Topic of the debate.

The topic is:"The US should legalize gay marriage"I am conyou have the BOPwe know all the definitions don't troll with them no semantics with the resolutionThe States interest in MarriageFirstly, the institution of marriage is one about procreation and child rearing. [1] Marriages goal is to create an climate for the continuation for society, aka procreation. This is why the state gives benefits to heterosexual couples over homosexual ones. Homosexual couples will never be able to create or have a relationship type relating to procreation. Procreation and child rearing are essential to making society move on, and if one of those is missing there is a problem. Only can a man and a woman create children, and or have a procreative type relationship. The courts have held that the only reason they are involved in the SSM debate is because the states interest in marriage is to ensure the future of the human race, and a procreative-type union. [1, 4] It is common to hear the arguments of the benefits of SSM. In a court case, Goodrich v. the department of health, the department of health recognized there was economic benefit to the gay couples if SSM was legalized. [5, 6] Goodrich claimed the only thing marriage was was 2 loving people with economic benefits. The State differed saying marriage is a union of procreative type couples, and therefore the state had no reason to legalize SSM, and they didn't. [5, 6] The government wants married couples to make biological children or create procreative type unions to help further society and states interests. [7, 8, 9]The anatomy of a homosexual relationship doesn't come close to this. They can neither produce children nor have a relationship of this type. As the heterosexual couples have the ability to further society the state ought to give them recognition over homosexual ones. Couples that do not revolve around a procreation type core, in the states eyes, is useless as they cannot advance society in the way the government wants them too. As the state only recognizes you if you have this type of relationship they will define marriage as in a man and a woman. Allowing SSM would get rid of the heterosexual... whats the word... special recognition.Wait, isn't marriage about love?Their refutation to the procreation argument is that marriage is about love. It the government cared about love, then wouldn't they regulate other relationships? A boyfriend/girlfriend scenario may have lots of love, but as they cannot raise a child effectively much of the time it is not regulated, and not in the states interest. [2] If marriage is only about love, then if a man and other 5 men went to get married would the state recognize them? Well if marriage is about love then what grounds do they have? As they deny them this right on a certain ground, the ground is procreation if you haven't figured this out, then only people who are in the states interest can marry. You are probably against bestiality, yet if marriage was about love couldn't this be allowed? My point is marriage in the states eyes cannot and will never be love, and it is almost impossible to say it is. ---> Conclusion The State has no reason to confer the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples as they do not fulfill the states interest. Marriage is not about love as pro Gay marriage advocates claim. As there is no reason to confer the benefits of marriage to homosexuals, then I urge a CON vote.[1] William C. Duncan, "The State Interests in Marriage" Ave Maria Law Review (2004) 153 (PDF)[2] Girgis, George, and Anderson, "What is Marriage" 270-271[3] THE CASE AGAINST “SAME-SEX MARRIAGE" Margaret A. Somerville[4] Singer v. Hara, 522 P.2d 1187, 1195[5] Goodrich . Dep't of Health (Mass 2003)[6] "Marriage In Its procreative Dimension: The meaning of marriage throughout the ages" By Dr. Charles J. Reid p. 31[7] "Straight is better: Why Law and society May Justly Prefer Heterosexuality" By George W. Dent, Jr.[8] "Same Sex marriage: Should it be legalized?" By Alexander Adams, Sandia Preparatory school, p. 2[9] "One Man, One Woman: Defending Traditional Marriage" By Tim Hsiao, Florida State University.