Gay Marriage

Opponent’s First Proposition: The LGBT Community Supports Anti-Discrimination and Gay Marriage is a Form of Discrimination Against Religious Beliefs Discrimination is defined as “making a distinction in favor of or against, a person …, class, or category to which that person … belongs.” My opponent argues that because the LGBT community advocates for the right of homosexuals to marry each other, that this right would discriminate against the religious beliefs of others. However, permitting gays to marry does not in any way affect religious groups from practicing their beliefs in the manner which they deem appropriate. Religious groups are not required to recognize or practice gay marriage, nor would these religious groups be required to marry gay individuals. The legal recognition of gay marriage would have absolutely no affect on the ability of churches and religious individuals to practice their beliefs. The absurdity of this argument becomes even clearer after considering the following analogy. Robert the vegetarian believes that it is wrong for people to eat meat. People want to eat meat. Robert the vegetarian argues that allowing these people to eat meat is discrimination against his belief that people shouldn’t eat meat. Discrimination necessarily requires a “distinction in favor of or against” a group of people. If homosexuals and heterosexuals have equal rights to marry, there is no distinction in favor or against either group of people, and thus discrimination does not exist. The current legal environment currently favors discrimination against gays, preventing them from marrying. Opponent’s Second Proposition: Civil Unions are Legally the Same as Marriage This is incorrect. While civil unions and marriages share many similarities, they do share different legal recognition. A number of federal laws, including those involving taxes, health insurance, and social security benefits, provide different recognition and impose different obligations or benefits to civil unions and marriages. Moreover, it is important to note that most states do not recognize civil unions, so this is not an option for many gay couples. But, perhaps more important than the legal treatment of marriages and civil unions, is that “civil unions” do not confer the same socially recognized importance of dignity, clarity, security, and power of the word “marriage.” Separate but equal is not equal. Opponent’s Third Proposition: The LGBT Community is Attempting to Force Churches into Allowing Gay Individuals to Get Married The legalization of gay marriage would not force churches to marry homosexual individuals. Under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, religious freedom is protected from government intrusion. Even if gay marriage were legalized, churches would not and could not be forced to marry them. Churches and their members would be free to exercise their religious beliefs and practices as they see fit, and if they so desired, could choose to marry only heterosexual couples in their church. Legalization of gay marriage only entails the government’s legal recognition of the marriage and has no affect on religious institutions. Opponent’s Fourth Proposition: Opponent is, Himself, Gay and Therefore has an “Un-Homophobic” Point of View I will have to concede this point.