Gay marriage should be illegal in the US.

My opponent stated "B. Many marriages are unnatural, yet still legal. Using my opponent's criteria marriages between the elderly, the infertile, and those that just don't have to have children are all unnatural." First off procreation does not make something natural. Man and woman were created to be together. My opponent is basing this of procreation. If homosexuality was meant to be natural then answer my question. Why cant they produce? Men were not designed to be with men. Woman weren't designed to be with woman. If its natural then why are gays more likely to attract Aids and HIV. Aids and HIV are not natural disease. They are not common. Since they are not common in nature and they are common in homosexuality, then this makes homosexuality not natural. Lets view another point. If the whole world became homosexuals then the population would die off. How is this natural? How is homosexuality which would cause the human population to decline and disappear if everyone went that way considered natural. Also you said "Condoms, Plan B, and every other type of birth control" These are manmade items. Man does not create nature. Man made choices to kill babies and things like this dont justify that. The question also isn't why isn't it natural the question should be how is it and id like my opponent to answer that. My opponent said "Leviticus laws should not be applied to our society today" Leviticus is not a guide for our modern lives. My opponent must not know much about the bible. I gave references. Now in the New testament it is said that we shall and should not live in the laws oft he old. Not ALL the laws. Now yes homosexuality was considered wrong. But the laws that God did not act upon were considered wrong. God destroyed two cities due to homosexuality. Also heres a verse or few about homosexuality in the bible in the New testament. 1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Keyword- effeminate meaning a man who is feminine in an appealing way. Also who acts feminine my opponent said about my Romans verse "This is not about homosexuality. It is about the cultic prostitution that went on in Rome during the time Paul wrote Romans. Cybele the fertility goddess was worshiped in Rome and the Empire. This is the historical context in which Paul was talking about sexual immorality. He's talking about shrine prostitution, not about modern, faithful, same-sex relationship" Heres what the verse stated "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their woman did change the natural use into that which is against nature. And like wise the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another: men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet" Now lets read the Greek version translated into English of this verse and more. Romans 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men and received themselves the due penalty for their perversion. The New testament was written mainly in Greek and this was the original translation. Also tell me this why would you want take an institution that was a religious ceremony for a man and women and change the definition of it and dynamic of it. The state was not invented by government. Marriage was invented by God and it started with Adam and Eve. My opponent said "Christianity saying that something is bad is not a reason for a modern democracy to outlaw it" Its not a democracy we have a democratic republic. Our founders knew it would not work, it did not work in Rome and they knew it wouldn't work here. There is a difference. First off my opponent stated "Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death." (Deuteronomy 17:2-5)" " If we follow biblical law here in our laws, we should kill the 22% of Americans that don't follow Christianity" Now i just stated the New testament frees us from the old laws in the old testament by the blood of Jesus Christ. I also said that is why we dont follow all the laws in old testament only the ones God re mentions in the New. My opponent said "Religious law in America is a terrible idea and is unconstitutional. A law saying that homosexuality, or anything else the Bible says is bad, is illegal violates the first amendment. " First i want to know how this violates the first Amendment? Second or constitution was BASED OFF RELIGION. My opponent ignores the fact and hasn't researched it obviously. Saying if we follow a law in the bible s bad then your saying that, Murdering, adultrey, Assault, Stealing, etc. Is good! My opponents argument is invalid due to that. My opponent said "Making same-sex marriage illegal would only increase family rejections by giving legal basis to the stigma against homosexuals. The best way to decrease mental health problems displayed by homosexuals is to accept them legally for who they are." Homosexuality has always been illegal so there is no "making same sex marriage illegal" It already is. Homosexuality was illegal in all 50 states, and it was called crimes against nature. Every state had laws called crimes against nature up until recently it was taken out by some states. Again another thing thats unnatural. My opponent said "Unprotected sex with strangers leads to more STDs and that isn't illegal" This is illegal; however it isn't enforced. Read a law book. Tell me this scenario. Someone has gay sex and get an STD. They decide they wanna be straight and date opposite sex. They do and that person finds out about the STD or HIV and dosent date them. Now this will make homosexuals feel bad about what they did and they might hide the truth about their disease which is illegal. Unprotected sex with strangers leads to more STDS; however its normally opposite sex which is way more common then homosexuality. Homosexuals are still more likely to contract HIV and STDS. It is proven My opponents last statement is very biased. People are beaten every day for doing something wrong or because they have a drunk parent. My opponent is saying its only gays. People get beaten and made fun of for how they dress, how they act and everything. I want my opponent to name one case where someone was denied a job because of their orientation? Because it would be taken to court. Find me a case about that. Elena Kagman is on the supreme court and is also gay. She isn't denied her position. My opponent said "They are denied opportunities to work and learn, driven from their homes and countries, and forced to suppress or deny who they are to protect themselves from harm." This debate is about the US not about other countries as my opponent jumps off the case My opponent has made several biased arguments and contradicts himself several times. Gays have the same rights as straights. Thank you