Gay marriage ought to be legalized in the United States.

I thank Con for her timely response. First of all, I would like to reiterate some of the points that I have already made: 1) While I did say that I disagreed with Pro's definitions of both sex and gender, I said that I did understand her meaning behind it. I am aware of the fact that, for example, some men act more effeminate than others, etc. Why is Pro trying to make it seem otherwise? 2) I DO NOT APPROVE of infidelity or divorce (in most cases for the latter). Arguments stating things such as, "Con would rather a child live in a broken home than in a loving and SAFE home with stable gay parents." do not fly here. This is a typical argument put out by Pro's side, and it does not hold water in this debate. I would rather that child be raised in a loving home, wherein reside his two, loving, biological parents. Once again, I AM JUST AS AGAINST INFIDELITY AND DIVORCE AS I AM AGAINST GAY "MARRIAGE". Statements like these seem to be maliciously ignoring what I already said. 3) My sources come from an article written by a conservative Christian organization, yes. But the data research? Not so much. The Center for Disease Control and the Amsterdam Municipal Health Service are not generally thought of as bastions of evil conservative propaganda. Here are some more sites that Con may want to look over: http://www.cdc.gov... http://www.washingtontimes.com... I will ignore (for now) the many inconsistencies, misrepresentations, and manipulations against my statements and focus on the issue at hand: gay marriage benefits. And here, I must return to the study on gay marriage in The Netherlands: If Pro could show that gay couples are, when married, monogamous, then it would be much harder for me to prove my point. The facts are, however, that the large, vast majority are not only unfaithful; it is considered the norm. I would assume that Pro is against legalizing polygamy, or any type of relationship involving multiple people, as marriage. The trend in The Netherlands, according to this study, is that these gay marriages are not, in fact monogamous. So, what is the next logical step for the progressive mind? Bob loves Larry, but he also loves Sam. Bob wants to marry because he wants the legal benefits of it, and wants to have his husband covered under his insurance, etc. So Bob marries…Larry. No, Sam. Okay, Bob decides to marry Sam. But, he still loves Larry, so now he writes his legislator, saying that he wants to marry both. Why can't he? Then Bob picks up another guy at the gay bar named Jim and wants to marry him (remember: according to the study, just ONE of the married partners will sexually be with 8 other people in ONE YEAR. AVERAGE.) because Jim fell on some hard times and can't afford healthcare anymore. Gay people decide to march in Amsterdam , demanding their right to marry multiple people. The government gives it to them, and you have an economic nightmare. Health insurers are now having to cover an undetermined amount of partners in the marriage, making premiums go up, etc. Children are then, by osmosis, being taught that commitment to your loved one is nothing. That idea of commitment inevitably flows into other areas of those children's lives: jobs, promises, friendships, etc. Gay marriage in The Netherlands does not help the society, does in fact degenerate it, and leads to polygamy. "That is so far fetched. You can't link the two in any way whatsoever," Pro might say. "Far fetched"? Not really. http://www.washingtontimes.com... Pro must prove that allowing gay "marriage" into America will not bring about polygamy and polymory. We must think about the consequences of our actions, not act passionately and without thought. Also, Pro: PLEASE show your sources for your (sometimes) outrageous claims. I cannot accept hearsay as truth. I await Pro's reply.