There are no compelling reasons for the state to legislate in favor of same-sex marriage

I'm not a huge fan of posting a million YouTube videos to make my case, however, these videos clearly attack most of what my opponent is saying. The prop 8 videos show why it is unconstitutional.http://www.youtube.com...http://www.youtube.com...;http://www.youtube.com...I want my opponent to reply to these videos as it strengthens my case in these videos. Next, onto my opponents arguments.But why? Why is marriage (Specifically, same-sex marriage) a right? Moreover, why should we define marriage in terms of love? Con has simply asserted both of these points without giving any justification for them. Indeed, he is guilty is circular reasoning. Con argues that same-sex marriage is a right because marriage is about love -- but that's exactly what is being disputed to begin with -- Con simply assumes it.Moreover, Con's argument does not make sense of the state's interest in marriage. The state is in the business of regulating marriage to begin with not because it wants to enable you to marry the person you love (Although that is certainly important as a means to marriage), but because it wants to ensure responsible procreation. That is, the state is in the marriage business because it has a compelling reason in ensuring that society is advanced and that its future citizens are raised under the best conditions possible (Male-female parenting). Viewing marriage as merely a romantic relationship renders the second question unanswerable. As I pointed out in my initial argument:"Marriage is an institution whose prime focus is to ensure a healthy environment in which future citizens can be produced. It is for this reason that the state confers legal and economic benefits upon married couples, for it recognizes that child-rearing is a hard task. Since procreation and child-rearing are essential to the advancement of society, the state has a vested interest in protecting a stable relationship under which this can take place. What grounds the procreative ability of marriage is the fact that it is a union between one man and one woman."After all, if the government was concerned about regulating relationships based on love, then why doesn't it recognize friendships? Appealing to different types of love will not work here, since favoring one type of love over another would be guilty of "discrimination" against those who love each other in a non-romantic way. Most of what my opponent is arguing are explained in the video. The supporters of prop 8 has ADMITED that marriage is a fundemental right. Fundemental rights CANNOT be taken away."...Life, LIBERTY, and persuit of happiness..." Again, everything explained IN DETAIL in the video.The Burden of Proof?Most of my BOP is explained within the videos.Marriage and ProcreationThis is explained in the video entitled Its all about the children (or is it)Again, I appologize for the video responses, but they are strong and explain my case MUCH more in depth than I would be able to explain it.I humbly request my opponent to take these videos and respond to their arguments. Thank you, ProfMTH for these videos. I did not create them. Please go to ProfMTH's YouTube channel for sources.