This argument against gay marriage is compelling and sound

FIRST ROUND IS FOR ACCEPTANCE AND RULES ONLY In this debate, My opponent will have to find a problem with the logic behind my argument against gay marriage and successfully explain why its not a compelling argument. how compelling the argument will depend on how much practical significance it has or will have on society. My opponent will have to explain how my argument will have little to no negative affect on society when it comes to public policy only. This means my opponent will not be mentioning the history of marriage, civil rights, or the "is" portion of this debate, but its about what we "ought" to do in terms of public policy. He or she is just there to poke holes into the argument and MUST accept the first premise of what marriage IS about, which I will provide a breif deductive sysllosgism . Its an argument about the actual true purpose of civil marriage, but its NOT the mainstream procreation argument heard time and time again. I am NOT arguing that the state is trying to encourage couples to procreate and raise and children by making fertility a requirement: Premise 1 The purpose of Civil marriage is to regulate the biological driven phenomena known as procreation that happens either by choice or by accident. The traditional view of marriage is based on the "natural teleology of the body" where only a man and a woman, and only two people, not three, can generate a child and raise the child through the natural complimentary element of both genders. Civil marriage arose and exist to encourage heterosexual couples to create and raise the next generation in the right context which is in a marriage and to discourage the creation of children in other contexts, which is out of wedlock birth's and fatherless homes in order to make sure they don't raise children in a unstable environment. The state uses the traditional definition of marriage ,as a means to achieve this purpose, in order to actually be able to encourage heterosexual couples to obtain a marriage license. Then, the state issuance of marriage licenses reinforces this meaning of marriage and ,as a result, provide legal and social support for their relationships. FURTHER UNDERSTANDING INTO THE PURPOSE OF MARRIAGE Now, when I say the word "encourage", I mean it in a indirect sense. For example, The mere appearance or existence of a green/ red traffic signal helps us know when is the right time to drive. Our understanding that green light means "go" encourages us to drive and red light means "stop" to discourages us from driving. Our understanding of the idea that marriage is between a man and a woman would be the green light that encourages us to procreate inside a marriage while cohabitation would naturally be the red light to not procreate inside. In both situations, this is done to maintain order in the public arena and protect ourselves or others quality of life. However, the difference between the two is that you get punished by the state if you drive pass a red light. When it comes to marriage, you are allowed to raise a family outside of a marriage or without the father and not get penalized. In other words, You have the freedom to marry and procreate or not. Thus, the law does not forcibly make us do right from wrong but helps us understand what is right and wrong regarding the well-being of children. Whether or not we choose to do what's right is entirely our choice. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Lastly, This is very important. When I say that this is an argument against gay marriage, I am actually saying this is an argument against redefining marriage to just two people regardless of gender. This is because the marriage laws on the books don't say "Same sex couples are not allowed to get married". When states allow same sex couples to be called marriage, they do not call them gay marriage or straight marriage and create separate institiutions with different names like civil unions. They redefine marriage to just two people regardless of gender by no longer referencing the gender within any of the laws. In other words, its a "one size fits all" marriage system put in place.