Gay Marriage

I would like to start out by accepting my opponent's definition of homosexual, however I would like to contest his definition of marriage. My opponent and I both agree that the first amendment prohibits the U. S. Congress from making laws that "respect an establishment of religion. " I completely agree with both the US constitution and my opponent on this point. However, my opponent and I disagree on the definition and the meaning of marriage. Basically there are two main institutions of marriage. There is a Civil Marriage, and there is a Religious Marriage. DEFINITIONS Civil Marriage - a legal status established through a license issued by a state government. Such status grants legal rights to, and imposes legal obligations on, the 2 married partners. Religious Marriage - considered to be a liturgical rite, a sacrament, or a solemnization of the uniting of 2 persons and is recognized by the hierarchy and adherents of that religious group. The hierarchy, clergy, and in some cases members of religious organizations, establish their own criteria and rules for who may marry within their assemblies. They are not bound by statutory definitions of marriage. Civil government entities in the United States have no authority over a religious organization's autonomy. Now obviously these are two very different things, however they confusingly use the same word "Marriage". There is a religious ceremony, and then there is a legal aspect to marriage. My opponent and I both agree they should remain completely separate. After all, why should religion have a say in the rights and benefits of a partnership? We all share different faiths ideas and opinions (and sometimes no faiths). Furthermore why should government have a say in a religious ceremony? After all it is unconstitutional that a government should make any law respecting that of a religion. Therefore, logically, a civil marriage should be renamed a civil union. A civil union should be available to anyone regardless if they are homosexual or heterosexual. A Religious marriage should be called marriage. Marriage is commonly known as a religious ceremony. In fact even my opponent recognized the word "marriage" to be such when he stated: "Yet, the GOVERNMENT forbids homosexuals from receiving the religious sacrament of marriage. " You'll notice that my opponent said "religious sacrament of marriage" he clearly views marriage as being part of a religious institution. I would also like to concede and agree with my opponent that homosexual relationships are not immoral. To conclude: Legally homosexuals partners should have the same rights that heterosexual partners have. However, marriage should be considered a religious institution as it is commonly known as such. Thus, it is unconstitutional for government to make any laws respecting the institution of marriage. The word marriage is commonly recognized by our society as having one with religious connotations, which my opponent also agrees with. Society gives words their meaning. In the past the word faggot was a term known for a bundle of wood, however today, the word faggot is a derogatory term used to insult homosexuals. Thus since society recognizes in large the word marriage as being a word to describe a religious ceremony, it should be considered as such and should not have any government interference. If a particular religion wants to allow homosexuals to participate in a religious ceremony it should be allowed to.