Gay Marraige Should Be Allowed.

And I am thankful for your willingness to debate this topic with me. =) My opponent asserts that the passage of a law protecting homosexual marriage rights is against our nation's ideals in that it would disregard the popular vote. I will admit that I have disregarded the popular vote, but I have not disregarded our national ideals. What of equality? Is that not a national ideal? It was not popular to abolish slavery, but should we think that the abolitionists were wrong to reject the popular prejudice of their time when it conflicted the ideal of equality? I would think not. I fight for equality in this case, and I am willing to be unpopular and right rather than popular and wrong. He goes on to state that there is a logic to assuming that homosexuality is a perversion and asserts that there is no science behind the claim of innate homosexuality. I'll get to my science in a bit, and I assure you I have plenty of it. However, I must first address the lack of common sense in the conclusion that one chooses to be gay. Why would one choose to be gay if being gay means to be hated, feared, and judged by so many? Why choose a life of less rights, social isolation, and condemnation? Now my science. Science has found evidence that when a mother gives birth to multiple males, each older brother increases the odds of being gay by 33% for the younger ones (Blanchard and Klassen, 1997)(1). In order to explain such a finding, it has been proposed that male fetuses set off a maternal immune reaction that becomes stronger with each successive male fetus. Each successive male fetus is attacked by H-Y antibodies which have been blamed for decreasing the ability of H-Y antigens to perform their usual part in masculinity of the brain in males (1). The notion that defending homosexuals rights due to the innateness of their sexual orientation somehow implies the call for sexual freedom to molest children and animals is absurd and irrelevant. I don't dispute the laws preventing pedophiles from molesting children. The rights of the children are violated. There is no legal consent that a child can give to a pedophile. In zoophilia, the animal is incapable of giving consent as well. What my opponent does make clear, however, is his attempt to use fear as a way of promoting the belief that homosexuality is a perversion. If there were any logic behind such a view, wouldn't countries such as Denmark already had those issues? Gay marriage has been legal there since 1987. There has been no push for any legalization of pedagogic, polygamist, etc. relations in Denmark, and no such legalization exists. Also, to provide the practical benefits of legalizing gay marriage that my opponent has asked for, Denmark has seen a reduction in the spread of STDs, promiscuity, and infidelity among gays since legalizing gay marriage. The suicide rate has also been reduced. The view that gays are equal is not valid. They are denied marriage and all of the legal benefits it brings. In most states, homosexuals do not have the right to make medical decisions for their partners in case of emergency. I'll also take this time to disprove the implication of polygamy when discussing the rights of homosexuals to marry. Polygamy is taking advantage of the legal benefits provided by marriage. When and if a homosexual is allowed to marry, it is still against the law for them to stray against monogamy. That would not change. ... Let's examine some more specific statements my opponent has made. "To begin with, as was evidenced with proposition 8 in California, gay marriage is not a civil right." Actually, it is. When ninety percent of us have the right to marry the adult of our choice and ten percent is not, there is a clear violation of a civil right. "Also, there is absolutely no analogous connection between segregation and gay marriage." I never debated that there was. What I did say about segregation was in relation to a civil union. "There are, however, plenty of negative repercussions. School sex-education programs would have to be entirely revamped to support equal say..." Well I'd support the revamping of sex-education in our schools. Gay and lesbian youth make up a whopping thirty percent of suicides among adolescents (2). They also make up a quarter of homeless youth, and twenty eight percent are forced to drop out of school due to their sexuality (2). As shown by organizations that include Focus on the Family (3), too much misinformation concerning sexual health of gays is because society refuses to be tolerant of homosexuality. If heterosexual reproductive health is all that is provided, you are alienating and confusing a homosexual child. Some devotion of time should be allotted to homosexual education as well. "They can have all the rights of marriage except for the name. A couple does not need marriage to be happy, comfortable, and free." My opponent does not make a valid point. Many homosexuals would be happier with a legal marriage. Think of religious homosexuals. Think of the benefits and legal protections marriage extends. The fact that gay couples aren't permitted to marry when heterosexuals are is hypocritical, unethical, and against freedom. I'll also say that to assert that it is okay to give homosexuals the same rights of marriage as long it's not called marriage is subscribing to segregation. "Who are you to claim proprietary rights to what IS and IS NOT moral?" I have an uncle who was beat with metal pipes because he is gay. I have a lesbian aunt whose scholarship was taken from her when the headmaster of her college found out she was gay. A friend of mine has suffered much emotional abuse at the hands of his mother because she does not approve of homosexuality, even though she doesn't understand it. I go to a school where homophobia is written on the walls, shouted out on buses, and ingrained in the minds and language of the students. Whether or not you think I have no right to claim that its ignorant to deny homosexual marriages and rights, I would be surprised to find if you had a better grasp on that than me. Maybe you don't believe in what I believe in, but it doesn't mean I will stop fighting for it. I have seen too much hate and lies in the homophobic culture to believe they have any valid excuse for it. "Are you willing to use the entire source in which the above quote is derived? If you are not willing, then do not use it as part of your argument – because as you will surely find, it is not your position that it supports." Certainly. 'And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.' (Luke 6 v31). I am curious to see the reasoning behind the claim that this passage does not support my position. ... In closing for my end of round two, I will thank my opponent again his participation. I am eager to hear what he has to say for round two, and I am glad to have such a worthy opponent to debate. =) ... Sources&References: (1) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... (2) http://www.socal-glide.org... (3) http://www.citizenlink.org...