Same Sex Marriage is a Basic Civil Right, and Should be Allowed in All Countries

Pro never affirms which countries and civil rights we are arguing so I have to use all countries and their civil rights. Pro never affirmed that all marriages are a civil right and that is the topic of our debate, not all countries have same-sex marriage rights because it simply is not a right. Pro never affirms homosexuality is not a choice, he just asserts it. Lets remember the resolution folks, it is: Same Sex Marriage is a Basic Civil Right, and Should be Allowed in All Countries. Pro has not affirmed the resolution and that means I am winning because all I must do is show the resolution is not affirmed and I can do that before I present any case. I will present my own case showing that same-sex marriage is not a basic civil right, it is not a right in all countries, and reasons why it should not be a right. Very few countries have recognized same-sex unions as marriages. Matter of fact the record reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, to sympathetic toleration, to indifference, to prohibition. . http://en.wikipedia.org... Not a basic civil right Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man, fundamental to our very existence and survival. But same-sex marriage cannot share in that survival. So by definition, marriage is between a man and a woman by our federal government. Marriage is an institution founded on procreating and child rearing couples. . http://www.britannica.com... Pro argues that same-sex couples should have a civil right to marry and appeals to equal protection and equal treatment rights. But for him to argue equal treatment to all, does nothing to constitute what is considered marriage. If someone wants to argue that two people who have not in the past been recognized as marriage partners should now be recognized as marriage partners, one must demonstrate that marriage law (not civil rights law) has overlooked or misidentified something that it should not have overlooked or misidentified. . http://www.cpjustice.org... Not a right in all countries In China same-sex marriage is not legally recognized. No country in Asia currently performs or recognizes same-sex marriages. Marriages in Israel are performed under the authority of the religious authorities and the Rabbinate does not permit same-sex marriages. In Africa, homosexuality remains taboo in large parts of the continent. Australia passed the Marriage Legislation Amendment Bill in 2004, amending the Marriage Act of 1961 so that it specifically stated marriage was for one man and one woman only. The Cherokee Nation Tribal Council unanimously approved a Constitutional amendment in 2004 defining marriage as between one man and one woman. . http://gaymarriage.lifetips.com... Ohio Law Does Not Recognize Same-Sex Marriages. According to the Ohio Constitution, only a union between one man and one woman is recognized as a valid marriage by the state. . https://www.ohiobar.org... Why it is not right The natural structure of human sexuality makes man and woman complementary partners for expressing love and transmitting human life. Only a union of male and female can express the sexual complementarity willed for marriage. A same-sex marriage contradicts the purposes of marriage. It is not based on the natural complementarity of male and female. It cannot achieve the natural purpose of sexual union. . http://www.foryourmarriage.org... Conclusion If same sex marriage were allowed as basic civil right as Pro suggest, the result would be a significant change in our society. Marriage would no longer be about our commitment to the future: our children. But instead it would be directed towards the adults. My opponent has not shown us any real reason why same-sex marriage is a civil right and should be allowed in all countries.