Marriage should be legalized for anyone of age, regardless of sexal orientation

"this debate does not include sexual orientation" If you would read the resolution it says, "Marriage should be legalized for anyone of age, REGARDLESS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION". That is to say that as long as someone meets the legal age requirement, they should be allowed to marry. The main point of my resolution is that sexual orientation should not be taken into account when a couple applies for marriage. This happens. My resolution is against these occurences so it is natural that I should argue against them. Just like if a debate was that god does not exist, my argument would clearly be against all arguments that say that he does exist. My argument is that if a person fulfills the age requirement, 17 as you stated they should be allowed to marry my major point is against sexual discrimination. It is in my resolution. "This debate is specifically about age, not homosexuality. But, if it makes you feel better to vent your anger about sexual orientation, that's perfectly plausible, just not arguable. " It is not specifically about age it is specifically about sexual discrimination. You put emphasis on the wrong part. I'm not venting out of anger, I am trying to have a debate against sexual discrimination. My resolution mentions age but only as the qualifier for marriage. The main point is that people who are of age should be allowed to marry without sexual orientation coming into the equation. I'm sorry if I provided more than one definition of marriage. Consider this my official definition. Marriage: a social contract between two individuals that unites their lives legally, economically and emotionally. "Not allowing two people to marry on the basis of their sexual orientation is discrimination. I may use this argument because my resolution is that sexual orientation should not factor in the decision to allow two individuals to marry. " As I have already shown my argument is against sexual discrimination. Age is not my main point. Therefore this statement is relevant. "Marriage binds two individuals together both economically and legally. So to be married is to provide a more stable environment for any children that two individuals may care for. If two people have a kid but are not married, there is no laws deciding that one parent may see the child if the couple breaks up. Marriage brings the law into the matter thus making the lives of the couple and their child more stable in the process. There is no reason why a couple should be prohibited from having this kind of security. " Your refutation to this argument is age related and my resolution focuses on sexual discrimination. Your two arguments all put an emphasis on age. And I am not arguing that anyone should be able to be married as I think you are arguing against. The main point of my argument is that people of age, 17, should be allowed to marry regardless of what their sexual orientation is. I am not trying to debate about age. It is unfortunate that we went the entire debate without actually debating about my resolution. We just debated about where to put the emphasis on my resolution. I apologize if my language may have been unclear or vague. If you would like to debate my actual resolution as I have recently explained I would be glad to. Please answer in the next round.