Same-sex Marriage Should Be Legalized Throughout the United States of America

I'd like to start off by saying that, no, I wasn't attempting to make you out to be some 'frothing homophobe', but moreso reveal you as a narrow minded fool. Close enough, though. Also, touching story, but I really find it annoying when people throw random personal stories into debates without a point. I don't know if I'd be able to find such a website, but there are far stranger ones on the Internet anyway-- everything is on the internet. "My opponent wrote that she is "a strong, strong believer in giving people as many rights as possible, as long as they do not interfere with the rights of other people." This sounds like a good philosophy until we examine what it means. If dad and young junior both consented to having gay sex with each other and decided to get Fido involved as well, would that be okay? In mean, they're not interfering with the rights of other people are they? (Dogs aren't "people")." Semantics debator, huh? Okay, so how about rights for animals (And bacteria and fungi, in case you want to fool with words a little more) should be considered as well. Now, a dad and young junior absoulely can if they both consent, as I find nothing LEGALLY wrong with that. Legality is what we're arguing, after all, not silly social norms and morals that change with time and person. "Society elects governments to represent their views and if the majority of people are of the opinion that incest, bestiality, paedophilia and gay marriage are morally abhorrent then their elected representatives have the duty to ensure that such practices remain outlawed." And when society becomes hypocritical, the government (Or other people) step in themselves and try pointing out how contradicting they've become. Also, would they be morally abhorrent to everyone? My biggest problem with most 'moral' challenges is that we have so many freedoms that we can basically have any opinion in the world (Almost) in the US. So, to put it simply, a group of people (Or groups of peoples) could believe that heterosexuality is wrong, but because they are interfering with rights of others by doing this, they cannot outlaw it. I find that, because we are supposed to be a free country and have so many wonderful rights and such, deciding that a person should have some of these removed because of your own opinion or the opinion of a current minority is outrageous. When you can give couples the right to same-sex marriage, without interfering with the rights of heterosexuals, then why not? It's better than restricting a decent part of the population in a way that the US originally tried to escape from and provide freedom from. If you can represent the minority and the majority, why should you refrain from doing so? It is much better than imposing the views of a majority onto minorities, as we have discovered many times in the past. I wasn't trying to muddy the water. I was making a very valid point that you seemingly cannot understand said plainly. As I said before, homosexuals do not want to FORCE their rights on others. They want them to be courtesly allowed because, guess what? If you really don't want gay marriage to exist, but people who ARE ACTUALLY HOMOSEXUAL do, their opinion matters more than yours. It brings me back to something I've said a thousand times: If you don't want there to be same-sex marriages allowed in the US, then do not marry someone of your own sex. That's all you need to do to prove your point, not strip others of rights you've taken for granted all of your life. Because if you really look at it, there's nothing more disgusting (There's never been) than stripping someone of their rights. Hitler did it, the US did it with African-Americans and women years ago, it's being done in some countries even now-- And how do we look at that now? We think, What Was Society Thinking? That, that, if you really need to know, is why we cannot always trust Society to do the right thing.