Gay marriage is not a civil right

Again, its fine if CON does not want to base this debate on American law. I am not holding him to it unless he holds it against me, of course. As I said before, The nature of my arguments can apply anywhere and to this resolution. I don't just say that gay marriage is not a civil right merely based on what the government and courts have randomly declared in my country. I explained why they made their decision on a consistent basis based the moral and philosophical aspects behind it. If I simply explained the "ought" without the "is", there would not be any structure to the debate. Even part of CON's argument was about the "is" rather than the "ought" when He talked about marriage being about love. Nevetheless, let me explain why gay marriage should not be a civil right. WHAT "IS" THE PURPOSE OF MARRIAGE? Again, The mere appearance, existence, or understanding that marriage is between a man and a woman ,which only indirectly encourages us to procreate inside a marriage and not outside of it, is not imposing a morality or using anybody as a means anymore than our understanding that green light means "go" and red light means "stop" is imposing a morality. Instead, Traditional marriage would be the green light while cohabitation and divorce would be the red light. Moreover, this is a moral rule which can be applied in all circumstances (making it universalised) which is justified (not using others as a means only). In other words, The law does not make us do right from wrong but helps us understand what is right and wrong regarding the well-being of children. Whether or not we choose to do what's right is entirely our choice. This is done to maintain order in the public arena and protect ourselves or others quality of life in both situations. However, the difference is that you get punished by the state if you drive pass a red light. When it comes to marriage, you are allowed to raise a family outside of a marriage or without the father and not get penalized. You have the freedom to marry or procreate and not get married or procreate. What CON says simply has no basis. Therefore, the state merely recognizing an objective biological reality to indirectly regulate it without force cannot be considered imposing a morality. I think CON probably did not understand the argument I made about the actual purpose of civil marriage. However, its not my fault that he does not understand my argument as it is. I made it very clear to him. WHY WE OUGHT NOT TO CHANGE THIS PURPOSE Based on the arguments and studies I mentioned in Round 1&2 involving the promotion of non-traditional views of marriage and discouraging traditional views of marriage as well; it logically follows that vulnerable future generations, will be programmed to formulate choices (like divorce, fatherlessness, etc) that have the potential to harm their own family and society in general as a result. This includes the legal ramicfications that may arise in same-sex divorce and parental laws. Just as there are a set of entry conditions for marriage there would be a set of exit provisions as well. I don't need to provide evidence for this because this is not about empiricism according to the rules of the debate set by CON himself. This is based arguments and potentiality THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTS OF REDEFINING MARRIAGE This new law impinges on people's freedoms and their capacity to live their life with freedom of conscience and to transmit their values to their own children. Americans will either be forced to accept something like this and reject their own beliefs that reflect objective (not subjective) reality in the process or else live in fear of a secular government that will pander to the likes of intolerant gay activists who will undoubtedly impose their convoluted notion of equality and human rights. Lastly, you don't need to redefine marriage to get the kind of economic impact PRO speaks of. Civil unions can potentially produce the same effect. In conclusion, Civil rights are about fairness and justice. They govern behavior to make sure we have order. The concept of gay marriage does not provide fairness nor is it just and it potentially creates disorder if we consider making it into a Civil right and it does not provide any benefit to society. I urge a PRO vote