gay marriage

I. First Paragraph Gay marriage indeed helps the economy. "Forbes magazine says an immediate windfall of about $17 billion could be had if gay marriage were made legal nationally. The magazine conducted the analysis several years ago and determined that "one thing is abundantly clear: Legalizing same-sex marriages would mean a windfall for the wedding industry. " Weddings are a $70 billion-a-year business. In another, long-term analysis, the Christian Science Monitor notes a Congressional Budget Office study, which found that if gay marriage were allowed throughout the United States, it would improve the federal budget's bottom line. "[1] My opponent's conclusion here is false because gay acceptance is rapidly rising. "Overall, 53 percent of Americans say gay marriage should be legal, steady the past year but up from 36 percent in just 2006. Thirty-nine percent strongly support it, while 32 percent are strongly opposed the first time strong sentiment has tilted positive. Six years ago, by contrast, strong views on the issue were negative by a broad 27-point margin. "[2] This conclusion is rapidly falling apart. In addition, just by using simple logic, why would people not shop at gay-owned stores? And how would they know? Again in addition, gay marriage's legalization will not increase this "discrimination" because there will still be the same number of gays. In fact, it will decrease. By the way, your video comes from the Georgia State GOP Convention, so it must be disregarded. "New research, which looks at variations between US states in tolerance towards homosexuality and HIV rates, has found that an increase in tolerance significantly reduces the rate of HIV. *** Importantly, given the current debate, they also find that laws that ban marriage between individuals of the same sex increase HIV rate by between 3 and 5 per hundred thousand. If we extended this analysis to California, the marriage ban in that state could have contributed to between 1,092 and 1,820 cases of HIV. This result is not as counter-intuitive as you might think. Increased tolerance reduces risky sexual behavior on both the intensive and extensive margin. "[3] This is almost like a catch-22 for your part. You are arguing that gays have higher rates of AIDS, when in fact it is gay marriage's prohibition that is causing the problem in the first place. Gay marriage's legalization would decrease the gay AIDS rate. Lastly, your final comment is odd. Heterosexual people get AIDS too you know? And "GRID" is in fact caused by gay marriage's prohibition. So as shown, gay marriage does indeed help the economy and the federal budget, far outweighing any of the consequences that "could" surface. In addition, gay marriage's legalization will decrease the gay AIDS rate. II. Second Paragraph "DOMA violates constitutional protections that forbid the Government from discriminating by creating disfavored, second-class citizens"and disfavored, second-class marriages. Such unconstitutional election-year bills appeal to anti-gay disapproval, dislike, or discomfort the very animus rejected by the Supreme Court as a basis for government discrimination. DOMA inserts the federal government for the first time in history into the definition of marriage, violating the Tenth Amendment, which reserves powers for the states. DOMA violates the Constitution's Full Faith and Credit clause, which requires that official acts and proceedings of each state be recognized by sister states. Congress does not have the constitutional power to decide when, or which, state acts get interstate respect or when people are stripped of those rights as they travel through the country. "[4] "Keeping gay marriage illegal also violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. According to the American Civil Liberties Union in 1996, (3) The law [against same-sex marriage] discriminates on the basis of sex because it makes one's ability to marry depend on one's gender. The ACLU goes on to say, Classifications which discriminate on the basis of gender must be substantially related to some important government purpose tradition by itself is not an important government purpose. If it were, sex discrimination would be quite permissible; discrimination against women has a pedigree in tradition at least as long and time honored as that of discrimination against same-sex couples in marriage. Nowhere in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution is preservation of tradition cited as a power or intention of our government. There is no constitutional basis for denying gay couples marriage, and every constitutional reason why our government should actively pursue legalizing gay marriage in order to give gay men and lesbians their rights as equal citizens of the United States and to ensure their inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness that every American is guaranteed. Our government's purpose is to defend the rights of the people, and in this instance our government has undoubtedly failed in its duties. "[5] The Constitution cannot be changed. There is nothing in the Constitution that defines this "marital tradition". These amendments simply defined it more. III. Third Paragraph "Life was harsh in early Old Testament times. The wanderings and struggle for survival of the Israelites did not permit prisons or rehabilitation. Anyone who deviated seriously from the norm was either stoned to death or exiled. The Old Testament prescribed the death penalty for the crimes of murder, attacking or cursing a parent, kidnapping, failure to confine a dangerous animal resulting in death, witchcraft and sorcery, sex with an animal, doing work on the Sabbath, incest, adultery, homosexual acts, prostitution by a priest's daughter, blasphemy, false prophecy, perjury in capital cases and false claim of a woman's virginity at the time of marriage. It must be emphasized that, according to the New Testament, we are no longer under the harsh Old Testament Law (John 1:16-17, Romans 8:1-3, 1 Corinthians 9:20-21). The concern with punishment is now secondary to Jesus' message of repentance and redemption. Both reward and punishment are seen as properly taking place in eternity, rather than in this life. In Old Testament times, homosexual activity was strongly associated with idolatrous cult prostitution as in 1 Kings 14:24, 15:12. (There was also cult prostitution by females. ) In fact, the word "abomination," used in both mentions of homosexual acts in Leviticus, is a translation of the Hebrew word tow' ebah which, according to Strong's Greek/Hebrew Dictionary, means something morally disgusting, but it also has a strong implication of idolatry. Thus, many Bible scholars believe the condemnations in Leviticus are more a condemnation of the idolatry than of the homosexual acts themselves. "[6] Its funny because the French and Italians are more ardent believers in the Bible yet. .. IV. Fourth Paragraph "Homosexual behaviour has been observed in 1,500 animal species. "We're talking about everything from mammals to crabs and worms. The actual number is of course much higher. Among some animals homosexual behaviour is rare, some having sex with the same gender only a part of their life, while other animals, such as the dwarf chimpanzee, homosexuality is practiced throughout their lives. "[7] "While sexual behavior may be chosen, the preponderance of researchers say attraction is dicated by biology, with no demonstrated contribution from social factors such as parenting or other factors after birth. "[8] I would refute more, but I am out of room.