gay marriage does not lead to bestiality or pedophilia marriages

Allowing ages 13-17 to marry complicates the topic even further. For example, according to the "Research on sex offender laws and their effects on people and society", the U.S. Federal age of sexual consent is 18 years old. http://solresearch.org... As I previously stated, this can turn into a "semantic argument" very quickly. Your definition of "children" was along the lines of, "anyone who is under 18". I don't necessarily agree with that definition. I think the word, "minor" is a better choice simply because the term, "teenager" does not necessarily mean, "child". I cannot offer evidence of what the magic age for marriage should be; simply because everyone matures at different rates. In this country, almost all the states have decided on the age of 18 because it's the age where you can vote, join the military, watch pornographic material, smoke cigarettes, and get married. I would make the argument that the age of a 13-15 year-old, do not have the maturity to make such a life altering decision of marriage. That is the reason they are not allowed to drive cars. I suppose my opponent could make the argument that there are some 13-year-olds that are more mature than 18-year-olds, but that's true for any age. We can't change the law for everyone just because there are a few exceptions to the rule. My opponent made the argument and tried to tie this in with gay marriage by saying, "Yes, if gay marriage is legal, it will open eyes to other types of relationships to attempt to earn their equality, regardless of their stances and members. Why restrict equality from pedophiliac and bestial relationships? Once, homosexuals were looked down upon (they still are) and in some countries, they are still imprisoned and killed. If homosexuals can rise from the dark unjustice, it will encourage all other members of all other relationships to do the same." For one thing, sexual abuse of children HARMS them, there is not evidence that gay marriage harms anyone. The same goes for bestiality. If an animal cannot consent, it becomes "rape". Homosexuals were looked down upon because people thought it was gross and they had religious biases against it. My opponent used the same argument that was made in the times when interracial marriage was being debated. People were warning that if interracial marriage became legal, gay marriage would follow. If my opponent is correct in his assertion that gay marriage will "open eyes to other types of relationships", and lead to pedophilia and bestiality, then I would ask the following questions: 1) Should we ban interracial marriages since at the time people were making the argument that interracial marriage will lead to gay marriage? 2) Better yet, should we ban heterosexual marriages because it made gay and interracial couples' eyes open to the possibility of marriage? Of course not. Children (and by children, I mean minors under the age of least 16) are way too vulnerable at that age to marry. They need to be protected from adults they prey on them for sex. I would like to add that most children have gone through puberty by the time they are 16. They are becoming mentally AND physically mature by then. My opponent has shown that the law is inconsistent in dealing with a legal age to marry. NONE of that proves that gay marriage will lead to pedophilia becoming legal. With gay marriage, the ONLY thing that is different from a straight marriage is the gender. It is still 2 consenting HUMAN ADULTS that enter into a civil contract. No other laws have to be changed. If one were to marry a 5-year-old, how would the 5-year-old have any idea what he or she was signing at the courthouse? How would that child fit into the "age of consent" definition? Could a child be awrded property in a divorce? Could a 5-year-old be granted custody of a 17-year-old from a previous marriage? My opponent seems to want to deal with the teenage years only, and it's probably because the lines can get a little blurred in that area. But we are dealing with ALL pedophilia. As for bestiality, I have already covered most of this issue. My opponent still has not shown or offered evidence of how gay marriage will lead to a human marrying another species of object. In fact, my opponent seems to agree that it will never become legal, but insists on making the argument that it will open the eyes of people. We should not make a law against something that doesn't cause harm to anyone, just because people will try to use the same argument for something that DOES cause harm to someone or something. In closing, I have offered evidence of why children getting married to pedophiles is not only dangerous, but also absurd. Furthermore, my opponent has pointed to a lot of inconsistencies in the law and some I even agree with. However, the topic is not about "legal age of consent" the topic is about "gay marriage not leading to pedophilia and bestiality". I yield to my opponent.