Gay marriage should be legalized

Sorry for making the time for each round so short, but I’m sort of impatient and I don’t like sometimes waiting days for people to post. If you ever think you have to miss a round, just message me and we can work it out. Also, if I ever come off as snarky it’s nothing personal, it’s just how I tend to debate. First, I’ll deconstruct Jim Spiegel’s argument. Heterosexual union is by far the most common method, but Spiegel seems to forget about surrogate mothers and artificial insemination. Both can, and have created humans before. It isn’t the indispensable way, so it doesn’t have special social value. Also, I’m curious what special social value is defined as. This is where I completely disagree. Since special is synonymous with better than usual, that means that according to you, anyone who is better than the norm should get special permission. If my driving skills are better than normal, does that mean I don’t have to follow the speed limit? I think now I have to define value. Value = relative worth, merit, or importance. You clarified down below that homosexual relationships have less value, and thus less importance or worth than heterosexual relationships. Calling one group of people more important than another and that they deserve better treatment is the definition of elitism, and is exactly what happened prior to the civil rights movement. I had to reread this one several times, and I still don’t really understand it. Are you saying that it’s morally wrong to acknowledge that something has importance? The more I think about it the more confused I get. Q.E.D.? Not really. Now onto your specific arguments: Why should a marriage be recognized? – Rebuttal You were almost onto something when you were questioning why the state even recognized marriage, but I knew it was too good to be true. It doesn’t matter how many unique benefits someone brings to society, they shouldn’t get special treatment from it. The President doesn’t get tax cuts or extra options for estate trusts and neither should some couples. I checked out your two websites, and I couldn’t find anything specifically damaging to same-sex couples. I would like to make it clear that I do not have to prove same-sex couples have the right to adopt or have children for this debate. You state that societies that don’t raise healthy children do not succeed, but I would like to remind you that only about 12% of men have had homosexual relations. This includes men who have just had gay sex once, and not all of them will necessarily marry another gay man. A small population like this won’t destroy a society, and there are much worse things to worry about for children than gay parents. Divorce is a huge issue that affects around 41% of parents. (1) This dramatically increases the rate of psychological and behavioral problems, and the child is more likely to be depressed later in life. (2) Are we going to ban divorces anytime soon? Probably not. “While I would much prefer a child to be raised with a gay couple than an orphanage, it is even more preferable for the child to be raised by a married mother and father.” But would you rather a child be adopted by a gay couple, or a single homosexual father or mother? “Procreation is also a unique benefit. While it is true that some heterosexual couples cannot or will not procreate, the fact is that procreation (which is needed for any society to survive) is principally possible in heterosexual relationships. This ability is enourmously beneficial to society, and since as a rule heterosexual couples can procreate, the state is jsutified in legistlating in favor of said rule“. The government doesn’t care about how many children you have, and allowing gays to marry won’t affect procreation at all. When you think about it, there are two options. Allow homosexuals to marry, and they will probably not have as many children as heterosexuals, or don’t allow homosexuals to marry, and they will probably not have children. Gays won’t just become straight because the government denies them the right to get married. What about equality? I would be more than happy to debate rights, whether we are born with them, if they change with time, etc. but I think that is going a little off-topic. “Traditionally, marriage is solely between a man and a woman.” Traditionally, schools were segregated by race. Traditionally, Africans were kidnapped and forced into slavery. See where I’m going with this? I agree that I have the burden of proof, and my main goal is to show that there should be a change in the status quo. “The state has every right to deny equal recognition to a relationship that is not equal.” I don’t see why it isn’t equal. “You certainly do not see incestuous marriage being a common issue-it’s simply out of the question.” Incestuous marriage is kind of an oxymoron, because the definition of incest is sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry. So no matter what, the government can’t make incestuous marriage legal, due to the word’s definition. I do believe however, that any two adults that can sign a legal document and both agree should be allowed to marry. Sure it’s extreme, but I think people should have as much freedom and liberty as possible. One thing I noticed… One of Con’s main arguments is that heterosexuals can have children and homosexuals cannot. This isn’t necessarily true, but even if it was, it doesn’t mean that heterosexual relationships are better. To put it bluntly, we don’t need a bigger population. The Earth’s population is growing very quickly, especially in developing countries, and it is going to get very crowded soon. America doesn’t need a bigger population. This is a pretty big part of my rebuttal, so I’ll reiterate. America does not need a bigger population. “Who cares if it’s not a choice?” It’s a big deal, and it destroys your soldier analogy. One soldier chose to be cowardly, and another chose to be brave. The brave soldier was awarded for his brave choice. I don’t believe Con refuted my arguments, so I’ll extend them onto the next round.