Gay Marriage is Morally wrong and should not be Legalized

I appreciate your response >>"it is sufficient that I negate since pro has the burden of proof." My opponent seems to thing that all he has to do is negate. Well i would say there is so much more thing you have to do then just negate my responses to win this debate. But that is what Con said in the first round. (was not what i intended) :::What the Bible says::: The Books and Chapters my opponent states: "(1 Samuel 15:2-3) and slavery (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)", have nothing to do with what i am arguing in the old testament. I simply stated what God created marriage to really be. What it should be. I am not sure on where my opponent was going with this statement. My opponent says i have not gave any reasons on why the Bible condemns homosexuality as wrong. He states that he feels like that's my "own opinion". Well let me put this in a delicate way...Its not my opinion. Leviticus 18:22, "Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." New Living Translation (NLT). I Believe that is straight out. For you can't turn around what God says, and try to make it mean something else. But since my opponent wants reasons, ill, give him more. Leviticus 20:13, " "If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act." But i won't just stay in Leviticus, simply because the old testament is not the only part of the Bible its in. 1 Timothy 1:10 "The law is for people who are sexually immoral, or who practice homosexuality, or are slave traders, [ Or kidnappers.] liars, promise breakers, or who do anything else that contradicts the wholesome teaching" There is plenty more...But i won't waste all my time proving my opponent wrong. (Sources: "The Bible") My Opponent states that my statistics are not reliable. Well neither is his...for no one knows the exact amount of % of people who are homosexual or gay. But what we do know for a fact is that homosexuality is unnatural. >>"First he says homosexuals can't marry because they can't have children. Then he says it's stupid to prevent people from getting married just because they can't have children" Once again my opponent is doing what he loves doing best...TWISTING MY WORDS AROUND. He know i didn't say that. I never said anything about that being the reason homosexual can not marry! The closest i ever got was..."Any time we intentionally remove an essential part of humanity from the family, (male or female) we have a family that will fail to function as society and children need it to." Apparently my opponent took that wrong. There is none, and i repeat "NO PLACE" where i am contrasting myself whatsoever. I am more so confused on where my opponent is seeing this. >>"Procreation is important for the next generation, not marriage" Do i really have to clear this up again? It comes through marriage! My opponent states that sex gives us children not marriage. Well consider this. Who would parent the child if no one got married? That's where it comes in. The next generation is created through marriage, through a strong home, who has a mother and a father to parent the child. Teaching him/her the right paths to take in life. Everyone should know this. >>" every time you abstain from having unprotected sex with the potential for impregnation, you're disallowing a potential life" --No you're not!? Where does my opponent get this from? I'm confused where Con is getting this information from. A child isn't even created yet. And why would you keep having kids? Not unless you're a billion air. There is a reason why married couples stop having kids on the average of 2-3. The kids cost money to raise. ********************************************************************** My opponent seems to think this argument is based off of that "homosexuals cant marry for the precise reason because they cant have kids." Once again never said they can't have kids, and secondly my opponent knows fairly well that this argument is far beyond that. My op penning statement was: "Gay marriage is morally wrong and should not be legalized. I have proven why it is morally wrong. So why should it not be legalized in the states? i have also given many reasons why...but lets try this topic in a more different approach. . Does Gay marriage really benefit the state itself? Why do the states want to legalize it so bad? Homosexual relationships do nothing to serve the state interest of propagating society, so there is no reason for the state to grant them the "costly" benefits of marriage. Some people will argue that homosexual marriages serve a state interest because they enable gays to live in committed relationships. Well still, there is nothing that prevents homosexuals from living in these kinds of relationships today. Advocates of gay marriage claim that they need marriage so they can have "hospital visitation and inheritance rights," but they can obtain this right by writing a living will and having each partner designate other as "trustee" and "heir." To get deeper into this, there is nothing stopping gay couples from owning their own house. :::Conclusion::: Besides the fact that that homosexuality isn't just a moral issue...for it is, but also effects the society greatly. People don't see that. They just worry about "rights" and what the person himself/herself wants to do. But is that really how it should be? People say God has nothing to do with homosexuality, i can disagree, but please answer the following questions 1.) Does one have to believe in God to live moral lives? 2.) How do you determine morals? Work sited: http://www.biblegateway.com... Thank you