Gay marriage should be legalized

For one to call something that is morally wrong a moral right, it means the person is indeed insane. Samesex marriage should not be encouraged..let me start by reboutal, my co-debater rightly put it that marriage is done because of love. Indeed i never protested to that what am saying is this, the reasons why people marry includes, 1.for multiplication, 2.for love. And you can't tell me that a normal human being will love and marry his or her fellow man..when I rightly said it denies parental right, it doesn't mean that is my only argument now let me give substansive reasons that will back up my claims.. 1.'same sex marriage is not a marriage' based on the defintion of marriage, marriage can be defined as a legal union between a man and a woman or a legal union of a man of women(Africa).so ponder on this, and based on my definition, is homosexuality there? Indeed it should not be legalized. 2.It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution In the 1960s, society was pressured to accept all kinds of immoral sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a new sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and same-sex ""marriage."" If homosexual ""marriage"" is universally accepted as the present step in sexual ""freedom,"" what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain ""avant garde"" subcultures are already advocating such aberrations. The railroading of same-sex ""marriage"" on the American people makes increasingly clear what homosexual activist Paul Varnell wrote in the Chicago Free Press: "The gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homo. 3. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society By legalizing same-sex ""marriage,"" the State becomes its official and active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval. In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new ""morality,"" businesses offering wedding services will be forced to provide them for same-sex unions, and rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as tenants. In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect Christians and all people of good will to betray their consciences by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and morality 4. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union Traditional marriage is usually so fecund that those who would frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the birth of children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families. On the contrary, same-sex ""marriage"" is intrinsically sterile. If the ""spouses"" want a child, they must circumvent nature by costly and artificial means or employ surrogates. The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families. Therefore, we cannot call a same-sex union marriage and give it the benefits of true marriage. 5. It Turns a Moral Wrong into a Civil Right Homosexual activists argue that same-sex ""marriage"" is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s. This is false. First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected. Same-sex ""marriage"" opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility. Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared with non-genetic and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy between the interracial marriage of a man and a woman and the ""marriage"" between two individuals of the same sex. Having given some of the reasons why it should not be legalized, reader, I urge you to oppose it