Same sex marriage.

Round four defense"Yes, there's benefits to marriage, There's benefits to robbing a bank too, as long as you don't get caught and you aren't the owner/employee of the bank, just like there's benefits to the person getting married...but not the religious organization that had to give up it's religious rights because it now has to marry gay couples even though it's against their beliefs. Once again, a civil union that gives someone the same benefits as marriage is a better option than legalizing gay marriage." ScmiedforgeThere is many differences between a civil union and marriage. "Immigration:A United States citizen who is married can sponsor his or her non-American opposite-sex spouse for immigration into this country. Those with Civil Unions have no such privilege.Taxes:Civil Unions are not recognized by the federal government, so couples would not be able to file joint-tax returns or be eligible for tax breaks or protections the government affords to married couples."[14] "What is a civil union? A civil union is a legal relationship between two people that provides legal protections to the couple only at the state level." [15]Mainly, the federal government and other countries don't recognize civil unions, but do recognize marriages. Furthermore, justice of the peace, also know as a judicial member can perform marriage ceremonies. "a judicial officer of the state can perform weddings." [16] I fail to perceive how this impedes upon freedom of religion at all. My opponent has not met his/her share of the burden of proof by showing how this affects religious freedom."Firstly, your source number 5 contradicts itself."Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon and presidential hopeful, recently apologized for a statement in which he said being gay is "absolutely" a choice.""Since then, he has apologized for the divisiveness of his comments, but hasn't backed down from the notion that being gay is something people choose."One of these quotes claim that Ben Carson apologized for the "divisiveness" of his comment, and one claims he apologized for the comment itself, both of them are from the same source (5) you provided. " ScmiedforgeAll this proves is that Ben Carson contradicted himself. Considering Ben Carson is one of the most devout believers in gay is a choice, my opponent has made an argument that aids my side of the debate. "Secondly, what mainstream psychologists say means nothing. At one point mainstream scientists thought the earth was flat, mainstream psychologists used to practice trepanning because it would allow evil entities to escape. If we relied only on mainstream techniques or beliefs we would probably still be throwing people in the water tied up to test if they are witches.Also, please check the definition of a word before you claim what it is or is not. The definition of "discrimination" is "the act of making or perceiving a difference" is not unjust." ScmiedforgeYou provide no evidence to back up your claim that mainstream scientists thought the Earth was flat. At least one religious sources claim the world is flat, the Old Testament. Second, science builds upon itself. Often, we have to find 99 ways not to make a light bulb. Each successive failure brings scientists closer to the truth. I find your anti-science statements unsettling and irrational. As for the definition of discrimination, I meant this definition. I contend this is how the word discrimination was meant to be used by the context of my round two argument.Discrimination "1. (Sociology) unfair treatment of a person, racial group, minority, etc; action based on prejudice" [17] I'll also provide you with these quotes from a previously homosexual man"Lastly, I am left with my own life story. I can't change it. I went from being in the gay lifestyle to marrying a woman, having a daughter, and living a happy heterosexual life""You couldn't pay me to have sex with a man at this point in my life. I don't feel the urge"" ScmiedforgeThis is anecdotal evidence and thus has little weight on the argument. Somebody could have simply paid the person to write that story. Maybe, the person was never gay to begin with. This is why science is an effective method, because the scientific method accounts for such variables. "Where anecdotal evidence gets very problematic, though, is when people make decisions that may affect their health or well-being based solely on it. For instance, there are many herbal medications and alternative medical theories and treatments that people decide to use largely based on anecdote. Now sometimes a preponderance of this evidence may suggest that there’s a good reason to try different things, but unfortunately many of these alternative treatments and therapies are not just there for the health and happiness of humans. People who offer them are profit motivated too. " [18]My counter evidence that gay conversion therapy doesn't work and is dangerous from a scientific stand point defeats my opponent's anecdotal evidence. Gay conversion therapy centers are most likely profit motivated and/or wishful thinking. "Yes it provides some revenue, but at what cost? Also at 1 - 5 percent of the population (I'll provide links with those statistics) and even less considering not all of them would like to get married, is not a very high rate of marriage licenses. I doubt we're going to see a decrease in taxes paid anytime soon because of the revenue from marriage licenses of gay marriages." ScmiedforgeWe would more likely see taxes increase at a slower rate, the results would be the same, less tax burden on the poor. My opponent poses the question at what cost? This an argument from ambiguity, since my opponent offers no reason or evidence of a cost imposed by gay marriage licenses. [19]"Let's read all of the first amendment."Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."allowing gay marriage prohibits the free exercise of religion. It requires them to marry gay couples. Respecting an establishment of religion would be instituting Sharia law, requiring Americans attend mass every week, or making it illegal to participate in gay sex." ScmiedforgeWhere do you get the idea that churches will be forced to marry gay couples? Most people have the common sense to only go where they are wanted. Besides, some people interpret the Bible to allow gay marriages. Gay couples would most likely seek out gay friendly churches and justices of the peace. Sources.14. http://lesbianlife.about.com...15. http://family.findlaw.com...16. http://marriage.about.com...17. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...18. http://www.wisegeek.org...19. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...