Gay Marriage

I will begin my argument by first refuting my opponents claims."C1: Marriage is the institution that forms and upholds for society, the cultural and social values related to procreation."My opponent relies on two claims here. First, that the purpose of marriage is to bear children. This claim does not hold upon scrutiny. By my opponent's logic, a heterosexual pair who are biologically incapable of bearing children should not be allowed marriage either. In other words, my opponent restricts the bond of marriage to only pairs capable of biologically capable of procreating. My opponent's second claim is that a homosexual couple is incapable of bearing children. This is false, as a homosexual couple is easily capable of adopting. Studies have shown that homosexual parents are just as capable to raise children as heterosexual parents[1][2][3], thus rendering my opponent's claim null. In addition, my opponent claims that same-sex civil unions are a sufficient substitute for homosexual marriage. However, the problem here lies in the fact that it is impossible to have something "equal" in every way to marriage without it actually being the same. "C2: Due to the fact that this debate about all countries, the governments of countries have no reason to grant marriage to such a minority."My opponent begins pursuing this line of inquiry by citing countries that have very small homosexual populations. However, this holds the assumption that if a minority is small, does not warrant rights. By this logic, the same should hold true for ethnic minorities as well. Allowing homosexual marriage causes little harm to the heterosexual majority and gains a large amount of rights to the homosexual minority. The process of legalizing same-sex marriage is quite simple, and I will argue later on in this argument that it is a basic right for homosexuals. My opponent also cites countries that hold a bigotry against homosexuals; however, if homosexual marriage is a basic right, this should not matter. "C3: There are apparent health risks that come with homosexual behavior."While these health risks are true and indisputable, this does not affect the status of homosexual marriage. While my opponent argues that the acceptance of homosexual marriage equates the government "encouraging" of homosexual behavior, a valid point, my opponent proceeds to suggest that there is an intrinsic state of poor health that comes with homosexuality, despite no evidence of this. I argue that allowing gay marriage, if anything, does the opposite of encouraging promiscuity. There is evidence to suggest that marriage actually reduces health risks in gay men [4]. Now that I have refuted my opponent's main, points, I will argue why homosexuality marriage should be legal everywhere.C1. Marriage is a basic human rightIn most developed countries, the consensus on human rights is that all humans deserve the same opportunities and rights. As an example, the United States Fourteenth Amendment states "No State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."[5] Marriage is an important right to people due to the spiritual and legal benefits in entails[6] and denying such a right to people who happen to have different sexual interests than the majority is an infringement on human rights, as it allows some people access to benefits that others do not. If marriage is a basic human right, it should be allowed universally.C2. The alternative is worseBecause this argument is not about homosexuality itself, the alternative to gay marriage is the presence of same-sex relationships without legal security. As cited above, marriage allows same-sex partners to gain a large amount of legal and financial securities. While it is true that civil unions can hold the same securities, civil unions do not offer the same spiritual protection. In addition, (also cited above), marriage increases health in gay men, decreasing the likelihood of promiscuous sexual activity. Finally, the allowing of marriage creates a much happier environment for children that is just as good or better than that of children of heterosexual parents [7][8].ConclusionDespite my opponent's claims, the legalization of homosexual marriage does not affect the importance of traditional marriage, nor does it equate to the embodying of unhealthy sexual behavior. Same-sex marriage also brings benefits to the LGBT community, including legal benefits and benefiting the environment of children of a same-sex couple. In conclusion, marriage is a basic human right that should be universally legalized.Sources cited:1.Marriage of Same-Sex Couples – 2006 Position Statement Canadian Psychological Association2."Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families – A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society" (PDF).3.Literature review of LGBT-parented families from the Australian Psychological Association4. http://www.cbsnews.com...5. http://en.wikipedia.org...6. http://en.wikipedia.org...7. http://gaymarriage.procon.org...8. http://gaymarriage.procon.org...