Gay Marriage should be legal.

My opponent stated that it is not NECESSARY to tell my voters who they should vote for, but it is much like campaigning and I feel it IS quite necessary indeed. If you would like to tell the voters to vote for you as well, feel free, but I will continue doing so. Thank you! To the arguments: 'and my opponent has not refuted the attack' 33% is one third of the population. This means 1/3 are definitely against you because of their religion. The other 67% were talked about in my next, say, 15 arguments or so. My point was that 1 out of every 3 people will be against this idea SOLELY because of religion. 'every 1 gay couple 2 straight ones can't have kids' I know we don't have a problem now, but if marriage becomes even more legal and supported for gays, then it soon WILL become a problem. The status quo there IS no problem, but the resolution you are supporting will cause one. This is the point of my argument which my opponent has failed to grasp, again. Because we enjoy living and not being extinct, vote Neg. 'small numbers don't hurt, big numbers do' My opponent states I don't read his arguments, but seeing as I actually went through his arguments and pointed out what was wrong, I believe I know what he is trying to say. The fact that my opponent is pretending I am blatantly ignoring his arguments, is 1) a lie, and 2) not an excuse to drop the argument as a whole. So once again, here, my opponent didn't refute anything and should flow Neg. 'small numbers don't hurt, big numbers do' (again?) So my opponent seems to assume EVERYONE is secretly gay, and that this will cause everyone to come out of the closet. Unfortunately for my opponent, everyone is NOT gay. The increase comes from points I have already mentioned that the opponent failed to refute such as the 'children are susceptible' argument. I would also like to point out that my opponent's hypothetical scenarios are his own interpretation of my arguments, and not what I'm actually saying. 'In a world full of gay people, humans die out' Notice how my opponent didn't actually refute ANYTHING here. 'we both know that's not the hurt I meant' Notice, also, how my opponent wrote his longest speech on my least significant argument, that talked about pains in the butt hole. My opponent call me selfish, and scared? How dare you. Is it selfish to value humanity as a whole instead of my self? Am I scared when I openly admitted I didn't have a problem with gays? Don't talk to me about equal rights, either. Sex IS a right. So why can't we have sex with our sisters and brothers? Why can't we have sex with animals? Hell, why can't we make clones and have sex with OURSELVES. Because it's wrong. A PERVERSION of nature. Do NOT judge me when you are the one being foolish. I AM SCARED? You are a fool. I am not scared of a gay person. I am scared of what happens when people start KILLING gays and innocent people when gay rights go to far. You are a fool if you cannot see I am defending gays this whole time from the cruelty of the world. I could care less about gays if people let them alone. But people will always pursue gays for destruction, and this is why there should be no gay. Because sometimes the world can't handle things, even if they ARE ok. Don't ever call me scared again. Or a fool. 'So my opponent shows divorce is increasing' Your points don't matter in this argument because my harms far outweigh what you believe to be irrelevant. I thought I said I was an atheist. Stop referring to me as if I was a Christian. 'marriage being symbolic' You sicken me. Homosexuality is unnatural because sex has one purpose, and gay sex will not fulfill that purpose. 'I am an atheist' I don't care what you call bull****. I, am an atheist. I always have, and always will. I am arguing this point for the fun of the debate. I am IN an actual debate class, and when having a debate I will make points that let me WIN, NOT points I actually believe in. You tell me do debate in an intelligent manner, while you don't even look at my arguments. I am not 'oversimplifying' your arguments. The point is, your arguments are weak. The fact that you insult me and say I'm wrong, does not anger me, and certainly will not make the voter vote for you automatically. I have made my arguments and they still stand, I have no reason for additional ones. Do NOT call me a liar. I am glad my opponent finally brought up evidence about all of these cultures that 'embrace homosexuality.' This makes me respect him much more as a pers..... oh wait. He HASN'T brought up any evidence. I actually back up my claims with evidence. For all I know, opponent could have made this all up. I have refuted all of my opponents arguments with no twisting of selective reading. My opponent only says this because he cannot admit when he is wrong. This is a fairly childish thing to do, but what more can you expect from what is probably a child? He was actually probably referring to the fact that you are an ***hole, regarding whatever member messaged you. I don't think his sexuality is relevant? Are you gay? Are you trying to prove some point by being abrasive? I am denying people the right to protect them, don't you see. I am saying 'no' for the same reason I would say no to heroin. It makes people happy, but it's effects are worse. Killing someone might make me happy, but this does not mean it's right. Same with homosexuality, it might make someone happy for a while, all until the die in a rally. I don't want those dead people. If you are telling me that death is O.K. then fine, you see how that works for you, but it doesn't work for me. And about the single parents thing, growing up with a daddy won't turn you gay. Growing up with daddies will. No coin toss necessary, gayness will come from gayness, plain and simple. Saying my arguments are illogical does not actually make them so. Your logic is obviously faulty. Hmmm, my opponent really IS an ***hole. Interesting. Anyway, your boredom is your own fault. If you have to rely on a debate site to quench your boredom then I'm sorry, your lack of friends tells me exactly why you are a jerk. I have provided a plethora of clear, concise arguments. I have refuted all of the attacks you made on them. My opponent tells you to look at his arguments, as to why he wins, but he has made none. He has said what he thinks why my points are wrong, but he has not said why gay couples SHOULD marry. Why should the voter vote for someone who has not actually supported his own claim? It is up to you, voter.