Gay marriage is natural, necessary and inevitable.

I am glad that you take this topic to heart (just as I do) and you took the time to address my main arguments one by one. I firmly stand behind my thesis: that Gay marriage is NATURAL, NECESSARY and INEVITABLE. The main discrepancy I am noticing between my arguments and yours is that we are almost talking about different things, different principles. And I think that I should spend some time clarifying what I mean by natural, necessary, and inevitable so that you can better address my points. By saying that gay marriage is natural I mean that allowing gay couples to wed is in accordance with 1. Our understanding of marriage today (e.g. gay marriage will be a natural inclusion); and 2. (most importantly) being gay and falling in love with a partner from the same sex is part of the usual course of nature (dictionary definition of natural: in accordance with the usual course of nature). Let me elaborate. I spent quite a bit of time already proving the first point here – that our marriage today essentially does not assign any roles that are gender specific, at all. This is beyond doubt in my mind – considering that we allow sick individuals who can't reproduce to marry, we allow older folks to marry, and we require no specific responsibilities from either side that are gender specific. (Please do not waste your time talking about tradition, because, as my argument makes clear, we are looking forward, from this point on). So on this first point then, you should agree that gay couples and their committed relationships fit perfectly into our marriage institution, they fit "naturally" in other words. On the second point, and I'm sorry if I didn't really talk about this one more in my main argument, homosexual behavior and homosexual relationships among mammals are very well documented, and ALL reputable medical organizations agree that it is no perversion, or a disease, or any sort of anomaly for two humans from the same genital group (as a comedian so brilliantly put) to engage in an intimate relationship and sexual acts. In an official statement from the American Medical Association on the subject: "AMA opposes, the use of "reparative" or "conversion" therapy that is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that the patient should change his/her homosexual orientation". This may sharply contradict some of what you may take for granted, but we are all here to learn aren't we? (I am not spending time rebuffing the few individual "experts" you quote, who had not been able to make the case for themselves, under the scrutiny of the Medical community as a whole) If we are to look beyond our preconceived notions of homosexuality and gay sex, it is very easy to accept that homosexuality is indeed part of the biodiversity that we are all witnessing everyday around us. If we still don't know for a fact what causes one to be gay or straight, we do know with a very high degree of certainty that being gay does not mean being mentally unstable, it does not mean being less educated, less talented, less intellectually capable, or lesser of a citizen all around. We have plenty of examples from history of gay men and women making great contributions to humanity. At this point, based on facts rather than personal biases, we MUST recognize and accept these individuals as equal in ALL RESPECTS. And we know that for two individuals who love each other, in our society, there is no greater recognition from family and society as a whole, than the recognition of marriage. It is NATURAL to sanction love between two intimately committed individuals with marriage. Moving on… Necessary. You give me a definition I've never seen before: "Necessary: absolutely essential". This definition caries a higher degree of urgency, than I initially envisioned. But I can argue that, yes, gay marriage is absolutely essential. It is essential to the individuals who are being denied inheritance benefits, tax benefits, and child custody benefits, and so many other benefits, that married straight couples take for granted. But it is also absolutely essential for our society's progress forward. We would not have "collapsed" had we not abolished slavery. We would not have collapsed had we not separated church from state. We would not have collapsed had we not given the women rights to vote. Yet, I argue that these things were absolutely essential for our society to move forward from the Dark Ages (in the case of Church-State separation), and from the times of total despotism of slave-owners, and times of gender inequality. When I state that gay marriage is necessary, I never said that it is necessary to the survival of the species, or the survival of the country. I did not specify. I hope that now it is cleared – it is NECESSARY FOR THE PROGRESS OF OUR SOCIETY, AND FOR THE DIGNITY OF ITS CITIZENS. Moving on… Inevitable. I never argued that being gay is inevitable. Your arguments seem to imply that. While I may actually agree with that statement (just as will 99% of the MD doctors in this country), my argument is that the acceptance of gay marriage in our society is inevitable. Why? I argue that this is primarily because of the concept of an upward moving spiral of evolution – in species, but also in societies. While there are obstacles on the way there, we are bound to eventually reach the cognitive and moral levels required to recognize the rights and dignity of individuals who have been historically (and in many places still currently) oppressed, prosecuted, and murdered. As mentioned above, all facts (and I mean facts that are provable, testable, and documented) show that LGBT individuals are innately such. The fact that many countries are already adopting gay marriage as the norm only speaks of the timing of this next step forward. If I were living in the 15th century I wouldn't have dreamed of such thing as gay marriage. Few people have the ability to look that far into the future. I am a simple man, and I can already see the next step upward in our evolutionary spiral. It is coming and you better get ready for it. On a final note, you made a number of references to the Bible and more significantly to the Biblical foundations of this country. This is one of the most absurd statements that I have ever heard, if it wasn't for the fact that I've heard it a thousand times already. Yet, I believe that a lie told a thousand times is still the same old, fat lie. Equality, liberty, justice for all... WHere are these words mentioned in the Bible. How about free speech. The core principles of this nation were derived from the great thinkers and philosophers of that time in Europe. Humanism and the revolt against tradition and religious despotism were the driving forces behind the birth of the USA. It is no coincidence that the Bible is mentioned zero times in the declaration of independence or the constitution. The only mention of religion in the constitution says: "No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The founding fathers were in their great majority OPPOSED to organized religion. And to leave you with a tangible undeniable proof of that, which you can easily verify – here is the opening of the first international agreement of the US. The treaty with Tripoli drafted in 1796 under George Washington and signed by John Adams in 1797 states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen…" We can take this into a whole new debate, but I hope that references to the "biblical foundation" of this nation will be dropped from this discussion for the time being. I look forward to your rebuttals!