Gay Marriage Should be Legalized

~~Defense~~ I am arguing that the state has no compelling reason for the state to legalize it. The state offers benefits to marriage because it has the purpose of procreating. Marriage is a way for the state to get more citizens. The acts in themselves most likely will create life. However, gay marriage undermines this and has no chance of creating life therefore, the state should not legalize it. My opponent then lists a series of deninitions of the term marriage. He says that since gay marriage is a listed definition then it is acknowledgeable, but he fails to realize that we are debating on whether it should be legalized or not. I have given points that have proven that the state has no compelling reason to legalize it, therefore, it should not be legalized. My oppoent then states:'According to the definition my opponent presented, marriage is a dispensable means by which new life can be brought into this world, which means that it is inessential. I agree with this statement, as one can have children out of wedlock. However, that definition also belies the syllogism that depends on it. ' My opponent is wrong. The acts i themselves are sanctioned by the government. When people are not married they tend to use more controception as a means to decrease the chance of pregnancy. Most married couple however, are going to have a few if not a lot of offspring. The problem with homosexual marriage is that it doesn't have any chance at all of producing offspring, and in fact underminds heterosexual marriage which generally makes more organized families with children in stable enviroments. Therefore, heterosexual marriage should be legal by the state, and homosexual 'marriages' shouldn't. My last argument was not fallacious, it is fact. For example: When we gave women the right to vote (which I have no problem with) they kept on pushing for other freedoms which pushed the line of morality intill they legalized abortion which is basically the extermination of the next generation. The same thing can easily be applied to gay rights. Once we legalize gay marriage, then we will have poligamists pushing for legalization of poligamy, and pedaphiles pushing for the legalization of pediphilia. This is the second resason why homosexual marriages shouldnn't be legalized. ~~Rebuttels~~ R1: My opponent has stated that homosexual unions existed in medievel times. According to his evidence he is correct, but my opponent has left one thing unnoticed: Marriage back in midievel times was not sanction by the state, and finantial benefits were not given to married couples. However, here in the United States gives support to marriages because of the fact that these unions creat more people for the continued cycle of society. Homosexuals do not create life nor does it do anything to benefit society, therefore it should not be legalized. R2: My opponent doesn't really do anything here but state that homosexuality is natural. Even though I disagree with my opponent on that, it is a subject for another debate at another time. ~~Conclusion~~ Do to the fact that my opponent was unsuccessful in refutting my arguments, and that his own arguments are not sound ones. And do to the fact that gay marriage does not do anything for the betterment of society. The government should not legalize it.