Gays should be allowed to marry.

First off, I would like to say "thanks for calling me a guy" "Now, to counter his first argument" IM AM NOT A GUY.... ok now that I got that out of my system, I will rebuild my case and points and prove why the negative is wrong. First off, he argues that my first point that gays can marry, but to a woman. Hello? Look up the definition of gay. OH, wait I already did: gay (someone who practices homosexuality; having a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex) http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... And would you look at that...a gay is someone who has a sexual attraction to persons of the same sex! And now for the definition of marriage as well... Marriage:(the state of being a married couple voluntarily joined for life (or until divorce)) (two people who are married to each other) http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... And the government cannot change the meaning of marriage because of the Tenth Amendment,which clearly gives states and/or the people the power...not the government so that makes your Second argument null. http://www.law.cornell.edu... ____________________________________________________________________________________________ And I shall put his first 3 attacks on my case together...which are that the Catholics created marriage and we cannot change the law because Buddhists want it. OK first like I said before "THE AMERICAN BIBLE HAS NO STANDING WHATSOEVER IN AMERICAN LAW" And where did I say that I was against (or should go against) Catholics. Why should Catholics & Christians be considered above all religions? Hmmm?! This is, of course, related to the motive above. But it is really subtly different. It's based on the assumption that the state has the responsibility to "sanctify" marriages - a fundamentally religious idea. Here we're dealing with people trying to enforce their religious doctrines on someone else, but by doing it through weakening the separation of church and state, by undermining the Bill of Rights. Not that there's anything new about this, of course. But the attempt itself runs against the grain of everything the First Amendment stands for - one does not truly have freedom of religion if one does not have the right to freedom from religion as well. It would seem to me that anyone who feels that the sanctity of their marriage is threatened by a gay couple down the street having the right to marry, is mighty insecure about their religion and their marriage anyway. And to add to this, wasn't SLAVERY A TRADITION?!?!? And if YOU knew the history of marriage you can see it was at first for the Bourgeoisie (which in the Marxist theory it is simple a fancy word for rich people) than it was denied to slaves and now it is time for us to allow homosexuals to marry!!! __________________________________________________________________________________ And to attack his first argument, you can see that he has contradicted himself! See he even said people choose, thus expanding on his point, we (as the people) have the right to do what we want. And hey, more than half the population at first was against not teaching religion in schools but over time they learned to GROW UP AND DEAL WITH IT! And as a point of clarification we live in a DIRECT REPUBLIC not a democracy.. _____________________________________________________________________________________ And going on to his point that "Anyhow, why should we religious folk change the entire meaning of marriage that WE CREATED so that two people of the same sex can completely contradict and defile our beliefs? You simply cannot" This argument, usually advanced by churches that oppose gay marriage, is simply not true. There is nothing in any marriage law, existing or proposed, anywhere in the United States, that does or would have the effect of requiring any church to marry any couple they do not wish to marry. Churches already can refuse any couple they wish, and for any reason that suits them, which many often do, and that would not change. Some churches continue to refuse to marry interracial couples, others interreligious couples, and a few refuse couples with large age disparities and for numerous other reasons. Gay marriage would not change any church's right to refuse to sanctify any marriage entirely as they wish - it would simply offer churches the opportunity to legally marry gay couples if they wish, as some have expressed the desire to do - the freedom of religion would actually be expanded, not contracted. ________________________________________________________________________________________ The fact is we need to create gay marriage for gay people. DEAL! ________________________________________________________________________________________ It is indeed so that straight people have the special treatment...the right to MARRIAGE!!! VOTE AFF/PRO! VOTE AFF/PRO! VOTE AFF/PRO!