Gay Marriage

a. -I said their "may" be more benefits to a heterosexual marriage. However, a benefit I can see to a SSM, is that we are promoting equality by doing so, not judging a couple based merely on their orientation. Another is that we are being a more honest and less hypocritical society if we allow SSM, by practicing the equality that our nation preaches. The Declaration of Independence states, "all men are created equal". I agree with this. But, if we do not allow SSM, then we evidently are not TREATING all men equal(allowing some to marry, and some to not). -I warrant that it is necessary for SSM's to be legal to promote equality and fairness. -Once again, in Beastiality, Polygamy, and Pedophile marriages, the 'partners' are not in love with each other. That is necessary for marriage. SSM's, unlike the previous three CAN include being in love with each other. I know an older gay couple, Chris and Greg- they have been a couple for 24 years and claim that they are, indeed, in love. -You insinuated that SSM couples would cause heterosexual couples to become homosexuals. I am saying that they will remain together if they are married or not, because you say that they will detract, in multiple ways, from society if they are married. But what will it matter if they are married or not? b. -Ok. -Again, what does it matter if they(SSM) do not contribute as much to society. You admitted that my argument regarding 'just because something doesn't offer as much of a benefit that does not justify it's legality' is true, so it holds true here as well. -Actually it does. You said that less money would be put back into the economy with SSM's. This would, in turn, create an imbalance, if it were correct. But it is not correct, because although they put less back into the economy, they, again, take less from it, so proportionally, it works out. -The link you provided me to assure me that your ratio is indeed correct, is a link to an MSN Nickname tool downloader. With no evidence of the 20-25%/75% statistic you give, how can it not be dismissed? Anyway, my point was that homosexuals do make up a small percentage of the population. I said this because, you said that it would create a negative effect on our economy, and by them being such a small percentage @ ~.6%, they cannot effect our economy in any monumental manner, as you had perhaps suggested. -I already stated why this is irrelevant. Thank you for not harping on it. My point is that people have no legitimate claims against legalizing SSM. I have done my best to refute all of your claims regarding this. Although there isn't one against SSM, there is a legitimate claim against, for example, bestiality, because in most cases, the animal takes part of this involuntarily(this seems logical because, if an elephant tried to have sex with me, I wouldn't be very voluntary). -I said these people are IN LOVE with each other. I do not deny that a pedophile may love a small child, but the two CANNOT be in love with each other. I explained this more fully in R1. It is not hypocritical at all. -My purpose in this debate is to merely legalize SSM. I am not saying we should legalize anything else. -It doesn't matter if it's about interpretations of absolutes, ideologies, or pizza. The facts remain the same. This topic is about why SSM should be legalized- not why polygamy, pedophilia, beastiality, or necrophilia should not be illegal. But, I will humor you: POLYGAMY -Marriage is between two people. If it's between more, its not a marriage. PEDOPHILIA -A.K.A, the sexual desire felt for children, is not an act but a thought, so it is already legal. If you are referring to the crime of pedophilia(actually completing a sexual act with the child), it should not be legalized because it is not consensual. Children don't yet attain sexual desires. In 1st grade, there was a girl named Madeline that I liked. I didn't want to have sex with her... I wanted to talk with her, to be around her, for her to like me back. I didn't even know what sex was. At maybe perhaps around 11 or 10 at the earliest, one may begin to have sexual desires. Extremely rarely, they might desire someone older. Still, it should be kept illegal for sex under 18, because this is roughly when people are ready to make the decision if they want to have sex or not. BESTIALITY -Sex should remain species to species. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, most of the animals taking part are not doing so, voluntarily. NECROPHILIA -Not only should sex remain species to species, but alive to alive. It's just common sense really. No, because a dead body cannot be in love with a person. Gay people have a right to be married because straight people do. There. It may be categorized this way by you, but that is not universal. My "constructive argument" is that there is no reason not to legalize SSM. On your last point, I can only say, again, that I know 2 homosexuals who are in love with each other. Not just attracted.