Gay Marriage

Greetings. I would like to thank my opponent for challenging me to this debate too.I would like to begin this debate by pointing out that Pro exaggerated his stance by saying that "people who take an extremist stance against a group of people who have done absolutely nothing to them is some what mentally demented and incapable of reasoning." Christianity does consider homosexuality a sin, and I am against gay marriage because of my faith. However, I must say that the Christian faith condemns it for a good reason. In fact, I think gay marriage should be condemned even in the secular perspective. Regardless, I hope my opponent tries his best in his debate.Pro says that the only difference between a heterosexual marriage and a homosexual marriage is that "two people of the same gender are getting married rather than a man and a woman." Here, my opponent makes a straw man argument, because there are more differences than that. One key differences would be reproduction. Can a homosexual couple have children? No, but on the other hand, a heterosexual couple can. "If we produce no children, our society will die. There won't be enough people to support the infrastructure, medical needs, economic development, etc. That is a fact. So, common sense would tell us that homosexuality is a danger to society since it cannot produce children to further the society" (1). Moving on, gay marriage opens more pathways for health-related issues by endorsing the homosexual lifestyle in a larger scale. "A new study in the United Kingdom has revealed that homosexuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population, reports Health24.com....the risk of suicide jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homosexual lifestyle...the lifespan of a homosexual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heterosexual...While the Health 24 article suggested that homosexuals may be pushed to substance abuse and suicide because of anti-homosexual cultural and family pressures, empirical tests have shown that there is no difference in homosexual health risk depending on the level of tolerance in a particular environment. Homosexuals in the United States and Denmark - the latter of which is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homosexuality - both die on average in their early 50's, or in their 40's if AIDS is the cause of death. The average age for all residents in either country ranges from the mid-to-upper-70s" (2). Furthermore, smoking issues are higher among lesbian and bisexual women. "Tobacco use is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in women in the United States, and evidence from studies with adults suggests that the prevalence of smoking may be higher among lesbian and bisexual women than among heterosexual women" (3). So, I would like to ask you, is gay marriage really okay? Homosexual lifestyle in itself causes depression, let alone gay marriages. Also, Pro says that gay people were born that way. On the contrary, "If genetic influence were expressed in these data, MZ twins should have the highest concordance for same-sex erotic preference, and unrelated and half-siblings the lowest. Table 5 is based on pairs in which at least one respondent reports a same-sex romantic attraction (N=527 pairs)...there is no evidence for strong genetic influence on same-sex preference in this sample. Among MZ [monozygotic] twins, 6.7 % are concordant. DZ [dizygotic] twin pairs are 7.2% concordant. Full-siblings are 5.5 % concordant. Clearly, the observed concordance rates do not correspond to degrees of genetic similarity. None of the comparisons between MZ twins and others in table 5 are even remotely significant 17. If same-sex romantic attraction has a genetic component, it is massively overwhelmed by other factors. As argued above, it is more likely that any genetic influence, if present, can only be expressed in specific and circumscribed social structures" (4). Here, we see that genetic influence (if it is present, though there is no evidence), can be displayed in specific and circumscribed or restricted social structures. Some of those "social structures" could include the types of environments that people grew up in. For example, a person (of either gender) who grew up without much interaction from the opposite gender could end up having homosexual tendencies. So, it can be safely concluded that it is a choice; it is a choice based on faulty, limited perception. Furthermore, my opponent states,"Love is love and can come in all shapes and forms." If this is true, then is pedophilia (with mutual consent) acceptable? Remember, Pro said that love can come in ALL shapes and forms. "Or, are we to say that only homosexual attraction is genetic and morally good where pedophilia is not? If so, why the double standard?" (5). To sum it up, gay marriage being legalized only has one significant consequence: gay people getting married and increasing the rates of depression. Once again, we should remember that homosexual lifestyle in itself is harmful, let alone the legalization of gay marriage. My opponent also said that love is love and can come in all shapes and forms, which unfortunately includes pedophilia. Pro, are you trying to say that pedophilia is okay, too? I would also like to repeat that gay marriages can potentially lead to under-population, meaning that our societies would eventually not be able to operate properly. Finally, God wants us to be happy, but He certainly does not want us to try and become happy through the wrong ways. On Genesis 1:28, God told us to be fruitful and multiply, and I repeat that we would be going to the opposite direction if we increased rates of depression and the abuse of items like tobacco.Your turn, Pro.Sources:1. http://carm.org...2. http://www.lifesitenews.com... 3. http://glma.org...:\ColdFusion9\verity\Data\dummy.txt4. http://iserp.columbia.edu... 5. http://carm.org...