There are good argunments against Same Sex Marriage

If I understand my opponents position correctly, he argues that heterosexual couples produce children through sex, while homosexuals do not. Because homosexuals do not, they are not as valuable to society, and recognizing homosexual marriage rejects the special value of heterosexual marriage, so it is unjust.Homosexual couples do benefit society. While homosexual couples cannot produce children through sex, homosexual couples benefit society. Homosexuals couples can adopt and raise kids, can procreate through a surrogate mother and being in a relationship increases mental and physical health of couples involved. While homosexuals cannot reproduce through sex, having homosexual couples benefits society and should be recognized just like heterosexual couples are. There are many heterosexual couples that are less valuable to society than some homosexuals couples. To disallow all gay marriages because the aggregate benefit of hetero marriages is greater that homo marriages is discriminatory.1.Heterosexual union is the indispensable means by which humans come into existence and therefore has special social value (indeed, the greatest possible social value because it is the first precondition for society).2. The indispensable means by which something of special social value can occur itself has special value.I assume that by heterosexual union you mean heterosexual marriage. Heterosexual marriage is not the indispensable means by which humans come into existence. Heterosexual sex is the way that people come into existence. In fact, in 2009, 41% of births in the USA happened outside of marriage. More than 50% of births were out of wedlock for women under 30 in the USA. [1]. With 41% of births out of wedlock, marriage does not have that much effect procreation, and no effect on younger moms. People will have kids with or without marriage. Marriage does nothing to increase births.Infertile couples get married. Also, people get married and choose not to have kids. These groups contribute to heterosexual marriages, but not procreation. Furthermore, considering birth control, procreation occurs when a heterosexual couple decides to have a kid, not just have sex.In short, heterosexual sex causes procreation and not heterosexual marriage. What has special value to human society deserves special social recognition and sanction.While the ability to produce children is special to human society, there are many qualities of gay couples that are special to human society.Gay couples can adopt and raise kids. 4% of children in the USA are orphans. It greatly benefits society when they are raised by parents. Gays can also have children through a surrogate mother. This is just as valuable as procreation through heterosexual sexBeing with someone you love improves your mental and physical health. It greatly benefits society to have mentally and physically healthy people. [3]These special qualities are important just like producing children is important. There are many homosexual couples that are more valuable to society than some heterosexual ones. Therefore, homosexual couples deserve social recognition just like heterosexual ones.4. Civil ordinances which recognize gay marriage as comparable to heterosexual marriage constitute a rejection of the special value of heterosexual unions. Allowing gays to marry does not diminish or devalue the ability to procreate in any way. Gay marriage honours the love of two people who want to spend the rest of their lives together. While they cannot procreate through sex, they still benefit society. To diminish it, they would have to worsen it in someway. Nothing is worsened for straight couples when gays are allowed to marry. My opponent argues that it is illegal for cousins to marry because they cannot procreate "Most states (~50%) prohibit first cousins from marriage, using liberal/pro-gay logic it should be legal for them to do so. But the reason they are not allowed to marry in those half of the states is because the kids they may bring are deformed, and or more likely to be deformed."Yes, the reason that cousins cannot marry is because they produce deformed children. The reason to disallow this is NOT because they cannot procreate but for the reason that it is wrong to knowingly bring deformed kids into the world. It is done for the same reason that people with a high risk of passing hereditary diseases to children may choose not to have them.My opponent claims "Now the BOP unbeknown to homosexual advocates is they have the burden of proof, they must prove homosexual unions should be treated the same as heterosexual ones."Homosexuals should be treated the same as heterosexuals because they are both people. To allow hetero marriage while not gays in wrong, just as it would be wrong to allow whites to vote but not blacks. The 14th amendment of the U.S states that guarantees equal protection of laws [4]You mention this in your argument "This argument fails, as it fails to prove in society or in any legal situation that they are in fact equal, which is impossible to prove." I assume this pertains to the argument I just gave. Please elaborate. I do not understand. Also you cited a previous debate(citation [1]), to claim "It is logically impossible to prove that homosexuals and heterosexuals are the same, hence it is illogical to claim they should have the same "rights" I do not with to read through an entire 4 round debate to pick out this point, please make this argument yourself so I can understand it.Homosexuals have the right to marry. It doesn't affect straight people to allow them to marry and only benefits gays.If my opponents argument is correct, then infertile people and those who do not want kids also should not be allowed to marry Gays have the same benefit to society as heteros that do not reproduce. If this argument stands he MUST concede that heterosexuals that are infertile or choose not to have kids cannot marry.Conclusion I have shown that couples benefit society in more ways than just procreation through heterosexual sex. Couples can raise kids ( adoption ), can produce and raise kids through a surrogate and couples have better physical and mental health. All these things are beneficial to society. Therefore the state should recognize gay couples as well because they have benefit to society. In addition, it is in the best interest of society to have equal rights, as the USA has with the 14th amendment.Furthermore, if my opponents arguments stands, then hetero infertile people and couples who choose not to have children must be denied marriage rights.Therefore,this argument is not good and I urge you to vote CON. [1] http://www.nytimes.com....[2]http://wiki.answers.com...[3] http://www.mnn.com...[4] http://www.answers.com...