Gay Marriage

I agree that religious text should not be a part of this debate. Therefore we will refrain from discussing Scriptural interpretations and Biblical hermeneutics. Contention 1: Marriage Is A Civil Right. In the Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia, Chief Justice Warren wrote that "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men" [1]. This struck down Virginia's ban on interracial marriages, largely as a violation of the 14th Amendment's right to equality under the law. The situation with gay marriage bears a striking resemblance to that of interracial marriage. Both were banned based on an immutable characteristic; both violate the 14th Amendment's right to due process and equality under the law. To grant some couples (white heterosexuals) the right to marry and deny it to others does, unmistakably, violate that right. Nor is this the only case where the Supreme Court has established marriage as a civil right. In fact, the Supreme Court ruled with the notion of marriage as a civil right in 14 cases [2]. Subpoint A: The Status Of Law In A Democratic Society The United States is founded with the idea that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The United States is not a theocracy. Religion has no role, nor should it have a role, in state affairs. Even if it was true that marriage belongs to religion, which I have disproven, the fact that America is governed by secular law would nullify any role religion has in saying who marries whom. Churches and other areas of worship are not essential to a wedding ceremony. Public officials, such as magistrates or justices of the peace, can perform what is called a civil marriage [3] - that is, a marriage without religious interference. Subpoint B: Denying Homosexuals The Right To Marry Deprives Them of Liberties Because homosexuals cannot, in many states, be legally married, they are denied several protections and benefits that are granted to their heterosexual counterparts. For instance, if one partner dies, the other is not able to automatically inherit the property or personal items of the other without a will [4]. They also cannot draw Social Security from the deceased partner as a heterosexual can. They are not covered by family leave, and they are denied hospital visitation rights [4]. They can't even file joint tax returns, not to mention that they are denied any tax credits for children. That heterosexual marriages receive all these and homosexuals do not is a case of discrimination and inequality before the law. Consequently, it stands in violation of the 14th Amendment of the United States. Therefore, in order illegalize gay marriage, we must find a compelling, secular reason to do so, especially since the majority of Americans support the legalization of gay marriage [5]. This is CON's task. If he is unable to provide a compelling, secular reason to illegalize gay marriage, then I win this debate. Contention 2: Many Religious Groups Support Gay Marriage This is a fairly self-explanatory point. Despite what some conservative Christians may believe, there are many religious groups that accept homosexuality. These include [6]: Reform and conservative Judaism The Episcopal Church (which stated an opposition to banning same-sex marriage and support unions) The Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations The United Church of Christ Society of Friends (Quakers) The Evangelical Lutheran Church The Presbyterian Church (which supports same-sex unions) Contention 3: Gay Marriage Has Economic Benefits Marriage, like just about everything else, is a business. Profit is a golden incentive. Legalizing gay marriage could send the marriage industry skyrocketing. Forbes reports that legalizing gay marriage would bring about $16.8 billion to the marriage industry [7]. Not that the marriage industry has been stagnant, but this is a venture with a large benefit and very little/no cost. USA Today agrees that legalizing gay marriage could help beneficial impacts on businesses [8]. Next round will be refutations. I look forward to CON's responses! [1] http://www.law.cornell.edu... [2] http://www.afer.org... [3] http://marriage.about.com... [4] http://www.freedomtomarry.org... [5] http://www.gallup.com... [6] http://www.pewresearch.org... [7] http://www.forbes.com... [8] http://www.usatoday.com...