Gay marriage should be legalized

My opponent states that gay marriage is not a political issue. This is definitely not true. Gay marriage has always been a political affair. If so then why has it been such a hot topic among politicians and the government today? Political can be defined as: "exercising or seeking power in the governmental or public affairs of a state, municipality, etc." http://dictionary.reference.com... Since gay marriage legalization has been a public affair in many different states and has been seeking power and acceptance through the government, then Pro's claim is false. My opponent says that I need to decide whether or not to use politics or religion against her. I can use both, thank you. If she wanted me to choose one or the other then she would have stated terms in Round 1. Since she did not, there aren't any rules stating whether I can or cannot use religion, politics, or both against her in this debate. May I also add that since she dismissed politics as something not associated with gay marriage, her two claims contradict each other. My opponent then remarks that I stated that not everyone is born a heterosexual. I never said that. Maybe she should read the entire paragraph before making these claims. Also, some homosexuals are raised Christians, but this is not what I meant. One's upbringing is usually more influenced by what their parents or guardians are like versus what their religion believes. For example, one could have bad, backbiting parents but still go to church every Sunday. They look up to their parents more than their preacher, and if their parents beliefs are unstable about certain religious teachings then their children will likely regard that. Further, I believe that homosexual practices are brought up by sexual experiences at a young age (Ex. #1: if a guy thinks that there are no attractive girls in his area, but there are a bunch of good-looking guys, then.. ;Ex. #2: a girl thinks it's wrong to like another girl who is sort of "hot" but is then told that is is perfectly fine, or encouraged, then..). So really, it doesn't exactly come down to being Christian. Some people have homosexual urges that they don't fight hard enough against, or dismiss their religion as not as important as what they are feeling. As for the Bible, Pro mentions how it was inspired by God, created by men. If the Bible condemns gay marriage, but is inspired by Him, wouldn't His prophets, seers, and revelators know by His word whether or not gay marriage is a sin? Or is her argument saying that His prophets were wrong? I am elaborating on this subject because Pro has still not made it clear why she contradicts her own religion. She says she respects other peoples' beliefs, but why does she think that she has to agree with their claim to marriage even when her own faith condemns this sort of behavior? My philosophy is that Christians get caught up with all the political buzz that they feel like they need to agree with the public opinion, even if it does contradict their own beliefs. Since Pro has not made it known why, my case stands. Allow me to lay out a few more reasons to support my argument: 1. Procreation. I think that anyone who reads this can agree that humanity was meant to procreate. If so, why should we encourage nonproductive behavior? Countries that have a lower death rate (i.e. Austria, Ukraine, Italy, Japan, Belgium, and others...) than birth rate are doomed to fail. If we legalize gay marriage, the birth rate in America will fall and will eventually lead to America's breakdown. So if everyone is gay, where does the next generation come from? How are we supposed to "be fruitful and multiply" (for us Christians) if we are encouraging the decline of procreation in our nation? 2. Heterosexual marriage allows the continuance of the family, our people, and our nation. Marriage and family is the fundamental training ground for values, morals, human responsibility, and a work ethic. Mothers and fathers have different roles. For example, my father taught me how to work hard and my mother taught me proper etiquette. I could list all the differing characteristics between mothers and fathers, but the point is that if a child has two mothers or two fathers then the development and upbringing of a child is somewhat unbalanced. The majority of people will tell you that a mother and a father is best for a child, as compared to two parents of the same gender. 3. Redefining marriage. As I said earlier, marriage has always been between a man and a woman. This small group of people over a little bit of time can't suddenly change the definition for the entire world what as always been. That's like saying a strawberry is now an orange because oranges are being discriminated against by strawberries. It clearly doesn't make sense. Also, by redefining marriage we will be weakening the view of marriage itself. It would deny the importance of mothers and fathers and further distance the needs of children to be under the consent of a married couple. For more consequences: http://www.heritage.org... Greater risk of suicide among gay couples and other statistics: https://www.frc.org... Even more cons of gay marriage: http://www.allaboutlove.org... Before we become a gay America, we should review the consequences.