Gay marriage should be legally allowed

"Dann continues to argue his opinions about whether the comparison between gay rights and civil rights is a correct one (while still giving no argument as to why he believes this; just that it is "apples and oranges"." I have given an argument as to why I believe there is no comparison. I shall quote myself addressing the point in a prior round: "Homosexuals arent a race. Homosexuality is a sexual orientation. Homosexuals were never made to use separate bathrooms, were never made to give up their seats on a bus, were not forced to eat in separate restaurants, were not kept segregated, were not officially considered second class citizens and were never forced into slave labour. The attempt to liken the two groups to show some sort of solidarity of plight betrays a wonderfully naive and biased attitude towards homosexuals." "I must make this comparison again even if my opponent doesn't find it valid. The same could be said of minorities before they were given the same rights. Has it gone away? No. Has it gotten better? Absolutely. I'd posit these legal and social divisions exacerbate and legitimize the prejudices against racial minorities and gays. Prejudice will never go away; I'm not arguing that. But it would start to falter as more acceptance raises. It's already happening. Acceptance of gays[1] and gay marriage[2] has risen as the movement has become more vocal in the last couple of decades. This counts against Dann's argument that legalization will somehow create more division. I'm not arguing that the correlation equals causation but I am saying that his argument does show up in the data. The data seems to disagree with his assessment of the issue." My opponent says things like 'the data', as though everything is a cold hard statistic. Lets look at black/white relations, if we must argue through analogy, though let it be understood that I really do believe them to be fundamentally different, and you should too. Blacks gained civil rights. Did they become like whites? No. Blacks live in black neighbourhoods. Blacks live like black people in a white country. The crime rate skyrocketed when black people gained their civil rights. Black neighbourhoods experienced and still experience the most abject poverty possible in the United States. Violent black gangs spread out like a virus throughout all the black population centres. Black people were always at a disadvantage, because they are playing a white mans game in a white mans home stadium. They were always on the back foot. With homosexuals, they are trying to play a heterosexual game in a heterosexual stadium. Look at it this way, there is the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, MLS. There is also the female equivalent of those leagues. Would you, in the name of equality, decree that the females shall be allowed to compete in the male league or vice versa? Most likely not. Why? Well, because it would rip the soul right out of the game. Less people would attend. The leagues would be ruined. And so it is with homosexuals trying to muscle in on marriage. They have their civil ceremonies, why not leave them to their own league, and leave the straight league to the straight folk? They would ruin marriage as an institution, and thereby helping to ruin the concept and value of family too. That would have a devastating effect on society. Look back at the black community. See how lots of them have absent fathers. See what becomes of a community, a society, when you mess around with the stabilising effect of the family unit? To legislate its undermining is a crime against society. "Does Dann suppose the blame of the risk lies on the gay couples for having a family or those who seek to harm the family? " The blame lies squarely with the gay couple. They are acquiring something that nature has declared off-limits to them - children. They should accept their fate nobly. They cannot procreate - thats just part of the territory of being gay. By circumventing it through adoption, they are leaving a child open to the most heinous abuses at the hands of classmates etc. and abuses suffered during these most formative years will affect and stick with a child their whole life through. They should be courageous and accept the fact that two people of the same sex cannot procreate, and they should accept it with grace. "The argument has been made by my opponent that a major reason why gay marriage should stay illegal is that more harm to them and society as a whole will come if gays are afforded the same rights. Dann then says it can be argued that these negative effects have happened to the Black community and yet believes that they should have received their rights (among them marrying who they'd like). What justification then is there for denying these rights to gays?" Gays have civil unions. No one is denying them the right to be contract-bound to each other. And really, stop likening gays to blacks. "Here I was positing that Dann was arguing that there is less discrimination (his actual argument, which he didn't seem to understand he was making) but concluding that there is no discrimination. This was to point out his logic fallacy in coming to a false conclusion based on incomplete data; I was not making my own fallacy." Sure "This is bias and prejudice. Not an argument in favor of your position." That was clearly a joke. You're a bit sensitive. Perhaps you too might be a... Before you jump on that, that too was a joke. http://www.youtube.com... Word to voters. Cast your minds down the line. Do we ever reach the politically correct vision of utopia, where everyone is equal, we're all colourblind, we all lack prejudice, we have lost our ability to be discriminating and to judge? Or does societal homeostasis always kick in and redress the imbalance in different ways? Is gay marriage a step in the right direction for society or is this notion of equality just plainly ludicrous? Does multiculturalism work? Can different faiths share the same house of prayer? Will differences always tell and will they always influence society? Will humanity overcome its inbuilt protection and fear circuitry that evolution has instilled in us? Is it not the same circuitry we see at play in the failure of multiculturalism or in the hatred between races, nations, faiths, cities, rival sports teams, rival schools, rival families, sibling rivalry? Can you really legislate people's attitudes? Can you really legislate people into internally and unconditionally viewing everyone and everything with equanimity? Would the world not be bland and uninteresting if that were the case and its inhabitants vacant, Stepford-like, zombie-like? I see where the pro-marriage lot are coming from - but only up to a point.I think they haven't thought through the long-term societal consequences, they're just jumping on the equality bandwagon while it still has motion and while its still a free ride.