Same Sex Marriage should be legal, because religious observance and parenthood are optional.

I agree with my opponent that, as per the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, congress cannot enact laws that use any religious articles as justification, unless the articles coincide with secular laws and their justifications. (Laws against killing, stealing, et cetera). Laws also do not control what sort of marriages a particular religion recognizes as legitimate or sanctioned by their deity or deities. The law could not force churches to recognize interracial, interdenominational, interfaith, or same-sex marriages because they are protected by the First Amendment. However, the clergy cannot dictate which citizens can engage in the current system of Civil Matrimony, without consistently applicable secular arguments. Marriage as a word has indeed become a contentious issue, mainly for groups that want to prevent same-sex couples from getting legal marriage. It is worth stating that these groups have not expressed the same passionate interest in enacting laws to reflect many other provisions for marriage dictated by their respective faiths, such as a law to prevent divorce, or laws to prevent marriages of people with different religions. Religious communities should address the issue of same-sex marriage much in the same way that they address dietary laws across religious lines. According to Hebrew dietary laws (Kashrut), and Muslim dietary laws (Halal), people are not to consume pork. These groups are able to practice their faith without enacting laws to prevent other people from eating pork, nor do they require laws to practice their own faith. Citizens of the United States who do not follow these dietary laws need not abstain from eating pork to 'respect the beliefs' of the practitioners. Likewise, same-sex couples do not need to abstain from legal marriage to show 'respect' for religions that do not condone same-sex marriage or relationships. As my opponent offers no support of using religion to justify laws against same-sex marriage, I have nothing more to explain on this point in the current debate. I will accept the suggested solution offered by my opponent, to effectively absolve the government from the use of the term 'marriage', however, such an act would effectively legalize same-sex marriage across the United States. I am not sure if that is the intended effect that my opponent was trying to establish, but if all parties that enter into a Civil Union (to be the universal replacement term for Civil Marriage) are free to call their union a 'marriage', then all same-sex couples that obtain Civil Unions (alongside all mixed-sex couples) would be able to refer to their union as a 'marriage'. The provision for reclassifying marriage as a religious institution would only complicate matters, as marriage in and of itself is not a religious institution. Although many religions have ceremonies and rules for marriage, there is no central religion to which the term would be given, and the non-religious cannot be prevented from enjoying the use of the term 'marriage', especially by any act of congress under the current Constitution (USA). My opponent also agrees that procreative ability is not a requirement for legal marriages to be recognized by the government as valid. I included that point in the initial argument only to address one of the central arguments offered in defense of laws designed to exclude same-sex couples from legal marriage. In conclusion, I understand the desire to 'protect' what a group finds to be sacred, but the concept of marriage does not belong to any particular religion, Judeo-Christian or otherwise. If groups wish to effectively ban same-sex couples from getting married, they need only provide universal, consistently applicable, and secular justifications to establish permanent laws on the issue, where the arguments will be able to stand on their own merits, rather than the popularity of the view, or conviction of those who hold them. Citizens should not be expected to follow arbitrarily selected tenets of the faiths of others as a sign of respect to that religion.