Gay marriage should be legalized

===Defense=== 1. What is marriage? My opponent attempts to write off this argument as irrelevant. For example, attempting to argue my allusions to bestiality and polygamy as irrelevant. However, the debate over gay marriage is a debate over what marriage is and why the government is even involved in marriage. If marriage is only about love, why bar someone’s right to polygamy? In order to justify the pro-gay marriage position, my opponent must define what marriage, by its very nature, is. I have provided two definitions of marriage—one the one I have defended, the other my opponent alludes to throughout the debate. My opponent by wrongly arguing the point is irrelevant is essentially conceding my whole case. Marriage is based on the fact that men and women are complementary. It is an institution designed to support these types of unions. If this is the case, the government then intrudes on marriage policy in order to promote procreation and child rearing. Again, my opponent has failed to refute this simply hypothesis and, therefore, concedes that marriage is intrinsically heterosexual. The references to polygamy are totally relevant, as they prove that this is true, and that gay marriage isn’t really marriage. Is there a difference between flings in marriage? You say marriage is about love—which I have already shown is NOT logical. In a social situation, we might marry because of love. But the fact is, the government could care less. You then go on to say it is about legal commitment... If marriage is about love, and a man likes two women, then there is no reason he should not be married… Again, what is marriage as an institution? My opponent has failed to prove his point. Why does the government regulate marriage? If marriage is merely about emotional commitment, then nothing differentiates it from any other relationship. My opponent has failed to refute that basic premise. The point stands. 2. Harms Anecdotal evidence. The fact is, overall, children in homosexual households fare worse. Using census data in Canada, it has been shown children raised in homosexual households are 65% less likely to graduate from high school [1]. In Canada, gay marriage has been legal since 2005 and homosexuals have had the same legal rights (benefits wise) as heterosexual couples since 1997. Therefore, there is no reason to assume that the difference is due to social or economic factors. In fact, homosexuals tend to be more educated and wealthy than heterosexuals [2]. Therefore, if anything, we should expect their children to do better. But this is not the case. Fun fact, the hormonal hypothesis has been refuted by the vast majority of studies published [3]. The creation of new life and more children raised in stable homes with a mother and father is in the government’s interest. Overpopulation is not an issue to be worried about. In fact, many experts predict that our population will decrease over our lifetime [4]. ===Note=== My opponent, as PRO, must provide arguments as to why gay marriage should be legalized. He has failed to do so. Until he does so, he is on the losing side of this debate. 1. http://www.terpconnect.umd.edu... 2. http://www.usnews.com... 3. http://www.mygenes.co.nz... 4. http://newsfeed.time.com...