Resolved: Gay marriage would weaken the insitutuion of marriage

C1 - A) Pro begins, "The dutch study... proved that gays cheat on eachother more when married than heterosexual people." First, the Dutch Study is not what Pro used to cite this fact in the last round. Instead it was Conservapedia which I've already attacked as a blatantly biased source, that is completely scoffed and laughed at by scholars and intellectuals for its overall lack of credibility. Unlike Wikipedia, it is far less factual. Moreover, Conservapedia cites IT'S source for the phrase, "Allowing gays to marry would make gays seek more partners" (which is what Pro is trying to prove) by citing 'Statistics Canada, Canada's National Statistical Agency, July 7, 2005.' I Google'd that source and all that came up were links to Conservapedia. One cannot validate the other. In addition to the fact that Pro should be penalized for utilizing terrible sources, keep in mind that there is no way to verify this proposed statistic. Pro must either prove this figure to be accurate or drop this contention. Finally on this point, Pro is wrong as the Dutch study specifically notes a difference between homosexual relationships and heterosexual marriages. In the last round, I explained that the two should not be considered synonomous; Pro dropped this contention. C1 - B) Pro continues, "That [cheating] weakens the definintion of mariage as the point of mariage is to be monogomas." This ignores all of my arguments from the last round explaining that the concept of marriage changes and evolves over time as a society, and most definitely between individuals. Pro ignores my point that Mormons for instance are polygamous. Everybody's values, wants and needs differ. Extend all of those arguments; this point from Pro has already been negated. C1 - C) Pro says not all divorce's result from cheating and I agree. That was never the overall point. However Pro cannot say that my numbers are "wrong" as I could just as easily say HIS numbers are wrong. Statistics are not perfectly accurate. Pro insists in R1 that only 25% of married heterosexuals cheat. I gave a source indicating that the figure was much likely higher. As yet another source, according to the Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy, approximately 50 percent married women and 60 percent of married men will have an extramarital affair at some time in their marriage [2]. That figure is MUCH higher than Pro suggests, indicating that heterosexuals are not necessarily the little pillars of fidelity that Pro assumes. C1 - D) Pro dropped the contention that lesbians are known to cheat. My proposition that lesbians are known to stay in long-lasting, monogamous relations goes undisputed. Considering lesbians want to get married, it would seem lesbians therefore strengthen the so-called "point" of marriage (monogamy) and therefore this completely negates Pro's case [3]. C1 - E) Pro dropped my contention that the concept of marriage has changed and evolved throughout history.C1 - F) Pro dropped my point that there is not necessarily a contradiction in terms.C1 - G) Pro dropped my point that there is no right or wrong way for a couple to behave sexually; that is up to the individual couples to decide for themselves, and that individual's choices within heterosexual marriages have so far not ruined marriage for everybody as Pro suggests allowing gay marriage would do. Therefore, my contention that it would be more realistic to recognize that people's behavior as individuals does not and probably will not affect the behavior of other people is valid. C1 - H) Pro must prove that the behavior of people within gay relationships will affect how other people behave in their marriages. Then he must prove that monogamy is of paramount importance to marriage in general. If he is able to do this, we'll continue from there... (PRO DIDN'T RESPOND). C2) Pro said people who are beaten will more likely seek divorce, and divorce does not strengthen marriage. The fact is that divorce rates are already high amongst heterosexuals, and violence among gays is not likely to affect straight people's relationships. C3) Pro proved my point by pointing out how many hate crime acts were committed against gay males. He also suggests that gays abuse drugs at higher rates than heterosexuals. That goes along with the fact that they get a lot of abuse and backlash from society, so I think this is an obvious correlation. It is completely untrue that "most" of America is liberal insofar as acceptring gays. Half of America is against gay marriage and therefore outright expresses bigotry against the gay community. Additionally, in a court of law it would be recognized that this image of gays as mentally unstable drug addicts is merely meant to depict gay people in an unfavorable light so as to make homosexuals seem like degenerates. This is abusive and fallacious. It does not discredit the institution of marriage in any way whatsoever. Pro is manipulating facts and figures, but best of all, doesn't even realize he is HELPING MY CASE!For instance, Pro proves that MOST hate crimes are against gays (over 56 percent). Thanks Pro! Pro also cites a Huffington Post article that says gay teens are more likely to commit suicide in politically Consrervative areas where they experience backlash from the religious Right and have NO support groups. Again, thanks Pro! Pro keeps providing source after source proving my point that gays are singled out and experience hate, therefore compelling them to want to commit suicide more and suffer more mental and emotional trauma. Once again, this does not strengthen his case against gay marriage in any way whatsoever. In fact, it supports my case further. If gays were given equal rights and treatment in society, there would be LESS backlash against them and they would be more accepted. We know this because racism has radically decreased once segregation was abolished.C4) Yep, extend all of my arguments about gay commitment. I singled out the ones Pro dropped. C5) Pro says some doctor proves that gay marriage increases out of wedlock births because allowing gay marriage changes the social outlook. First of all, plenty of people have divorced parents who are not married, so this is irrelevant. Second, Pro's source never proved that at all. Instead, it suggests that these births increased by 10% in the 10 year period between 1990 and 2000. However, out of wedlock births have increased EVERYWHERE even in placed where gay marriage wasn't legalized [4]. Therefore, the link between the two has not been proven whatsoever. C6) Regarding gays having higher divorce rates, I said I wanted to see the proof. Pro said he included the proof but doesn't link it specifically. Remember, he is supposed to prove that MARRIED gays have higher divorced rates than married homosexuals - not just that gays in relationships tend to break up more. That is obvious and would prove nothing as I've already explained in the last round. C7) Pro completely dropped his contention on religion; again, it's not relevant. C8) I invited Pro to detail the benefits of marriage, and said I will explain exactly how and why homosexuals can experience the same benefits. He writes, "I will show evidence later, but you haven't provided prof at all for your side." Obviously I can't respond to this until Pro answers. == Sources and Conclusion == Due to character limits, I'll let my sources argue why Conservapedia is a JOKE of a legitimate source [5], and the FRC (Pro's other source) is specifically recognized as a HATE GROUP [6]. I'll explain further in the next round. My conclusion is the same: Pro has not established what marriage is supposed to be and its alleged benefits, or how gay marriage would negatively impact the institution. Instead he just includes (many unproven) anti-gay statistics. He has not met his burden.Sources: http://www.debate.org...