Resolved: The United States ought legalize same-sex marriage.

Thanks to my opponent for responding and I would like to apologize for forfeiting however since we both forfeited a round, I agree with my opponent that we should disregard it when it comes to voting on the debate. Sub-point 1a: Nowhere in your sources (those which I can access, some such as those from University sites where I need a special login I cannot) does it suggest marriage as a solution for the prominence of AIDS in homosexuals. It seems to blame it on low self esteem. The reason they are affected in a larger scale may have a lot to do with the fact that in general they are more promiscuous. [1] Marriage is also not a solution to this as it does not guarantee fidelity. However blaming promiscuity on a lack of acceptance of a lifestyle as my opponent’s sources do is irresponsible and ignores the real issues. Sub-point 1b: My opponent questions the validity of my source’s claim. The fact behind it is that homosexuals have no vested interest in the future because they will have no offspring. While it may appear that there may be temporary economic benefits to the state by allowing same-sex marriage, in the long run it is detrimental. Sub-point 2a: The question that must be addressed when it comes to equality is, to what extent are people equal? Certainly we all are equals as humans but we are not all equal in other respects? Some people are smarter, richer or more talented than someone else. When it comes to homosexuality vs. heterosexuality, they are different by the very nature of what is essential to procreation. Since homosexuals by nature cannot reproduce then they are already inferior in that regard. This is not to say they are inferior in every regard. Sub-point 2b: Same sex marriage cannot be considered a marriage by the definition of what marriage is. Marriage has been redefined by some dictionaries, but the danger in redefining words is that their fundamental meaning is lost. Dictionary.com offers this as its first definition marriage “the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.” It does then go on to talk about homosexual marriage and Merriam Webster does similarly, I will explain why doing so negatively effects the meaning of the word. [2] [3] If I pointed at an apple and said it was a banana because the definition of what a banana and what an apple was had been changed that would not change the fundamental nature of each and it would in fact be dishonest to do so; just as how the word Gay was adopted by the homosexual community when it used to mean happy. Contention 3: My opponent contends that his argument was not ad populum because he claims that homosexual marriage is a moral right. The only thing more that I can offer that hasn’t already been said is that Miscellaneous: I hope that my opponent now sees what my case is. When I said I didn’t want marriage to be a Government Issue that is exactly what I meant, however that does not mean marriage would be eliminated, it just means it would be private and recognized by churches. However this argument is independent of the others because if this were accomplished the other arguments I mentioned would not be as necessary. In fact my opponent’s source that references Locke makes mention of there being no need for human governments, which would despite its slant inadvertently support the proposal I am making here. I brought up this argument as my opponent had agreed that I could use whatever means I wanted to attack his resolution. My opponent has also misrepresented what tyranny of the minority means. It does not mean that every time a minority wants equality it is tyranny and certainly even an individual who has been legitimately wronged should justly seek to get whatever solution they need. It means that a minority uses underhanded methods to try to forcefully get their way whether or not they are morally entitled to it. Thanks again for this debate; I only wish we could have both been more productive with the rounds so we could have had a fuller debate. 1 http://factsaboutyouth.com... 2 http://dictionary.reference.com... 3 http://www.merriam-webster.com...