Gays should be allowed to marry.

(and sources are not needed. .. it can be mostly opinionated arguments :)) I would like to start off with a quotes: "Every gay reader understands the secret self that is full and wonderful and has longing and tenderness and a desire for connection to other people. I think arguments against gay marriage are just ridiculous! Who cares? People want to get married for the same reason I want to get married. They want to do it in front of their friends and family. They want it to be a legally binding thing. They want to have that commitment. The idea that there's some moral issue about it is so ridiculous. " -Lynda Carter, writing in Instinct Magazine,May 1, 2007 Actor and Singer . http://www.buddybuddy.com... "There's no reason that the government should prevent homosexuals from entering civil marriages because some religions object to the concept, any more than the government should ban atheism because some religions object to it. " Lisa Pampuch newspaper columnist . http://www.great-quotes.com... And now onto my arguments; I will only be making three (for now) which include; proving that marriage is NOT an institution between a man and a woman, gay relationships are NOT immoral, and same-sex marriage does NOT threaten the institution of marriage. 1) My first argument is that 'marriage is NOT an institution between a man and a woman. ' I will prove this throughout this argument. First off we have to look at what marriage means to people. To the Christians and Catholics, it means a sacred union between a MAN and a WOMAN. But what about the other religions in the United States and beyond? The rather overused statement does not neccesarily apply to Buddhists and other world religions that generally allow gays and lesbians to marry. Buddhists getting their rights infringe, which I believe is the FIRST AMENDMENT. and the first amendment that cleary states FREEDOM OF RELIGION. 2)My second argument is that 'Gay relationships are NOT immoral. ' Many people might say that gay relationships and in turn gay marriages are immoral. .. but who says? The Bible? Somehow I always thought that freedom of religion implied freedom from religion as well. The Bible has absolutely no standing in American Law, as was made clear by the intent of the First Amendment (as well as being explicitly stated by the founding fathers in their first treaty, Treaty of Tripoli, in 1791) and no one has the right to impose rules none else simply because of something they perceive to be a moral injunction mandated by the Bible. As I stated in my first argument Buddhist do not consider gay marriage to be immoral and would like to have the authority to have the right to gay marriage here in the US. In one believes in religious freedom, the recognition that opposition to gay marriage is based on religious arguments is reason enough to disclose the argument that gay relationships/marriage are immoral. 3. Same sex marriage does not threaten the institution of marriage. Hmmm. .. .my opponent might argue that it threatens the institution of marriage but how? Threaten marriage by allowing people to marry? That doesn't sound logical to me. If you allow gay people to marry each other, you no longer encourage them to marry people to whom they feel little attraction, with whom they most often cannot relate adequately sexually, bringing innocent children into already critically stressed marriages. By allowing gay marriage, you would reduce the number of opposite-sex marriages that end up in the divorce courts. If it is the stability of the institution of heterosexual marriage that worries you, then consider that no one would require you or anyone else to participate in a gay marriage. You would still have freedom of choice, of choosing which kind of marriage to participate in -- something more than what you have now. And speaking of divorce -- to argue that the institution of marriage is worth preserving at the cost of requiring involuntary participants to remain in it is a better argument for reforming divorce laws than proscribing gay marriage. and I now stand open for the neg response. .. . "Marriage is both a civil and because some religions object to the concept, any more than the government should ban atheism because some religions object to it. " Lisa Pampuch newspaper columnist Sources: . http://www.great-quotes.com... . http://www.buddhistview.com... and of course the LOGO channel VOTE AFF/PRO! VOTE AFF/PRO! VOTE AFF/PRO! VOTE AFF/PRO! VOTE AFF/PRO! VOTE AFF/PRO!