Resolved: Governments ought legislate anti-bullying policies focusing on sexual orientation.

Normally, I would go down the flow starting from my opponent's case and down to mine, but in this debate, my opponent doesn't necessarily have an established case written supporting her end of the resolution other than what she contends in the rebuttal and conclusion. Therefore, I'm only going to focus on the rebuttals in my case.[PRO Case]Sub-point 1a: Judges, if you look through my opponent's evidence, you will realize that my opponent doesn't understand her own evidence. In Evidence [1], you will see that it only reports that 63% of obese children are bullied. It doesn't compare it in any way to the percentage of children bullied for being gay, so the first piece of evidence provides no objective evidence that they face more bullying. Her Evidence [2] completely contradicts what she is saying because it even explicitly states that gay students are even more likely to face bullying than obese children. It also doesn't compare the numbers to the amount of people who suffer from a disability. What this shows us is that my opponent hasn't really proven that these groups are more disadvantaged than homosexuals, so if my opponent is trying to look at critical groups for this legislation to be aimed at, her own evidence points in the direction of the PRO. Even if we validate what she's saying, however, and these groups are more disadvantaged, she's running under the assumption that I wouldn't want to accept any legislation for them. Of course these other disadvantaged groups should have their legislation as well. In fact, what really matters in this legislation is the enumeration of sexual orientation as one of the things schools need to work in order to prevent bullying against. This would provide the focus that the legislation would have for gay students. I believe that my evidence pointed this out. However, in the scope of this debate, the focus here is whether or not homosexuals should be given this legislation at all. Response B: Well, for one thing, the bulk of my reasoning for trying to promote this legislation is because of the dispropotionate frequency of bullying done on gay people, so if my opponent tries to create this hypothetical world where LGBT youth are the only critical group, it would only add more fodder in my case because LGBT youth would be the single group that gets bullied the most. If it's a fundementally different nature that my opponent is looking at, however, gay bullying also would fit within this scope. Not only is LGBT bullying so frequent, but because so few gay students have parents at home that support their sexuality (my evidence points that out), gay students are more sujected to helplessness and suicidal thoughts. [1] Sub-point 1b: My opponent is trying to imply that my evidence is not accounting for the lurking variables even though that it explained that teachers were more likely to intervene in cases of gay bullying because they had requirement by law. Nevertheless, if my opponent isn't really making a heavy point on this and still at the end supports anti-bullying legislation in general, I won't expound on this too much either.[1] http://sdgln.com...