Gay Marriage

I apologize if anyone on this site has been offended by my bland and blase description of gay sex. However, that has nothing to do with this debate. Moving on, in noting that he was obviously wrong about sex and gender being synonymous, Con claims that I was merely playing up a semantical argument. However, the only reason I brought up that discrepancy in the first place is because I took everything that the video discussed to argue about and respond to it, since Con was too incompetent to post his own argument. He had to use a cartoon in order to appropriately express his views. Hmm. Additionally, using the "nature" argument in this case is a bad choice. There are traditional heterosexual couples in the animal kingdom, but there are gay ones as well as people are now discovering such as the infamous gay penguins, Silo and Roy. Moreover, human beings are the epitome of the animal kingdom; there are a lot of things we do in this society that animals don't, and yet we are okay with these things. You cannot degrade the character and capacity of humans to that of wild animals. Some animals are cannibalistic; does that mean that it is the appropriate behavior to eat other human beings? Not to mention that homosexuality IS natural. If people are homosexual, then it comes naturally to them, meaning it's natural. I personally cannot believe that my opponent had the audacity to say that it would be better for a child to be raised in an impoverished household by straight parents who have no scruples (morals) than by a loving gay couple in a good home. That is probably the most disgusting argument I have ever heard, and an example of pure bigotry. Clearly my opponent is so homophobic that he would rather a child SUFFER than be loved by gay parents... and then has the audacity to say that society is supposed to protect the defenseless. What a joke. Finally, I don't see a point to my opponent's argument at all about a straight child "hiding" the fact that he's straight from his gay parents. Honestly, this is the most incompetent and ignorant debater I have ever encountered. Clearly those who hide the fact that they are gay from their straight parents do so because of their parents expectation of what SOCIETY finds traditional (the norm). This would not be the case in a gay household. Additionally, I already argued that even if a gay parent WAS "upset" that their child were straight.... which is very, VERY unlikely... that there would still be a plethora of straight role models for the child, AND this little tidbit really has absolutely NOTHING to do with the argument of gay MARRIAGE. To conclude this debate, I'd like to point out that my opponent has clearly straw manned my argument in saying that I clearly do not care about the rights of babies. First of all, not only is that COMPLETELY irrelevant to this debate, but nowhere in this debate did I *ever* talk about babies, ever. What I said in the last round was that we should rectify the legal system to try and be as fair and just as possible, even though life itself tends to be "unfair." I fail to see how this has ANYTHING to do with abortion. Now my opponent is just being ridiculous. As a side note, I'd like to point out that people who are ridiculously homophobic usually have a few sexual skeletons in their closet as well... pun intended. I hope that Con isn't so vehemently against homosexuality because he himself is a homosexual. That would be silly. Then again, this debate wasn't exactly the epitome of seriousness.