Are my arguments too long to read? Here is a shortened summary of the arguments made each round.

PRO:

-Most people support gay marriage; gays should have the same rights as straights when it comes to marriage

 

CON:

-Opponent has BoP (burden of proof)

-Majority of countries don't have gay marriage legalized

-Gay marriage goes against old definition

-Gay marriage can lead to other "weird marriages"

-We shouldn't have people who don't support gay marriage pay taxes

-Gays' children have worse behavior (e.g., homosexual acts)

-Normal marriage is being "Destroyed"

-Goal for marriage is shifted

-people support civil unions more

-The definitions of marriage have shifted in modern day so marriage as a whole should not be allowed

-Traditional marriage is superior to gay marriage (and because such they cannot be compared as equals) because it BUILDS society while the latter only indirectly contributes

 

PRO:

-Accepted BoP

-Most countries, through signing the UDHR, believe gay marriage is a right

-Church has changed views on marriage

-Opponent's definition source shows in some cases marriage isn't just man and woman

-Polygamy marriage isn't so bad

-The taxes to the government benefit society

-Opponent must prove homoerotic sexual acts immoral. Plus, gay parents are more committed to their kids as statistic finds.

-More homosexual marriage is good

-Reproduction leads to overpopulation, and artificial reproduction is becoming more and more popular

-Gays prefer marriage to civil unions

-Gays adopt children

-Gays can help society as well

 

CON:

-The Roman Church doesn't accept homosexuality

-Pew research center is one source and biased

-Homosexuality is a sin in the bible

-Most churches ban same-sex marriage

-gay children are not natural

-Polygamy children don't do well, neither do the spouses

-we don't want to give gays a bad environment; their children suffer more emotional and social problems

-The world is not getting over-populated; there is plenty of space available

-Civil unions are recognized in more countries than marriage

-Gays can help, but they can't BUILD (make up) society

 

PRO:

-The church is unfair as it does not give gays the same rights as straights

-Old testament is untrustworthy to new testament

-Bible is biased

-Men gain skills from polygamy, and the Koran supports it too

-Just because gay couples' children have more problems than straights does not mean they shouldn't be able to marry; poor people can marry regardless of the amount of problems they have

-Civil unions have many benefits over marriage, a big one being adoption

-Gays, through adopting children, can have them go to society and MAKE UP PART OF THE SOCIETY.

 

CON:

-Gays can still love each other without marriage

-Opponent contradicts himself because if the Bible was created when homosexuality wasn't recognized, then the "love" passages only apply to heterosexuality

-The bible has many passages condemning homosexuality (again...)

-Traditional methods are superior to new methods (as polygamy shows), therefore gay marriage, a new thing, should not be applied.

-Civil unions can give adoption rights via a signed bill

 

PRO:

-Marriage gives far more benefits than no marriage

-Just because something is old does not mean it is good

-Love is infinite, while poorness is just a status. Infinite benefits wins over finite benefits.

-We should focus on our current children rather than looking for hope in born new children

 

CON: 

-Homosexuals have a tougher environment as already proven. The extra tax would not be a good thing. 

-Civil unions offer the same benefits as gay marriage, just that they cause less hate

-Gays don't need marriage to adopt children!!