DeBunked: Arguments Against Gay Marriage (Pt.2)

Now that I have had a good night's rest, I feel that I can continue what I was doing. Basically I was responding to why I feel that many arguments against Gay Marriage are wrong or how they can be disproved.

Argument Six:
"They have Civil Unions. Those are the same thing. They can just sign a piece of paper, and have it notarized saying that their partner has the rights of a spouse."
Yes, I have actually heard this argument. More specifically it was worded like this

...other than maybe like someone said on here u wouldnt b able to make important disisions about who ever u luv but something can b wrote and noterized for that there is always a loop hole some where...

I will concede that yes there are Civil Unions. And yes these do afford homosexual couples some of the same rights as married couples. But a civil union is not the same as marriage and just because the state equates the two, doesn't mean that it is right. It is basically a slap in the fact to the LGBT community by saying "Hey you can be together in the eyes of the law, but we are going to call it civil union because it isn't really marriage. That can only be between a man and a woman". A civil union is not recognized by other states as marriage is. Civil Unions are only on the state level and not recognized by the federal government either. A United States citizen who is married can sponsor his or her non-American spouse for immigration into this country. A United States citizen who is engaged in a civil union are not afforded the same rights. Filing joint tax returns? People who are married are afforded these rights, but not those who have a civil union. There are other benefits such as spousal insurance, survivor's benefits, FMLA enactment to care for a sick spouse, making medical decisions for your spouse if need be, etc. that civil unions do not provide, but marriage does. Marriage laws seem to be universal, but the rules and regulations of civil unions are not. Is it really too much to ask that LGBT persons be afforded the same rights? After all, it is a state and federal issue, not a religious institution.

Argument Seven:
"It destroys the institution of marriage."
Ha ha ha ha! No I think that people like Britney Spears who get 55-hour quickie weddings in Vegas, or Elizabeth Taylor who just announced that she would be getting married for the ninth time, have done a fine job at ruining the institution of marriage all by themselves. How can two people who love each other and have been together for years destroy the institution of marriage? That is just laughable.

Argument Eight:
"Gays shouldn't be allowed to get married because they cannot procreate."
It is real sad that some people think that marriage is only about procreation. But furthermore, there are heterosexual couples who cannot or will not have children. Should they be denied the right to marry as well? After all they are not procreating. Marriage is about more than procreating and having sex. Marriage is about spending the rest of your life with the person you love. It is about developing a relationship that was once two but now one. It is about being there for that person in their time of need. It is about loving them through thick and thin. Marriage is about a multitude of things. Procreation/children are only a part of it and not a necessary part either.

I have yet to have any one person give me a logical and fact based reasoning as to why homosexuals should not be allowed to marry. Homosexuals are people just like everyone else and deserve the same rights. I support the LGBT community with everything I have and will continue to do so!