Well, Defender, I must at least give you props for coming to your conclusions by yourself, rather than simply accepting religious edict, but I must say that I think there are some serious logic gaps in your argument.
"My biggest problem with Gay Marriage is that it does open a large hole in the marriage system. Please make a strong argument for Gay Marriage and I bet this same exact arguement could be made for any number of degenerate behavior such as Pedophiles."
That's a non-sequitur -- "I bet any argument you make about X can also be applied to Y, and Y is clearly wrong." Fine, but it's apples and oranges. Homosexuality is not pedophelia is not incest is not plain ol' pre-marital sex. You may disagree, and that, of course, is fine, but that's based on a "feeling" you have, not any sort of evidence, and I'm gonna go with the sum amassed data of the scientific community -- homosexuality is not a disorder, period.
"Sorry but I don't believe that gays are natural...I believe its a defect and/or a cultural problem. There is something very unnatural about gays."
Yeah, well, sodomy, oral sex, masturbation, and having sex just for fun are "unnatural" following that implied train of thought, too, but I, for one, have no problem with them.
"If one of my kids become gay I would be extremely unhappy about it and might even disown him/her."
I'm going to wildly speculate about someone I don't even know; I bet you wouldn't. No reason. I just bet you wouldn't. Would you be unhappy? Sure. Disown them? Your own kids, over an IDEA? I hope not.
"Basically I procreate for my family...if a child becomes Gay the line ends with them. Gays don't procreate."
So? Who needs procreation? Roughly 10% of the global population was, is, and always will be gay. It certainly hasn't hampered the population so far.
"Let them have some civil union crap that's defined specifically for them but if you turn marriage into a 'they love each other' definition then you will see more than just 2 guys in love."
Legal definitions are never that simple. That's the equivalent of saying "If we allow public verbal obscenity, it's only a matter of time before we start condoning murder!" The difference is obvious. You might have a point here IF a heterosexual couple who had a civil ceremony had a "union," not a "marriage," but that's not the case.
"It also DOES encrouch on the benefits given to many married couples. America needs families to make more Americans."
No dice. It's not like it's marriage that's keeping gays from procreating. They're not popping out kids, married or not -- and would it be acceptable if more gays had children via in vitro fertilization? America isn't going to start shrinking if we legalize gay marriage. Immigration and day-to-day population growth more than cover it.
"Families work hard and pay good taxes and create more tax payers. I don't see how gay couples contribute to American society that they should be rewarded with the same tax breaks that I may need for my family."
Because they work hard, pay good taxes, have families, and generally do everything you do. They just have sex with their own gender. Now why WOULDN'T they be rewarded with the same tax breaks?
"Does a gay male couple need tax breaks? Usually gay men are very well to do. You have 2 men who enjoy a fair income. Usually they have no children and they share a smaller dwelling. If they are allowed to be married they will get additional tax benefits that would cut into mine."
Well, now you're just making generalizations all willy-nilly. Consider that not having kids allows a couple -- gay or straight -- a higher standard of living. That would account for most of that, wouldn't it? And tax breaks for gay married couples are a drop in the bucket compared to the tax breaks we'd be doling out if we started fixing that divorce rate, or to those for corporations. And they're not ADDITIONAL benefits; they're the SAME benefits, for doing the same thing.
"I see no reason to suddenly allow Gay Marriage. It's out of nowhere that gays suddenly want to be married. WTF for?"
It's "suddenly" to you. To the people who have been fighting for equality for decades, one issue at a time, it's anything but "sudden."
"They gave up hetero life and decided to become gay...wtf."
Nobody decided to become gay any more than you or I decided to "become straight." I mean, I can't speak for you, but girls have been a primary fixation with me for as long as I can remember. I never sat down with a "Dudes v. Chicks" pros and cons checklist when I was eight, like I did with "G.I. Joe v. Star Wars." Why would you assume it works any differently for anyone else?
"Show me some historical precedent for a gay marriage? I can only think of Babylon."
The (Ancient) Greeks and Macedonians. Many Native American tribes. Late "Dark Ages" Turkey.
"The world will laugh at us and call us immoral bastards if we allow gay marriage."
Not likely, at least not in Europe. How many countries there have already legalized it? And last I checked, the rest of the world isn't exactly setting the standards for human rights and quality of life. I mean, we have to bring democracy to them on the tip of a bullet, but we've supposed to care what they think about what we do with gay marriage? Can't have it both ways.
"Pedophiles include 14 yr olds marrying 40 year olds. Don't 14 yr have a say? They don't really have to be victims if they "love" each other."
The key concept here is that of the "consenting adult."
"Here is a simple challenge to Pro-Gay marriage people.
Please write a 5 point post why gays should be allowed the right to be married."
I only need one, and paraphrased, it goes, "All men are created equal."
-trq
Lastly... dag, dude -- FOUR kids? How do you have time to play anything?!
that was sad to see. dont ask for it, but if you wanna look at it 
...whos keeping tabs again?...you said that logic had nothing to do with any of my opinions...but logic has everything to do with my opinions, i just didn't state the logic behind my opinions...therefore...you're wrong...