Discussion about same-sex marriage — including equal rights and the ideal environment for raising children —characterized a debate Thursday night.

The debate, which included members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community and others, drew opinions from many areas of the ISU community.

Louis Kishkunas, former president of the ISU College Republicans, said state involvement in same-sex marriage could lead to legal ambiguities where one state could recognize a marriage while another may not.

“I don’t even think we should be talking about this issue,” he said. “We should be talking about this from a cultural perspective.”

Kishkunas said he was taking a moderate stance on the issue by advocating the concept of civil unions, which grant all the legal benefits of marriage. The sanctioning of same-sex marriages should be left to individual religious organizations independent of the government, he said.

“If we just go through it culturally, schools would still be segregated,” said Ryan Delperdang, an ISU student.

Kishkunas said he does not think civil rights can be compared to same-sex marriage, and he supports equal protection under the 14th Amendment for members of the LGBT community.

“Having a broad-based civil unions law integrates everyone under one system,” he said.

Warren Blumenfeld, assistant professor of curriculum and instruction, said married people receive more than 1,000 benefits that are not only denied to same-sex couples, but also to single people.

“I feel in support of same sex-marriage as a transitional state,” he said. “I support the right of a civil marriage for everyone.”

Even if same-sex couples were granted the rights given to married couples, it would still constitute a hierarchy of privilege that denied rights to other groups, he said.

“Single people, LGBT people are under that line of privilege, I’m for getting rid of that line,” Blumenfeld said.

“I should not have more privilege just because of my relationship status.”

Peter Swanson, senior in mechanical engineering, said marriage is a unique institution.

“The issue is should government recognize marriage between a same-sex couple? Of all relationships, only one has a possibility for procreation,” he said. “That is the reason why it is recognized and set apart when so many other relationships are not.”

Blumenfeld said marriage has more purposes than raising children. He also said one in three females in a same-sex relationship and one in five males are raising children, and there is no evidence same-sex parents have a negative impact on a child.

“I don’t think it’s right to deprive a child of a mother or a father,” Swanson said.

“To see how a man relates to a woman in the intimate environment of a family, that’s a unique experience.”

Delperdang said this called into question the practice of divorce. Even lacking a role model of one sex in the home, children could be socialized to know how to act in relationships, he said.

Even if children can be socialized in this way, it is still best to have a role model of both sexes in the home for the children to interact with every day, Swanson said.