The Instigator
Akshay2012
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
RossM
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Arranged Marriages should be outlawed in the US

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
RossM
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/17/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,877 times Debate No: 52774
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Akshay2012

Pro

I would like to first thank my opponent for accepting this debate.
To begin I would like to provide the following definitions
Arranged-An association through outside influence(MW)
Forced-To have no choice in the matter(MW)
In the past, arranged marriages were primarily a business transaction between families trading
their eligible children for financial security or future considerations for the respective families
(News). The primary reason for arranged marriage still remains that many families want to
secure wealth, property and social status for their children (News). However, marriages must be
based on love in the US, given the state of the economy, because it violates many laws and moral
standards.
Arranged marriages violate many laws in most circumstances. The Thirteenth
Amendment to the US constitution states abolished slavery ("U.S"). However arranged
marriages constitute a form of slavery as the child is usually forced to marry his/her arranged
partner by their parents ("Arranged"). It is in fact de-facto slavery for the child is not legally
forced to marry the partner of their parents choosing however they usually feel they need to
under the threat of severe punishment and disownment. Also, given the upbringing of many
families that have arranged marriages (Asian Countries) most of their children are taught from
birth to follow whatever their parents say, no matter how much they dislike it. The poor children
see no other way out and they are forced into a loveless marriage. Article 12 of the UDHR states
that "... No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or
correspondence..." ("Arranged"). Arranged marriages directly violate Article 12 because the
children"s privacy is being violated die to interference from the parents. Usually arranged
marriages are conducted with children over 18 which is considered to be the "legal" age for
children becoming adults due to the gain of many rights. Because they are technically separate
from their parents at that time they should not be subject to a forced marriage. Article 20 of the
UDHR also states that " No one may be compelled to belong to an association" ("Arranged"). A
marriage is rightly considered to be an association therefore an arranged marriage is in direct
violation of Article 20. This is because an arranged marriage is in most cases forced therefore it
is also a forced association. Arranged marriages must be outlawed because they violate many
national and international laws.
The original purpose of an arranged marriage as aforementioned was a basically a
business transaction. However the majority of the arranged marriages in the US now have
nothing to do with money due to the culture and economic status of America (News). The
tradition is being carried on without the purpose and that is why arranged marriages need to be
outlawed. The usually loveless marriages are going on without an actual PURPOSE! The poor
people are suffering just because of "tradition."
Forced associations also violate many moral standards in the US. In an arranged
marriage, one or both of the people in the relationship may not love the other at all and they
never will. At least of half of forced associations result in the aforementioned situation and
virtually none of them are in love when they marry (News). Forcing either child/adult into
marriage where they will be unhappy for the rest of their lives is completely in violation of the
US morals of freedom and just morality in general. Interestingly enough, children of arranged
marriages are more antisocial then they would have been normally (Batabyal). Given that
arranged marriage is usually a family tradition, most arranged couples would usually want their
children to be arranged as well. Because of that they usually instill early one that their child
should not date and interactions with the opposite gender are discouraged. The problem with that
is very similar to some of the problems with single-gender classrooms. The child is usually not
very adept at interacting with the other gender which is required in work and even in school,
where group activities are quickly becoming the norm. The poor children can be teased and even
severely bullied due to their inability to interact well with the other gender. One child almost
committed suicide due to those kinds of taunts (Batabyal).

Arranged marriages MUST be outlawed given the state of American society today. The
poor couples are suffering because they were forced together because of a tradition that doesn"t
even apply anymore. The destitute children are being incessantly bullied and taunted because of
something that wasn"t even their fault. These marriages, aside from causing copious amount of
suffering, are in violation of national and international laws.
I stand in firm affirmation the resolution and I look forward to my opponents rebuttal
RossM

Con

I thank my opponent for the debate motion, and hope for some interesting arguments.

Contrary to what my opponent believes, arranged marriages are not forced.

Arranged marriages do not violate any laws, American or not, on slavery. You have used the term "Arranged", conjured images of oppression and abuse, and then expect us to believe it. In Islam, arranged marriage has two parts, "ijab" and "qubul", or in English "proposal" and "acceptance". The first is the stage where the parents of the child will go to seek out a spouse for them, as the general consensus in many Eastern countries is that love blooms after marriage, not before. Then, when they have found a partner that they find suitable, they let the two meet, and then give the ultimate choice to the child.

In Sikhism, one can choose whether to have an arranged marriage or not, but if they do decide to let their parents choose, they are not forced, coerced, or made to do anything they don't wish to. Again, the choice is given to the child. I am not saying that the child isn't forced in certain circumstances, but then that ceases to be arranged, and instead becomes forced. It is important to know the difference between the two.

In Hinduism, people aren't meant to stay celibate, so the parents will go out to find a spouse, and again give the ultimate choice to the child. I see you have mentioned illegal marriage in your argument, and the threat of being disowned being too much for the child to bear. This is a forced marriage and should not be taken into account when arguing about arranged marriages. You then go onto say that they are placed into a loveless marriage, which links in with my second point.




These marriages often end in a happy, healthy relationship.

Arranged marriages are not "loveless". As I said in the last point, many Eastern communities are based around the idea that love flourishes after marriage, not before. In fact, according to statistics, countries which have arranged marriages in them have less divorces than America itself! Shouldn't we be promoting marriages that give the same amount of choice to the child, but just help them along the way?


So, we have ascertained that arranged marriages are not forced, and that arranged marriages don't always end in divorce and a loveless life style. Therefore we now know that they violate no laws whatsoever. In answer to your point about the children not wanting to have an arranged marriage, I bring your attention to statistics. A recent report from Delhi found that 84% of youths wanted an arranged marriage, and were not forced into the decision. I feel like we are looking at this with our Western minds, and are not paying enough attention to the wants and rights of those who came from Eastern societies. Marriage and divorce in the USA has risen lately, so we need to allow those who wish to have an arranged marriage, which have been statistically proved to last longer, to do so. I am not saying that there shouldn't be checks to make sure that the marriage was consented by both participants, but we shouldn't discriminate against these people by not allowing them to do something which is perfectly legal. It is my opponents BOP to show us why they should be outlawed, but currently he has not done so. All my opponent has succeeded in is throwing random Articles and bad, uneducated facts at us.







Debate Round No. 1
Akshay2012

Pro

I would like to again thank my opponent for accepting the challenge and I too hope for some interesting arguments.
My opponent mentions that I used the term arranged to "conjure up images" of abuse and expect everyone to believe me. What I believe my opponent fails to understand is that those circumstances do happen IN THE US. The statistics my opponent used to show that most children in eastern cultures want arranged marriages are just that from EASTERN countries. I acknowledge the fact that most eastern cultures do have arranged marriages, causing a bandwagon effect, however western civilization is a different story. In the United States, "dating" is the cultural norm. The majority of the arranged marriages in the US have one or both spouses saying they didn"t want it (Batabyal). Therefore my opponent cannot state his/her statistics from Delhi and other Eastern areas and use that as acceptable evidence. That evidence isn"t even valid because the majority of those polls are monitored by parents therefore the child is still under fear of disownment ("Arranged"). My opponents calls my articles "Bad, uneducated facts," but his don"t even apply.
I would also like to respond to my opponent"s second point. Divorce rates do not show "happy healthy relationships." In Eastern society, divorce is scorned upon so consequently there wouldn"t be as many divorces. The US on the other hand, is more "free" on those matters and our culture allows for FREEDOM if decision. I am not saying divorce rates aren"t problematic, just that they don"t apply here.
My opponent has also failed to respond to my moral standards argument, in which I stated that these lifestyles cause many problems for children, and many lead to suicide. I extend that argument and hope my opponent will respond to such a key issue
I stand in firm affirmation of the resolution and I look forward to my opponents rebuttal.
RossM

Con

What I believe my opponent fails to understand is that those circumstances do happen IN THE US.

Yes, I totally agree that these circumstances do occur. However, this is forced marriage, not arranged. As I stated, arranged marriage gives the last choice to the child. Any external intervention from the parents during this period makes it forced, not arranged, which are two entirely different things.

The statistics my opponent used to show that most children in eastern cultures want arranged marriages are just that from EASTERN countries

But arranged marriage started in Eastern countries. Then, when these people immigrate to the west they bring that tradition with them.

In the United States, "dating" is the cultural norm.

Yes, dating is the cultural norm, but that does not mean that we should totally deny the fact that other cultures, who live in the diverse USA, also have their own norms which they wish to continue.

The majority of the arranged marriages in the US have one or both spouses saying they didn"t want it (Batabyal).

Well, firstly, I can't judge the validity of this statement as you haven't given links (especially without statistics, with the general statement of "majority"). Secondly, as I have said for the third time now, if the spouses did not want it then it is NOT arranged, rather forced. I feel like Pro is not taking this into account.

Therefore my opponent cannot state his/her statistics from Delhi and other Eastern areas and use that as acceptable evidence.

The statistics were merely to disprove your generalisation that all children are forced into the marriages. Therefore they can be applied quite effectively. Also, if these are the children who are immigrating into the US, then it makes all the difference what they think.

That evidence isn"t even valid because the majority of those polls are monitored by parents therefore the child is still under fear of disownment

This is a subjective opinion which has not been reinforced by any factual evidence, and therefore cannot be taken into account. We are assuming here that our Western society is brilliant and free, and that those who live in the Eastern societies cannot have an opinion.

I would also like to respond to my opponent"s second point. Divorce rates do not show "happy healthy relationships." In Eastern society, divorce is scorned upon so consequently there wouldn"t be as many divorces. The US on the other hand, is more "free" on those matters and our culture allows for FREEDOM if decision. I am not saying divorce rates aren"t problematic, just that they don"t apply here.

You are totally ignoring the facts here! In these countries they believe that love blossoms after marriage, and therefore divorce is something which they frown upon because of that. Divorce is such an easy option for western marriages when things don't go their way, but eastern marriages say that one should try their very very best to repair the damage. Again, you have used no evidence to support this claim, so we must assume that it is a subjective opinion.

My opponent has also failed to respond to my moral standards argument, in which I stated that these lifestyles cause many problems for children, and many lead to suicide. I extend that argument and hope my opponent will respond to such a key issue

You keep using this word "most" or "majority". Without hard facts, these types of claims don't pass. Again, the validity of this argument cannot be affirmed as we have no evidence to prove it. For the sake of it though, I would just like to say that the answer to this problem does not involve outlawing arranged marriage, rather educating those people who deem it necessary to attack someone for their culture.

Pro gives us fanciful facts about Eastern societies, and has totally forgotten about his uneducated points about "slavery" and the articles in American law. It is clear that he is using his own opinions on the matter, generalising each and every case of arranged marriage. Furthermore, he keeps getting confused between forced marriage and arranged, something which could harm his points in the long run.
Debate Round No. 2
Akshay2012

Pro

Akshay2012 forfeited this round.
RossM

Con

I extend my arguments.

VOTE CON!
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Akshay2012 3 years ago
Akshay2012
Yeah it was fun!
Posted by RossM 3 years ago
RossM
I totally understand! I too had to forfeit about 4 rounds of another debate due to work load. You had some extremely interesting points though, and I thoroughly enjoyed debating with you!
Posted by Akshay2012 3 years ago
Akshay2012
I apologize for forfeiting. I had a lot of work... Vote Pro!
Posted by RossM 3 years ago
RossM
Some Wikipedia, but I usually seek to use other sources that are more reliable. The Wikipedia article gave me one of the graphs which you can see, but not really much else. At least I honestly claimed my sources...
Posted by wizza_x 3 years ago
wizza_x
damm!!! Con just went wikipedia on your azz
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Cermank 3 years ago
Cermank
Akshay2012RossMTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: "That evidence isn"t even valid because the majority of those polls are monitored by parents therefore the child is still under fear of disownment ("Arranged"). " I'm sorry but I loll'd. Brilliant arguments by Con, successuvfully refutingPro. The pro case was extremely weak, owing to complete moscharacterization of arranged marriages, which Con subsequently addressed. Plus forfeit.
Vote Placed by CJKAllstar 3 years ago
CJKAllstar
Akshay2012RossMTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit and Con had stronger argument with sources to back them up. Spelling and grammar was also not perfect with Pro.