The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

Arranged marriage should be outlawed.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/9/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,496 times Debate No: 21860
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




I have this moot in an upcoming debate and would like to practice.
At the risk of losing a round, could the affirmative present their argument first?


I accept this debate and will be arguing that arranged marriage should be outlawed mostly because it is perhaps the greatest intrusion on women's rights ever. Arranged Marriages are a disgust to women since cultures that do allow arranged marriages cause girls as young as 8 to be auctioned off almost as brides to husbands who range anywhere from 40 to 90
^ 8 year old girl DENIED a divorce from her 58 year old husband
^ DIFFERENT 8 year old girl sold to be a wife of a 47 year old man to pay off a debt
^ 12 year old girl forced to stay married to 80 year old man
^ 29 year old girl refused marriage to a 38 year old man had her face burned by her mother

Arranged marriage should be illegal mostly because it impedes on numerous basic human rights for women
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank imabench for accepting my debate.
Firstly, as my opponent has not taken the opportunity to define the moot, I will do so.
Then, I will attempt to rebut his argument.
Finally, I will try to explain why arranged marriage is a misrepresented tradition that doesn't deserve the stigma it carries.
I would define ‘arranged marriage' as ‘a marriage arranged by someone other than the couple being wedded' and ‘outlawed' as ‘to be made illegal, banned'.
My opponent, as is only natural, jumped to the worst examples of arranged marriages to try to vilify the practice. The sources he cited are extreme cases, involving massive debts and sky-high dowries changing hands.
Arranged marriage does not ‘cause' this problem, the process is simply being abused in the cases put forward- the internet does not ‘cause' hackers, it is simply a tool being used by many and abused by few.
It's also a ridiculous statement to say that arranged marriages are ‘perhaps the greatest intrusion on women's rights ever'. I watched a documentary just the other day about women in Africa who were systematically raped every day for years before they were saved and then interviewed- and that was current- meaning that saying ‘the greatest intrusion ever' becomes all the more ridiculous'.
It is at this juncture that I think I need to clear up some things around arranged marriages. From his argument, my opponent seems to think that arranged marriage is actually sex slavery, but that isn't the case.

Arranged marriages vary greatly in both nature and time of meeting to time of engagement.
The most common style of arranged marriage is an ‘introduction-only' where parents introduce their child to their potential spouse and then it is up to them to manage the relationship and most importantly, make a choice. However, although Western morals may dictate that this is the best way to go about an arranged marriage, the ‘introduction-only' arranged marriages are considered in most places to be the most difficult and traumatic to the son or daughter. Both men and women fear the stigma and emotional burden of going through a courtship and being rejected, especially as they may be introduced to five or more potential spouses in the process.

A better way, some say, to go about an arranged marriage, is a ‘fixed-time arranged marriage'.
The parents will choose a partner and the couple will get married soon after their introduction. There is little to no time for courtship, and the couple will have a choice to make. This is considered less stressful and better for the couple than ‘introduction-only' arranged marriages.

So does arranged marriage work?
Yes! The practice is alive and well in many countries throughout the world- even in mine.*
Arranged marriages must be doing something right, because the divorce rate (American) for normal marriages is currently at somewhere around 50%, but for arranged marriages it's about 4%.
This is a testament to the process of arranged marriage and the fundamentals behind it.

I await my opponent's reply.



Here are the Pro's response to why Arranged Marriage should be legalized

1) Im making it look bad (which is my job)
2) There are worse things done to women besides arranged marriage (how this is a legit argument confounds me)
3) Arranged marriages work by introducing couples and then making them marry after about a week whether they like the other person or not (May i take this argument for my side?)
4) Arranged marriages have lower divorce rates than normal ones.... (But doesnt care to explain why this should make it legal)

- 1 - "Extreme cases of Arranged Marriage"
Pro concedes that in arranged marriages that young girls can be wedded to men 20 years older then they are, when the girls are not even 20 years old, and that these arranged marriages can be used as paying off debts.

The first two he completely ignores, the third one i will respond to with a comparison.

A man owes a man money, but he doesnt have any actual money to pay off the debt, so in a fair deal the man in debt gives his own slave to be the other mans property to pay off the debt.....

In another scenario a man also owes a man money, and he too doesnt have actual money to pay the other man back, so in a fair deal the man in debt sells him his own daughter to be the mans wife to pay off the debt.

The First one happened in America in the 1800's and involves "Slavery" and is illegal,
The Second happened in Saudi Arabia a month ago and is called "Arranged marriage" and according to the Pro should NOT be illegal.....

"Arranged marriages must be doing something right, because the divorce rate (American) for normal marriages is currently at somewhere around 50%, but for arranged marriages it's about 4%. This is a testament to the process of arranged marriage and the fundamentals behind it."

two things
1) Just because arrnaged marriages divorce less doesnt necessarily mean it should be legalized
2) Arranged marriage has lower divorce rates probably since DIVORCE IS ILLEGAL IN CULTURES THAT HAVE ARRANGED MARRIAGE

"because divorce is not accepted among most Indians"

"For one thing, we are a traditional society and therefore divorce is frowned upon. Secondly, most people think of marriage as permanent"

"Similarly divorce is decidedly more difficult in these countries compared to those in the west."

"the pressure a married couple encounters from both society as a whole, and from the respective families, suggests that divorce is often not an option.";

So no duh arranged marriages have lower divorce rates than normal ones, thats because divorce is often illegal or not an option to begin with!

Apart from not giving a single reason to support arranged marriage, here are my reasons
- Impedes on a womans basic right to choose her spouse
- Almost completely forbids women from being able to divorce her spouse
- You cant force love
- Its not natural
- There are numerous cases of these "marriages" just being debt settlements
- Girls who are too young get sucked into marriage to men twice their age
Debate Round No. 2


AshtonB95 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: he debated like starcraft first round and the FF