The Instigator
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Commondebator
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Consenting adults have the right to get married.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/20/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 543 times Debate No: 76729
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)

 

YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod

Pro

The first round is for acceptance. I will take the affirmative position, and my opponent will take the antiaffirmative position. Topics that relate to this debate are: Same sex marriage, interracial marriage, and the right of disabled people to get married.
Commondebator

Con

I accept

Good luck
Debate Round No. 1
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod

Pro

Thank you for accepting. Reasons why I say this: People have the right to be happy. What consenting adults do in their bedrooms is none of anyone's business. It is fine to disagree with same sex marriage, but it is wrong to force a religious idea on other people. The antigay concept is a religious idea that should not dictate the law. Gays also have the right to liberty of belief. We hold these truths to be self eident that all are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Commondebator

Con

As Americans become more conscious and open-minded towards homosexual marriage, they are also becoming increasingly unaware of its harmful consequences. The assumption that all arguments against homosexuality only stem from religion and hate, with no valid evidence or reasoning, is simply false. While homosexuals themselves are no threat to this nation and deserve the same rights as every other citizen in America, homosexual marriages can cause some major setbacks, and is wise to reconsider homosexual marriages. People have the right to love the people of their same sex, however, this is not sufficient for marriage. Furthermore, homosexual marriage is the first step in legalizing other forms of illegal marriage, such as polygamy, and it will most likely increase out of wedlock births, divorce rates, and it is certainly not a beneficial lifestyle for their children.
Homosexuality is becoming more common in America, which ruins the institution of marriage. Marriage was never meant to be for two people of the same sex. If a movement in society can redefine marriage to include people of the same sex, then another movement in society can further redefine marriage to include two or more people. Love is essential for marriage, however it is not sufficient. For an example, if a person loves his mother his legal connection comes from biology and the state"s interest. It is within the state"s interest to create an environment that is suitable for a stable and safe growth. Unlike hetrosexuals, homosexual marriages last shorter and is not beneficial for the child. Therefore, homosexual marriage does not fall under the state"s interest. The state does not, and should not, care about love in marriage. This is simply because love is subjective and marriage is objective. Which is why, marriage belongs to the state.
When examining the environment for homosexual couples, the first thing that be should be looked at, is their kid"s growth. Recent data from studies show that, on balance, the overall outcome for the children of homosexual parents often results in child delinquency, drug abuse, and parental abuse. A study done by Dr. Mark Regnerus found that 31% of offsprings from lesbian couples had forced sex against their will, while 25% of offsprings from gay couples had forced sex. Lastly, only 8% of children, from hetrosexual couple, reported having forced sex.This data obviously suggests that children from homosexual couples are more prone to sexual abuse. From the same study, it was found that children from homosexual parents were arrested much more than hetrosexual parents . From a scale to 1-4, with 1 being never arrested and 4 being numerous times, offsprings from lesbian couples had a number of 1.68. Offsprings from gay couples had a number of 1.75, while children from hetrosexual couples had a number of 1.18. Finally, the study showed that children from homosexual couples were more exposed to marijuana. From a scale to 1-6, with 1 being never used marijuana and 6 being used marijuana numerous times, children from a lesbian couple had 1.84. Children from a gay couple had 1.61, while children from hetrosexual couples only had 1.32. From this evidence, we can conclude that homosexual lifestyles pose a serious risk to their children because the numbers are really far apart which suggests that the homosexual parenting was largely to blame.
Reports by the U.S census bureau in 2005 showed divorce rates throughout the years in America. Right when homosexual marriage became accepted at around 1990, there was an abnormal skyrocket in divorce rates. Although this is partly due to more people getting married, so there will be a natural increase in divorce rates. However, an article from the National Review finds a study that shows how homosexuals have much higher divorce rates in Sweden. After controlling for age, region, country of birth, education, and duration of the partnership, it was found that homosexual males were more 35% more likely to divorce. Homosexual females were 200% more likely to divorce. Using this data, it can be concluded that homosexual marriages are likely to divorce and were a major contributor to the increase of divorce rates in 1990. Therefore, this increase in divorce rates in 1990 was probably not because of more people just getting married.
Evidence shows that by legalizing gay marriage, there would be a huge increase of out of wedlock births. In the Netherlands, out of wedlock births were already on a steady rise. However, out of wedlock births doubled to 31% in 2003, which was about the same period as same sex marriage was recognized. Stanley Kurtz, the author of the article, states that "The conjunction is no coincidence", and he is indeed correct. The article then talks deeper in regards to the history of the gay marriage debate in the Netherlands. Attorney General, Greg Abbott advocates the idea that homosexuality will lead to an increase of out of wedlock births. He claims that "By channeling procreative heterosexual intercourse into marriage," Abbott adds, "Texas"s marriage laws reduce unplanned out-of-wedlock births and the costs that those births impose on society." Greg Abbott firmly believes that by keeping homosexual marriage illegal, it will also decrease out of wedlock births.
While polygamy may seem like an unrelated topic to homosexual marriage, and the legalization of homosexual marriage has nothing to do with polygamy, these two forms of marriages can be strikingly similar. Since a movement in society can make the Federal Government to include people of the same sex in marriage, then another movement in society can include two or more people. What"s more, is that polygamy has had roots unlike gay marriage. This would potentially make it easier to legalize polygamy. A Washington Times article shows how gay marriage has given polygamy a "legal boost". However, critics argue that polygamy cannot be compared to gay marriage since "marriage"s definition as a union of two people remains inviolable." "Unlike same-sex marriage, which has no historical roots and is a new frontier " you can"t say the same thing about polygamy," said Austin Nimocks, attorney for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund. Many people argue that it may be easier to legalize polygamy due to its historical roots. Looking at Canada, the Canadian judge is already testing the national ban on polygamy. British Columbia Chief Justice Robert Bauman is expected to rule later this year on whether anti-polygamy laws violate Canada"s constitution, when Canada recently legalized homosexual marriage in 2005.

Will post citations and I will further describe my stance of polygamy and incest. (Sorry, for some reason the paragraph would not indent)
Debate Round No. 2
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod

Pro

Stop right there. There is nothing wrong with two men or two women getting married. There is no harm in that. I am a Side A bisexual. If I fall in love with a woman, you would try to stop us from getting married? What gives you the right to tell people what to do? It is okay to disagree with same sex marriage, but it is not okay to force said disagreement on other people. Liberty of belief goes both ways (pun intended). You have every single righ to personally oppose same sex marriage, but you do not have the right to force that other people. The antigayposition is a religious idea not supported by the Constitution that should not dictate the law.
Commondebator

Con

Couple things I should point out: Homosexuality, incest, or bisexual traits do not-in anyway disgust or offend me. Please do not be offended by this debate, I hardly care about who you are. Don't take this personally

Previous citations:
Richardson, Valerie. "Same-sex Marriages Give Polygamy a Legal Boost."Washington Times.” 07 May 2015.

U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2011

Sandfort TG1, de Graaf R, Bijl RV, Schnabel P.National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, Web. 08 May 2015

David Badash, "Greg Abbott: Banning Gay Marriage Reduces Out-Of-Wedlock Births." The New Civil Rights Movement. Wed. 08 May 2015. (All Quotes from Greg Abbott)

Stanley Kurtz, "Going Dutch?" Lessons of the same-sex marriage debate in the Netherlands. Web. 08 May 2015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harms of Incest:
"The psychodynamics of all three parties to father-daughter incest seem to indicate that people who become involved in incestuous behaviour are often psychologically damaged before the fact, so that if they show subsequent evidence of psychological impairment the incestuous behaviour can be as plausibly viewed as a dysfunctional attempt at solving problems as it can a cause of subsequent psychopathology"
-PubMed Research (1)

The U.S government has literally no reason to legalize incest, which would create a lot of social, psycological, and biological impacts. This would also create a lack in genetic diversity which is bad for the country. My opponent may argue from a morality standpoint on how this is "stripping" away from their rights, however mariage is controlled by the state and belongs to the state. Similary, 2 gay men could stay together and have sex however the simply cannot marry due to the consequences listed above. Incest is a bit different...Unlike gay marriage, incest causes as much harm to society wheather the couple is married or not.

My opponent must give an objective, legitimate reason to legalize gay marriage (or any other forms of currently illegal marriage), besides a more subjective, moral reason derived from personal exeperince.

Gay Marriage and other marriages
I already listed of how gay marriage can bring a lot of negative impacts. You see, the state has no reason to legalize gay marriage because it does not fall within the states reasonable intrests. Using 16kadam's example, if a mother loves her daughter, the "connection" comes from biology and the state's intrest to create a suitable and healthy atmosphere. Gay marriage however, does not create a stable envirment since an offspring needs emotional support for both parents. Incest-Well, there are literally no reasons to legalize that.



Debate Round No. 3
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod

Pro

If you truely do not care, why are you taking the negative position? It is cool, I am just a curious cat. A side note: Same sex marriage has nothing to do with incest. They are separate issues.
Commondebator

Con

Its because its just for fun, but in reality I don't care who you are.

When you said "consenting" I thought it also applied two adults as in an adult daughter and an adult father.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
==================================================================
>Reported vote: dsjpk5// Mod action: Removed<

2 points to Con (Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Only Con had sources.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Does not explain why Con's sources were better or what significant impact they had on the debate.
===========================================================================
Posted by MegadethRocks44 1 year ago
MegadethRocks44
Disabled people should definitely be able to marry and so should interracial couples.

I am against homosexual marriage as it is a government over reach. The government should not be able to redefine marriage. For centuries marriage has been between a man and a woman. sure there have always been gay people but their relationships never have been, aren't, and never will be marriage worthy. Homosexual marriage is just silly. A gay couple cannot possibly have children or even really make love. the only way to really make love involves a male and a female. Making love and having kids are two of the major parts and functions of marriage.
Note: infertile couples may have a hard time having kids too but there is always a possibility. It is not possible with a gay couple.
Also if the government makes gay marriage legal there is nothing to stop them from making polygamy and incestuous marriages legal. People might even want to marry animals! That may sound ridiculous now but 100 years ago so did homosexual marriage.
Posted by YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod 1 year ago
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod
Done.
Posted by YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod 1 year ago
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod
On it.
Posted by Commondebator 1 year ago
Commondebator
Just edit the debate, and there should be a tab to change the time limit
Posted by YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod 1 year ago
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod
I don't know how to change the timeline.
Posted by YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod 1 year ago
YeshuaIsTheOneTrueGod
Slippery slope fallacy. Marriage equality for consenting adults will not lead toi incest. I am talking about marriage equality for consenting adults who are NOT related.
Posted by Theunkown 1 year ago
Theunkown
this also includes incestual marriage and polygamous marriage, you should include that in there.
Posted by Theunkown 1 year ago
Theunkown
this also includes incestual marriage and polygamous marriage, you should include that in there.
Posted by Commondebator 1 year ago
Commondebator
I would accept, only if the time limit increased to 72 hours
No votes have been placed for this debate.