The Instigator
solo
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
elgeibo
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Divorcees should be allowed to vote against Gay Marriage Issues

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 5 votes the winner is...
elgeibo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/28/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,476 times Debate No: 5830
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (5)

 

solo

Con

Assumed: Marriage is a holy, unbreakable union in the eyes of your god.
Assumed: You are a theist.

I think it is at the height of hypocrisy for divorcees to be able to vote against Gay Marriage Issues. If you are willing to break a commitment and bond that is supposed to be 'eternal', you should not be able to vote against Gay Marriage if you are divorced. To look away from religious doctrine and spit on the face of a god by getting a divorce should not entitle those people to quote scripture to support hate-mongering biased views; nor should they be allowed to vote on an issue that they took so lightly.
elgeibo

Pro

My position in this debate is as follows:

No matter what a person has done in their past, a person has the unalienable right to vote. In so long as they are a citizen of the country that they are living in. And, as such, may vote for or against Gay Marriage Issues.

Man, in the sense of mankind, will make mistakes. This is an inherent part of being a person. Assuming that my opponent lives in the United States of America (USA from here on) then my opponent lives in a country that allowes murderers, rapists, theives, adulterers, and idol worshipers to vote. Interestingly, it also lets liars, prideful people, and those who are quick to anger vote as well. These also spit in the face of God, yet they can vote.

Divorcees then may vote.
Debate Round No. 1
solo

Con

I am debating whether they 'should' be able to or not in regards to Gay Marriage Issues, not whether they may or may not vote.

I agree that man will make mistakes, however there should be consequences for making them. Criminals make mistakes which land them in jail; the consequence is to take away their freedoms. Since they made a "mistake", should we just dismiss it and allow them their freedom?

Divorcees should not be allowed to vote on any issues regarding marriage for they are failures at it and entered into that eternal commitment, not just with another person, but also God, only to break that vow.

All of your criminal examples are not necessarily divorcees, so this debate has nothing to do with them unless they are divorced.
elgeibo

Pro

My argument was, sadly, in the realm of legality, not in the realm of "should." I will try to keep it in that realm from here on out.

Prisoners are eventually allowed out of prison if they have shown that they can be good citizens again. If you've been divorced for 25 years from your first marriage and have had a full and committed relationship since then, are they allowed to vote, or would all divorcees be excluded? What if there have been several broken marriages before a much longer kept one?

What about the partner in the marriage that had not been the reason for the divorce? Are they allowed to vote as they have not "spit in the face of god" and did not want to break up?

All divorced people who are registered to vote should vot
Debate Round No. 2
solo

Con

<>

Not if they're sentenced to death or life in prison. Divorce is a sin that sends both parties to hell, as I understand it.

Not being able to vote should be a life-long status after divorce.

You should only be married once, as is the intent in all religious doctrines. Multiple marriages is multiple spits on the face of God. In fact, it may be urinating on God at that point.

As for unwilling divorcees, they could've saved themselves a one-way ticket to hell had they waited to get married instead of rushing such a serious matter. They used poor judgment and agreed to marry the wrong person. A sin is a sin and hell is hell.
elgeibo

Pro

I would hate to have ever done a single sin in your belief system. All sins are equal in God's eyes, and as such are equally forgivable. That not withstanding in my argument, I'll get back to the point at hand.

I will look at your idea of "shouldn't vote". I believe your opinion is that divorcees have no understanding of the reason/ workings of marriage, therefore they should not have the right to vote on this issue.

I have no idea onto the workings of a car, yet I have no problem voting on whether or not tax money should be used to help auto manufacturers. Because I do have a say as to what I and my children will have to live through if that tax goes through.

Divorcees should vote because they are affecting others no matter what.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Dnick94 8 years ago
Dnick94
Dnick94 voting as a member of debate.org

Conduct: Tie. None of the debaters were more polite or respectful than the other.

Spelling and Grammar: Con. Pro had few minor mistakes that could be easily fixed if their writing was copied and pasted into Microsoft Word. Other than that, both sides were easily understandable to read.

Argument: Pro. Con's opinion was that divorcees have no understanding of the reason/ workings of marriage, therefore they should not have the right to vote on this issue or people who committed a crime should lose their privilege to vote. This reasoning was flawed, because Pro stated that everyone committed sins which I believe and Con only used religious contentions instead of a moral and ethical approach since we are in America and we have the freedom of religion.

Sources: Tied. No side use sources as they used logical reasoning to support their contentions.

Advice: Use sources to support your debates. Otherwise you can't prove your points with just logical reasoning and no evidence from other websites.
Posted by solo2070 8 years ago
solo2070
Elgeibo I am sorry but that argument does not make him appear as a Latter-Day Saint. I am one, and I am very well versed in the doctrine of the church. It is not an absolute on the divorce topic. I am not a expert on Catholic doctrine but I believe that his argument fell more in line with their beliefs.

The Nature of this debate was an interesting one, and I felt that more compelling arguments could have been made using a moral, and ethical approach as apposed to a religious one. There are so many different doctrines about divorce and the nature of sin within the different religions that would be hard to debate such a topic and present points that could be proved or disproved. It was too broad of a focus. "should" needed to be more specific. I understand that this was more of an opinion debate that a fact based one, and therefore it would be more loose on its points, but I felt that it could have been a little more focused. I think if it were it could be a very interesting debate indeed. One worth observing or participating in.

My vote is that elgeibo won this debate. I feel that he posed more points that needed refuted, and I felt that they fit within the parameters of "should." There were some points that could have been re-worded and would have fit in quite well with it. I feel that solo got stuck on one point and never really presented more than one sound argument, and never really refuted it other than to talk about how he did not feel it felt within the confines of the definition for "should."
Posted by solo 8 years ago
solo
Huh? I am what obviously? ;) I don't get it.

As for my recent debates, they were created in part to get some folks to look at Gay Marriage in a certain way before I have a go at their hypocrisy and ability to turn a blind eye to their scripture.
Posted by elgeibo 8 years ago
elgeibo
I'm going to go ahead and comment on myself at this point.

Solo is obviously and Church of Later Day Saints. And a strict one at that, as more liberal LDS will fudge on the absolute sin nature of divore, since their latest prophet made a couple changes to that particular belief in the 1980s.

I am an odd amalgamation of doctrines from Baptists, Presbyterians, and Methodists and believe different on the nature of God and Jesus and sin than Solo.

So, this debate was one of opposing understandings of God and sin than really on divorce.
Posted by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
Very interesting debate topic:

Conduct: Tie. Neither side got drastically out of line.

Spelling and Grammar: Tie. Both sides were readable.

Convincing Argument: Pro. Con appealed to God's nature without substantiating it. To what does he appeal that divorce is an unforgivable sin? Since his argument hinges on this, he needed to convince me that divorce is indeed a "one-way ticket to hell."

Sources: Tie. This was a logical debate.
Posted by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
Actually I found it quite an interesting topic, and I applaud both debaters for an interesting, informative, well argued debate. Now for my vote:

Conduct: Pro
- Con was neutral in the category of conduct, Pro was courteous and followed Con's direction on how he wanted to debate, despite the fact that extending his argument from R1 would have resulted in an easy victory.

Spelling/Grammar: Con
- Pro could use some strengthening in his use of grammar/vocabulary. Pro had a few minor errors, nothing of great concern. Con made few to no mistakes, and displayed greater eloquence.

Convincing Argument: Pro
- This was a difficult decision, as both sides provided interesting arguments with valid points. In the end, Con rested most of his case on how divorce is a sin, rather than concentrating on how divorce shows an individual does not understand 'marriage' and therefore should not vote on 'marriage' related topics. Pro destroyed Con's case by pointing out that in christianity, all sins are forgiveable.

Sources: Tie
- Neither side incorporated any sources.

Again. congratulations.
Posted by elgeibo 8 years ago
elgeibo
no one will read this debate at all :)
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by elgeibo 8 years ago
elgeibo
soloelgeiboTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by solo 8 years ago
solo
soloelgeiboTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Vote Placed by solo2070 8 years ago
solo2070
soloelgeiboTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Vote Placed by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
soloelgeiboTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
soloelgeiboTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14