The Instigator
5683_DF
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
moneystacker
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Do you think gay marrige should be legal ?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/7/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 300 times Debate No: 84704
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

5683_DF

Pro

I think it should be legal cause were human just like everyone else we deserve to decide who we want to spend the rest of our life's with and you may judge us but you will never bring us down we have much as right to marry who we choose.
moneystacker

Con

I think it should be legal cause were human just like everyone else we deserve to decide who we want to spend the rest of our life's with and you may judge us but you will never bring us down we have much as right to marry who we choose.

TBH I wasn't sure whether to laugh at this statement or kind of raise my head a bit higher as I was reading this out of shock. So I did both.

he says this "you may judge us but you will never bring us down we have as much a right to marry who we choose."

I feel like this is unfair and he seems to be implying that just because someone like myself is against gay marriage we hate gay people as individuals. I am a apostolic Christian.....

There are several groups which call themselves "Apostolic." Generally speaking, these churches all seek to uphold or return to the teachings and practices of the first church.

According to one of their early writers, the Apostolic Church stands for first-century Christianity in faith, practice, and government, "to make known world-wide the forgiveness of sins through the atoning death of Christ, the baptism in water by immersion; the baptism of the Holy Spirit with signs following; the nine gifts of the Holy Spirit; the five gifts of our Ascended Lord; and the vision called in the New Testament, the Church which is His body." As intimated in that statement, the practice of signs and wonders is an integral part of their doctrine.

The doctrine of the Apostolic Church is similar to most evangelical churches. They believe in the unity of the Godhead and the distinctions between the members of the Trinity. Regarding salvation, they teach the need for conviction of sin, repentance, restitution, and confession for salvation. They teach the possibility of a believer falling from grace. Where they differ from many evangelicals is in the Pentecostal teaching of tongues as a sign of Holy Spirit baptism and in their teaching that the ministry of apostles and prophets should never cease in the Church Age.

I am simply against the practice because it is not acceptable in my religion but we still believe its important to talk to people who are committing a sin or are not doing right to try to help them go the right way, and even if they don't we can still socialize them as long as we don't let the sin or activity influence us to do it ourselves. I am also against the practice though because too me it's common sense that this practice not only wasn't met to be a type of marriage, but also wasn't met to be a thing.

Now for the debate

Observation 1: Since the resolution says "think". This is purely my opinion. My side isn't proposing that we should reban gay marriage or attempt to implement a new anti gay policy. I am simply expressing my opinion as to why I feel like it should be banned.

Observation 2: Since the resolution says "think" this is basically based off who ever presents there opinion better. Also since this is a "think based debate things like, religion, experiences (my opponent kind of stated he is gay), and personal feelings are allowed since these factors lay a huge role in forming opinion.

1. Gay marriage wasn't met to be.
In many cultures, both ancient and modern, polygamy has been quite common, which describes the relationship of one husband with multiple wives. This was, in fact, the predominant pattern of human family in ancient Israelite and other near-Eastern and Mediterranean cultures. https://signposts02.wordpress.com...
Explanation: Even back then marriage wasn't man to man based or woman to woman based.

Sub point A: Adam and Eve
Genesis 2:12 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of ground, and breathed into his nostrils he breath of life; and the ma became a living soul.
Genesis 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Explanation: When God created a partner for Adam He created Eve"not another Adam. This means that perfect partnership requires some level of difference as well as a level of similarity so great that Adam could cry out loudly, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh". Intimacy between a man and a woman is the normal way of male/female bonding (emotionally and physically).

Explnation2: If God had intended for homosexual and heterosexual marriage, He would have designed our bodies to reproduce through both means. I men this is common sense come on if everyone was gay we would all day. Just because there is a Preponderance of people performing homosexual intercourse or believing in it doesn't mean its right.

Introduction to sub point b: I will focus on romans which is written by Paul. I will use a part of romans that focuses on the Gentiles and sins committed

Sub point B: Gay marriage is considered a sin by god
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in them-selves that recompense of their error which was meet.
Romans 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do these things which are not convenient:

Translation: In the same way, their males also abandoned their natural sexual function toward females and burned with lust toward one another. Males committed indecent acts with males, and received within themselves the appropriate penalty for their perversion.

Translation/explanation of romans 1:28 Furthermore, because they did not think it worthwhile to keep knowing God fully, God delivered them to degraded minds to perform acts that should not be done.

But to support this claim even further look at the next verses
Romans 1:29-32 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder debate, deceit, malignity; whispers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, invertors o evil things, disobedient to parents Without understanding covenant-breakers without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

Now some would claim it's a coincidence when more bad I mentioned after something else bad but in the bible it's not. homosexual activities is regarded as a sin.

Conclusion: I will not present another argument I had in mind simply because I believe this Is enough based of the size of my opponents statement. I have 1,316 characters left.
Debate Round No. 1
5683_DF

Pro

5683_DF forfeited this round.
moneystacker

Con

my opponent hasn't provided a response so I will wait. If he doesn't respond vote me off the FF.
Debate Round No. 2
5683_DF

Pro

5683_DF forfeited this round.
moneystacker

Con

moneystacker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
V Probally the most boring response I have ever had to biblical usage in a debate. Not going to address the comment however I am willing to debate over the relevance of the KJV bible if you invite me to a debate.

Next he asked someone to debate against gay marriage right? So he wanted to hear someone speak against gay marriage right? So that implies he wanted to hear what I had to say right?

Come on man.
Posted by jkmarsh7 1 year ago
jkmarsh7
Everyone is not Christian and they they will not live there lives on your crazy writings from a book older then our time. Also in the bible it bands wearing clothing and shaving but I highly doubt you don't shave or wear clothes and don't try to pull some crap up about all bibles are different and frankly to gay people it doesn't matter either you or the gay people what you think, except for they have to continually listen to your opinions on them wether they like it or not. Also not everyone reads the bible so is it Even logical to base all your opinions out of this book when debating is not mention for that
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
I men this is common sense come on if everyone was gay we would all day.

I met to say "this is common sense come on if everyone was gay we would all die or cease to exist. But if everyone wasn't we would live. I know this will never happen but it was never met to be.
Posted by moneystacker 1 year ago
moneystacker
I'll debate this I'll be using common sense, what marriage was established as back then or the history of it, and the Kjv bible a bit as well
No votes have been placed for this debate.