The Instigator
Truth55555
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
2Sense
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Equality, gay marriage

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...
2Sense
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/30/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 724 times Debate No: 77132
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Truth55555

Pro

I'd just like to describe my stance and clarify that I am not encompassing all of the lgbqt community or their supporters just a tragic large number of them. My question of debate is:
Is equality really what lgbt is fighting for, or is it a change of the upper hand?

1) Lgbt isn't just taking their right to marriage, they are trying to have marriage in a church (majority of which disagree with gay marriage). This is an attempt to belittle the churches rights to their beliefs.

2) Anyone who does not support gay marriage is labelled bigoted and intolerant and ignorant. This is hypocrisy in itself because they are belittling the right to opinion and freedom of speech. Meanwhile they say their rights aren't being allowed and its not just.
2Sense

Con

I'd like to thank Pro for initiating the debate. I haven't been on this site in quite a while, but in light of the recent federal legalization of gay marriage, I would be more than happy to accept and discuss this topic.

Since Pro has not outlined any specific parameters regarding the debate structure and format, I will jump right into acknowledging the resolution question and providing rebuttals to the two main points presented.

Question: "Is equality really what lgbt is fighting for, or is it a change of the upper hand?"

"Upper hand" is defined as having a mastery or control over something that is consequently placed at a disadvantage (1).
Therefore, it can be inferred that Pro's claim asserts that citizens who identify as LGBT are seeking a type of mastery and control over the church as well as over their opponents, subsequently creating a disadvantage.

1) "Lgbt isn't just taking their right to marriage, they are trying to have marriage in a church (majority of which disagree with gay marriage). This is an attempt to belittle the churches rights to their beliefs."

This is, first of all, a blanket statement that is not necessarily applicable to all LGBT citizens. A number of LGBT couples have partaken in non-religious ceremonies in order to officialize their marriage (2). Therefore, Pro's description of LGBT citizens' intentions are inaccurate, vague, and overtly generalized.

Furthermore, for the LGBT couples who do wish to wed under religious ceremonies in churches, Pro has no evidence to substantiate whether or not their intentions are that of belittling as opposed to that of wanting equal opportunities that their heterosexual counterparts currently have as well as fulfilling personal and religious wants (3).

Until Pro provides further evidence that LGBT couples' ultimate intent is to disadvantage and infringe on the rights of religious institutions, this claim vilifies LGBT citizens and creates unfair bias.

2) "Anyone who does not support gay marriage is labelled bigoted and intolerant and ignorant. This is hypocrisy in itself because they are belittling the right to opinion and freedom of speech. Meanwhile they say their rights aren't being allowed and its not just."

Pro makes yet another blanket statement claiming that all who do not support gay marriage are labeled as bigoted, intolerant, and ignorant.

This generalization over-simplifies the various perceptions and attitudes of and towards anti-gay sentiments (4), which, yet again, vilifies and creates unfair bias against LGBT citizens.

Furthermore, this generalization confuses Pro's main point of discussion since there individuals who disagree with anti-gay sentiments and yet do not identify as LGBT (5). Therefore, despite Pro's initial resolution focusing on LGBT citizens, non-LGBT citizens are referenced nevertheless, which is an irrelevant point to the topic.

Pro continues on to describe this opposition to anti-gay sentiments as hypocritical and a breach of the freedom of speech clause.

If the freedom of speech clause is correctly understood and interpreted to mean that citizens have the right to express opinions freely without any governmental intervention, we can conclude that, based on Pro's previous claim, LGBT citizens are breaching no such rights of those who do not support gay marriage (6).

Pro should be aware that voicing criticism against anti-gay sentiments is not the equivalent to legally barring a group from certain privileges, such as marriage, that another group has access to, which is indeed an infringement on civil rights (7).

Pro should also be aware that societal criticism is not the equivalent to censorship, and that, under the freedom of speech clause, LGBT citizens and supporters have every much right to express their criticisms and opinions as non-LGBT supporters and anti-gay citizens have the right to express theirs.

End of first round rebuttals.

I look forward to Pro's responses.

---------

Sources:

1) http://www.merriam-webster.com...
2) http://www.pewforum.org...
3) http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu...
4) http://www.norc.org...
5) http://www.uas.alaska.edu...
6) https://www.law.cornell.edu...
7) http://www.businessinsider.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Truth55555

Pro

Truth55555 forfeited this round.
2Sense

Con

My opponent has forfeited this round, so I extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
Truth55555

Pro

Truth55555 forfeited this round.
2Sense

Con

Pro has once again forfeited the round. I extend all previous arguments. I'm a little disappointed, but I suppose it can't be helped. Please vote Con
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Truth55555 1 year ago
Truth55555
Alright I think I organized it a bit better now.
Posted by Truth55555 1 year ago
Truth55555
Sorry new to this kinda an anon rant I see where you get that. Sorry
Posted by Zarroette 1 year ago
Zarroette
Oh, so you're arguing that LGBT people should practice equality.
Posted by Zarroette 1 year ago
Zarroette
Are you arguing in favour of equality or are you just ranting?
Posted by Phenenas 1 year ago
Phenenas
Um...what are you debating, exactly? You spent all of the first round justifying yourself and explaining what kind of debating you didn't like.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
Truth555552SenseTied
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: Ff
Vote Placed by HermanGomez95 1 year ago
HermanGomez95
Truth555552SenseTied
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: Forfeiture.