The Instigator
Nonsensicality
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
somenerd224
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Gay Marriage: Yay or Nay?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+11
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...
Nonsensicality
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/19/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,721 times Debate No: 31333
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (78)
Votes (1)

 

Nonsensicality

Pro

Gay marriage is good.
Some people would say that in the Bible, it rules against gay marriage, saying that 'any man who lies with another man is sinful', but it also says in the Bible as well that Jesus (you know, the guy who the Bible was practically based on) said to love unconditionally. And if you also view this topic from the religious perspective, if God created mankind, and created everything about them, and knows the past present and future, then He created homosexual people. And why would He have created them if they went against his moral codes?
somenerd224

Con

No i think it is bad if my i take my family to the beach and my kids see a gay man kissing another dude i think that would be wrong. By the way people will think your gay if you like gay marrige.
if your straight vote for me.
Debate Round No. 1
Nonsensicality

Pro

If you took your family to the beach and your kids saw a man kissing another man, you could think that was wrong all you like. But PDA on all levels isn't acceptable for little kids to view, no matter who's kissing who, and that's a whole different issue. It isn't like your kids would 'catch' homosexuality from the two gay men. It isn't something you can catch. It's born into you.

By the way, I am a straight female, and will support gay marriage until I die. People are people, and deserve their rights. It's in the Constitution, for Pete's sake.
somenerd224

Con

somenerd224 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
78 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Rayze 3 years ago
Rayze
If we want to stay true to the Constitution then we would respect separation of Church and State. The First amendment prohibits the establishment of religion in order to promote religious freedom, the 14th amendment protects the civil liberties of all Americans, including the right to marry and do what they want with their body. You want to argue to ban abortion well you're striking against the 1st, 13th, and 14th amendments. You want to argue against same-sex marriage then you're striking against the 1st and 14th amendment.

Religion is not in our constitution, just like how alcohol isn't banned in the states (remember the Prohibition?). We removed it with the amendments, and learn to read the constitution since the 9th amendment is practically a guide to reading the constitution correctly.
Posted by Jboughey 3 years ago
Jboughey
This debate should be about why have we strayed from our legal beliefs. Maybe because there's too much acceptance in this country. We need a president that cracks down and says "enough s*** people. We need to stay true to our Constitution and rights. If you've got a problem with that than tough s***, go whine about it, but this is going to stop!" Such as the problems regarding gays, abortions, etc.
Posted by Jboughey 3 years ago
Jboughey
I'd like to let everybody know something. The US hasn't really supported gay marriage at all since the start of this country. George Washington even led out two gay people of his army camp I think it was because of this, and the words of Leviticus are in our Constitution so when people say that's all you bring up is religion. Well religion is one of the main defense mechanisms and ITS EVEN IN OUR CONSTITUTION PEOPLE. So it's completely ok and logical to play that card.
Posted by makhdoom5 3 years ago
makhdoom5
oh sola i read you comment now.
what the names you are saying i am saying about them.
in our book there name was aad and samoon and lout.
Posted by makhdoom5 3 years ago
makhdoom5
i even don't wanna have debate for this.
i hate this topic.
invented by dirty loot nation.
and also the dirty Romans.
and both of that nations had dirty defeat.
and the loot was punished by GOD.
and its mention in our book. in christian and even Jewish scripture.
your asss is made for pooping only .
but it is also test for you.
every body part is for test.
the most dangerous is your tongue.
don't say anything which hurts some one. you will be punish in the hell.
may be above sentence would be controversial for my below comments.
but that was pure care.
i care and so don't like peoples to do mistake.
not mean.
to encourage bad things.
Posted by makhdoom5 3 years ago
makhdoom5
and even not helping a person who wanted to commit suicide where you can it is mean and dirty.
you don't see how bad is it physiologically.
physically.
medically.
ethically.
socially.
and morally.
against nature.
your asss is made for pooping
and your vagina and penis for pissing and having sex so that you can have baby.
i never saw any animal having sex without the menstrual period of his opposite sex.
even serves the purpose of their sexual body part for their purpose.
and follow the nature. but humans are worst than them.
but still human were blessed can have sex any time. but what they did, go against nature.
well those who are gay. are facing consequences .
but those who cant be gay and are not gay. should stop them as its harmful.
mostly to their health,
mostly damage you immune system.
this is so bad you are straight but like other to be gay.
Posted by makhdoom5 3 years ago
makhdoom5
and even not helping a person who wanted to commit suicide where you can is means and dirty.
you dont see who bad is physiologically.
physically.
medicallly.
ethically.
socially.
and morally.
against nature.
you asss is made for pooping
and you vagina and penis for pissing and have sex so that you can have baby.
i never say any animal having sex without the menstrual period of his opposite sex.
even serves the purpose of their sexual body part for their purpose.
and follow the nature.
but human were blessed can have sex any time. but what they did go against nature.
well those who are gay. are facing consequences .
but those who cant be gay and are not gay. should stop them as its harmful.
mostly to their health,
mostly damage you immune system.
Posted by makhdoom5 3 years ago
makhdoom5
than go and drink poison and die. which is also created by GOD.
go and jump into the river created by GOD.
go and jump form hill.
and go and have sex with close relative ( what i mean here you must know). be human use head and not be worse than animals.
this is just nonsense.
Posted by Lovebotlass17 3 years ago
Lovebotlass17
Jboughey, that's cute. Yes, I must be gay myself since I am "whining" (standing up for, debating against your view) about gay marriage. Yes, this makes a lot of sense.
Posted by drhead 3 years ago
drhead
@Sola.Gratia: So He didn't punish us for slavery, or killing the natives when we came here (all His children, as you say), but he's going to punish us for letting gay people be happy together? I also find it interesting that you haven't brought up Jesus's forgiveness in this matter - aren't you supposed to be telling us that as long as we accept Jesus as our savior, that'll wipe away all of our sins, and that that is the ONLY way to get into heaven? You are a Christian, after all.

Furthermore, I feel that it should be brought up that if God created all species, and if he finds homosexuality offensive, why did he create bonobos, which are a fully bisexual species? As an agnostic, I find it difficult to believe in a God due to lack of evidence, but I find it even more difficult to believe in one that would create something that offends him.

@Jboughey: With how much your arguments were ridden with logical fallacies, false statements, irrelevant statements, and assumptions, the results of your argument are hardly sufficient to prove ANYTHING about the person arguing against you, since anyone with enough of a brain to not take your statements at face value would have been able to completely dismantle your arguments just as well. Your argument was ENTIRELY based on religion, and once it had been set through my quoting of the Constitution (and Rayze's counter-rebuttal to your statement afterwards) that any religious objections to gay marriage are completely irrelevant in a legal context, you stopped arguing for your position. To summarize, I think someone is whining, but it isn't who you think it is. Shall I take this as you conceding, since you seem to have no secular case against gay marriage, despite this requirement for a valid case being set forth and supported by plenty enough arguments to make it impossible to win this argument without a secular case?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Rayze 3 years ago
Rayze
Nonsensicalitysomenerd224Tied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Troll debate and Forfeit