The Instigator
Questioningteen14
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
1Credo
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Gay Marriage and/or Relationships

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 3 votes the winner is...
1Credo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/4/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 711 times Debate No: 61271
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

Questioningteen14

Pro

I am pro for gay marriage and most of you are going to say "Oh you're 14 you have no idea what you are talking about." I'm just going to say that i'm intelligent for being a 14 year old. The thought of being against gay marriage is horrible. DON'T TRY TO PULL ANY TYPE OF RELIGION RELATED THINGS INTO THIS. You can if you want to but you will just be shot down. Gay marriage is perfectly fine.
1Credo

Con

I. Acceptance

Thank you for creating this debate. I look forward to a good discussion on the issue presented.

II. Burden of Proof

The burden of proof lies on Pro regarding the assertion "gay marriage is perfectly fine". As Pro has requested that religion not be brought into this debate, I will take this assertion as a legal issue rather than a moral issue.

III. Response

In 1996, the United States Supreme Court"s decision in the Romer v. Evans case prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation. As a result of the finding that this sort of discrimination was unconstitutional, the United States government must be blind to sexual orientation (among other things) when enacting policy.

But the concept of "gay" marriage proposes to do just the opposite. In the case of traditional marriage, the law is blind to sexual orientation. A heterosexual man is legally able to marry a heterosexual woman, a homosexual man is legally able to marry a heterosexual women, a heterosexual man is legally able to marry a homosexual woman, and a homosexual man is legally able to marry a homosexual woman. In no way does the traditional idea of marriage discriminate based on sexual orientation. This traditional idea is consistent with the 1996 Supreme Court ruling.

In contrast, if "gay" marriage were to be enacted into law, it would mean that only homosexual (I"ll use this term when referring to the orientation and the term "gay" when referring to the marriage idea) men and women would be allowed to be joined in a "gay" marriage with other homosexual men and women. This means that while a homosexual man would legally be able to marry a homosexual man, and a homosexual woman would legally be able to marry a homosexual woman, a heterosexual man would be prohibited from marrying another heterosexual man, and a heterosexual woman would be prohibited from marrying another heterosexual woman. The orientation-based discrimination in this case is clear. The idea of "gay" marriage would unconstitutionally discriminate against a heterosexually-oriented individual"s right to the same type of marriage that would be given to a homosexually-oriented individual.

I will leave it to Pro to clarify whether they would like to discuss the idea of "same-sex" marriage (which would be blind to sexual orientation) rather than "gay" marriage, which is clearly unconstitutional.

Thank you, and I look forward to Pro"s response!

IV. Citations

http://www.law.cornell.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
Questioningteen14

Pro

I am new to debating and i have no idea what to do. I will look more into how to debate and things. Thank you for your response and i will create another debate or message you when im ready. Again thank you.
1Credo

Con

No worries, we can restart anytime you get a chance!
Debate Round No. 2
Questioningteen14

Pro

Questioningteen14 forfeited this round.
1Credo

Con

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
I would never allow gays to ever be around my children.That is a filthy and nasty lifestyle at best.And I do not want government to force me to do business with them either. And marriage is a religious concept. Civil unions are a secular concept. So, why force us religious folks to accept them.All they should need is approval from government.Civil unions do that. The only reason the spoiled gays want marriage is to make it meaningless. And it is definitely a choice. It is a sex act, not the color of their hair.There are all kinds of restrictions on marriage. Polygamy, brother and sister, children, animals.
Posted by evangambit 2 years ago
evangambit
"The burden of proof lies on Pro regarding the assertion "gay marriage is perfectly fine". As Pro has requested that religion not be brought into this debate, I will take this assertion as a legal issue rather than a moral issue."

That's actually an interesting line of reasoning. Strictly speaking, ethical systems aren't all derived from belief in the supernatural, but at the same time, rejecting solely religious-based ethical systems (and not others) does not seem fair unless one can show they are invalid (which Pro has not (yet?) done).
Posted by LittleCaramellNeko 2 years ago
LittleCaramellNeko
I completely agree. People that are against Gay Marriage need to rethink. There is an "Equal Rights" law that allows people to get married. In the US, every citizen is said to be equal and have equal rights. Sadly, gays, queers, transexuals, bisexuals, or whatever the hell you want to call them, are NOT given their equality. They are not truly equal beings or given equal rights until they are allowed the right to gay marriage. Also, if you think being gay is bad for the country, you are ignorant and just wrong. Being gay also does NOT effect the capacity and ability to be a good parent. It has been proven that gay parents are better for children because too many straight parents push their children to do things they don't want.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by torterra 2 years ago
torterra
Questioningteen141CredoTied
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: "DON'T TRY TO PULL ANY TYPE OF RELIGION RELATED THINGS INTO THIS. You can if you want to but you will just be shot down. Gay marriage is perfectly fine."-Pro... As a Christian I have to side with Con because, in my opinion and after all the research that I have done I have come to the conclusion that gay marriage is not appropriate and I will not for pro. I enjoyed reading about it, but I must say that con has done an amazing job at this debate. I also think that its funny that pro forfeited a round. Sorry but my vote is Con!
Vote Placed by Envisage 2 years ago
Envisage
Questioningteen141CredoTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession... Plus zero arguments.
Vote Placed by dynamicduodebaters 2 years ago
dynamicduodebaters
Questioningteen141CredoTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded