Gay Marriage should be legal in all States.
Debate Rounds (3)
I accept the challenge of your debate. I will take the con side of this debate and give reason as to why I disagree that gay marriage should not become legalised in all states.
I'd like to first break down your argument and give my argument against. Then I'll wait for your rebuttle in the next round.
"Marriage is a right to everyone, not to just those who are straight."
I would agree with your statement that marriage is a right to everyone if I believed marriage was indeed a right.I do not believe it to be a right. We, as human beings, have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Marriage does not fall into those categories. This would fall under the Decloration of Independence and there is nothing about happiness and marriage coinciding. Marriage would not fall under these right, gay or straight. http://www.archives.gov...
"If we start saying Gays can't be married then what is going to stop us from saying that about Blacks or Immigrants?"
It will never get to a point where we refuse to allow blacks and immigrants to get married. We have already climbed out of that hole
years ago. Race is inherited and homosexuality is not, therefore cannot be desciminated over, that is, if marriage was a right. Nowhere in the Constitution does it mention marriage as a right. http://www.archives.gov...;
"There is absolutely no reason that gay marriage shouldn't be allowed."
There is a very good reason. Marriage is not a right. If it were a right, this debate would not be taking place.
"Your religion should not have a say in whether or not a man can marry another man, what gives you the power to say that two people perfectly in love can't get married?
Religion plays a big part in it, actually. This country was founded on religious grounds and principles. Therefore, religion has a lot of say in this debate. And what gives me the power to say two people in love cannot get married? Well, I do have the right to free speech. And so does everyone else. And again, if marriage were a right protected for us in the Constitution, then I wouldn't have a say.
"Would you like to be discriminated against for something you can't control?"
No, I probably would not like it one bit. However, there has never been any scientifically proven data that prove a "gay gene" even exists. Therefore homosexual desires can be controlled.
Lets start with response "Therefore homosexual desires can be controlled".
This could not be more wrong, you cannot state this as a fact. Scientist have and still admit that they do not have 100% knowledge on how the brain works so their can be no way to be 100% sure that something is causing people to be gay. Saying a gay person should be able to control their desires would be the same as saying you can control wanting women and just be gay because hey, that's what's cool (as an example). Until more studying is done on the human brain and how it works and functions we cannot give a definitive answer either way.
Next, "Religion plays a big part in it, actually."
It's true, religion plays a part in our government, but it shouldn't. There is a separation of church and state for the reason that our founding fathers never wanted religion to play a role in our government and how we make laws. Here is a quote from Thomas Jefferson, one of our Founding Fathers:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God...."
No one religion should have the ability to change how our government makes laws and discriminate against someone, if we can start discriminating against one group of people that can and will set the dangerous precedent that we can keep discriminating against other groups because we don't agree with what they believe.
"Marriage is not a right. If it were a right, this debate would not be taking place."
The Constitution does not say many rights that are given to you, it would be impossible for the Constitution to state all rights that are given to you. You have the right to vote, although the Constitution actually never states it. There are an endless amount of rights you are entitled to since birth, not only the ones stated in the Constitution. Marriage is most definitely a human right. It is even stated in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (Article 16).
Our States offer certain benefits to those who are married, whether it be access to their assets when they die without a will or their retirement if an accident were to happen. These benefits are only for those who are legally married and recognized by their respective State and for a State to discriminate against someone for loving a person of the same gender does not show America off as a open and free country. Instead it shows we still discriminate against those we feel are different and that isn't what our country is suppose to represent. We are suppose to be the leaders in Freedom and Democracy, even for the minority.
Even our Federal Government recognizes Gay Marriage due to the repeal of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). We should start being a country that represents freedoms for all, heterosexuals and homosexuals, blacks and whites, men and women.
Thank you for your reply. I truly enjoy debating civily on hot topics such as this. I understand that topics like this can create animosity toward each other and really never ends with a true winner I just hope that those voters on the side lines can keep an open mind on this.
"Scientist have and still admit that they do not have 100% knowledge on how the brain works so their can be no way to be 100% sure that something is causing people to be gay."
This is a true statement to some degree. Science has never proven that homosexuality is genetic or if it's just pure choice. There has been studies done suggesting that it is Epigenetics, which revolves around the idea that surrounding forces like friends, family and the way one is raised within a society, that ultimately decides for the individual. Then that would also ultimately come down to choice. Almost everyone raised in this world can ultimately make his/her own decision.
That being said, making gay marriage legal in all 50 states would still be wrong if one follows the Constitution. A document this country was founded proudly upon.
We all know that race is genetic. It is scientifically proven that if two white parents have a child, that child will be white. Two black parents have a child, that child will be black. Etc, etc. Sexual preferences have not been scientifically proven to be genetic. So in this sense, giving black people the right to finally vote and do eveything white people were allowed to do, is the right thing. This brings me to my next point.
"You have a right to vote, although the Constitution actually never states it."
Voting is not a right, it is a privilage, just as driving and marriage are both privilages. Our rights include freedom of speech (which we are excersizing right now with this debate), our right to protect ourselves from intruders, which incldude personal attacks, government intrusion, and attacks that involve our personal property. We have the right to a quick and speedy trial and a right to an unbias jury. These are all rights that every man, woman and child are assured of.
"Marriage is most definitely a human right. It is even stated in the United Nations Decloration of Human Rights."
Yes it is, however it is not a human right as stated in the Constitution of the United States. Are we not debating the right of homosexuals being legally able to marry in all 50 states of this country? The United Nations is a multi-country representation and does not reflect on the individual Constitution of any one country. Marriage is not a basic human right in this country and the United States government does not have the authority to declare marriage as legal. The United States government has two jobs; defend the constitution and protect the borders of this country from all enemies both foreign and domestic. Not decide who gets married and who does not.
And yes, America is an open and free country. This is why the government is not discriminating against homosexuals. Unlike during the 60's and earlier with african-americans, homosexuals are not being hosed down, bitten by dogs, beaten, and segragated by their government. They are being told they cannot marry, which is not a human right ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION. The same Constitution that is supposed to define OUR country, not the United Nations.
Marriage is also defined in the Bible as between one man and one woman. I understand that many don't consider the Bible a reliable source, however the Bible was written by man long before anything else in modern age was written. It (the Bible) defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman a long time ago. We cannot just redefine or rewright the definition of words to fit our agenda or ideas. http://www.biblestudytools.com...;
"That being said, making gay marriage legal in all 50 states would still be wrong if one follows the Constitution. A document this country was founded proudly upon."
The Constitution was founded to protect our rights and liberties. It protects the rights of the Majority as well as the Minority (in this case homosexuals). The way we interpret the Constitution will play a vital role here, we know that there are an endless amount of Natural Rights you are born with, the writers of the Constitution could never have wrote and fit those in.
Our Government, on both Federal and State levels are not allowed to discriminate one group from another, that's in the Constitution. Amendment 14 states that no citizen will be denied privileges or immunities of US Citizenship, and as you had just stated Marriage is a privilege that would mean States cannot make laws denying a homosexual the privilege to marry due to their sexual orientation.
I brought up the United Nations solely to show that it is considered a Natural Right by many countries, including America. We adopted this draft on what Human Rights are, we as a country cannot say that we believe that Marriage is a right for all humans but in our own land not practice what we say we believe.
Our Federal Government does not discriminate against homosexuals, some of our State Governments due though, they give benefits to married couples of opposite sex, but not to those of the same sex that is discrimination. Depriving people of certain benefits that can help them and their families is just as bad as beating them and turning the dogs loose on them. It will only cause hurt and anger, it will make OUR own citizens feel like they are less because they have a different belief then you, they will feel like they must change or even move because of who they are.
Again, our Constitution has always been here to protects the citizen and make EVERYONE equal.
Marriage is a legally recognized social contract between two individuals, religion has no say anymore in whether or not one can be married. I am an Atheist, I will marry the person who I want, whether your religion says I can or not. Religion is very discriminatory, that is probably one of the reasons our Founding Fathers and Framers (men who wrote our Constitution) wanted State and Church separated.
More and more Judges in many States are interpreting that not allowing homosexuals to marry is against the Constitution. One State Judge ruled that it was unconstitutional to ban gay marriage. Some of his quotes:
"This is an unconstitutional attempt to narrow the definition of equality."
"The exclusion of a minority for no rational reason is a dangerous precedent."
And he is right in everything he states. Banning gay marriage is an attempt to narrow our definition of equality and doing this does set a dangerous precedent.
Do all 50 states really NEED to legalise gay marriage? I say no. I say no for several reasons.
1) Marriage, as defined not only by ancient text, but by most societies, is one man and one woman. We cannot rewright the definition of a word to fit our agenda or ideals.
2) A species needs to procreate in order to survive as a society. If they don't, the species eventually dies.
3) It is not the government's business what couples do in their homes or who they prefer to have sex with. Therefore, it is not right for the government to decide who gets married or who does not. Legalizing gay marriage is not the government's job.
4) Marriage is a privilage, not a right. We do have a right to happiness, but marriage does not fall under that right. There is no gaurantee that one will be happy in their marriage.
5) Children need to be raised by a mother and a father. Depriving them of one or the other is wrong. It has been proven that children need both sexes as parents. Not that a gay couple can't raise a child, but studies have been done and they show that it is healthier for a child to be raised by a mother and a father. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com...;
I believe if we allow gay marriage, our society and country will eventually die. Since homosexuals cannot reproduce and there must be an adequate amount of procreation within a society to survive, I do not believe gay marriage should be legal.
My opponent says religion has no say whether two people can be married. I say it most certainly does have a say. Most marriages are
performed in a church. And even more are performed by a pastor, priest, or rabbi. To say that religions have no say in the matter is false. Leaders of most religions will choose to marry a couple or not marry them, based on their convictions. And if they feel a couple should not be married, they won't marry them.
A government should have no power to force a marriage. It is not the government's job to do so.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.