The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Gay Marriage should be legal in all of America

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/1/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 837 times Debate No: 85860
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




I challenge you!
You accept?


It shouldn't, here is the reasons:
1). Gay marriage violates moral law.

2). If we allow it it will pollute morality.

3). if children are raised with a mom and a mom, or a dad and a dad, it will screw with their morality.

4). Gay marriage is a danger to public health.
Debate Round No. 1


1. Pro states "gay marriage violates moral law."
And, what is moral law? According to Google dictionary, it is defined as " an absolute principle defining the criteria of right action." How exactly do you know if something is moral? If it's right, then it is moral. Who decides if something is right? Is this information from the bible, is that what you're following? Being an atheist, I don't use the bible as adequate evidence. However, if you truly believe it's wrong, it's only a few who believe that and a few biased people can't decide if something is moral or not.
2. This "point" is very similar to your first one. In what way will it "pollute" morality?
3. There is not much that separate the genders, genders are not stereotypes. For example, if you have a stereotypically masculine father, and a stereotypically feminine mother, that will be YOUR ideal parents. However, not everyone follows these stereotypes. Understand what I'm saying?
4. How is it a danger to public health? Homosexuality is not contagious, and it's definitely not a health issue.

All of your "evidence" is not evidence.


1). How do we know if something violates moral law? This depends, if you have a moral compass, it goes without saying, but if you don"t, you don"t. Morality is not something we can look at and examine under a microscope, you cannot "prove" its existence. Rather, it is self-evident, not me, not you, not any human in the world is in the place to "decide" what is moral, but we are in the place to know, what is moral. So if you don"t believe homosexuality is immoral, I can"t help you, if you don"t know it by yourself, I can"t prove it to you.

2). As you might know, the homosexuals attempts to get this "right to marriage" as they call it, (which is completely ridiculous, marriage is 1 Male+ 1 female, so if they want the right to marriage, they got it, marry someone of the opposite gender; that"s marriage, not me not them not anyone else gets to marry someone of the same gender, so it is not discrimination, it is equality). Has caused it to be tolerated in schools.
This is training children to think that homosexuality is OK somehow, hence they will live their life thinking that "morality is fluid just like gender is fluid." Gender is not fluid, you"re a male, female, or a hermaphrodite, you look down, what you see is your gender.
So children are literally being taught that things that are obviously wrong, they are both morally wrong and logically wrong. This by no doubt will confuse them, mentally and morally.

3). I understand very well, you are just not understanding what I am saying. In marriage, there is a balance that comes from that. Gay Marriage takes away that balance.
I am not basing this off of stereotypes OK, I am basing this off of gender. This is something everyone learns at around 13; there is very distinct differences between males, and females (and hermaphrodites, but they don"t teach you about that).
If you have a X chromosome, and another X chromosome, you are a female. If you have a X chromosome, and a Y chromosome, you are a male. If you have a X chromosome and a X/Y chromosome, you are a hermaphrodite.
There"s no fluidity to that, it"s kindergarten math!
X+X= Female
X+Y= Male
X+X/Y= Hermaphrodite

4). STD"s, they are actually very easy to get, say a gay guy goes and urinates into a toilet, someone sits on it, they got STD"s. It is deadly, and yes, it is VERY contagious.
Debate Round No. 2


1. I will not continue with number one, because the answer cannot be proven.

2. It is not equal, because not everybody in the world is straight. According to this source (listed below), many people are members of the lgbt community. And, according to this article, (listed below) homosexuality is scientifically proven. The definition of marriage is eerie. Are you preferring to the bible and what it says about this? If so, please say so. Gender is fluid. It's been proven that transgender people are diagnosed of gender dysporia. This is when someone has an imbalance of testosterone and estrogen. If one is a trans girl, there's most likely more estrogen and if one is a trans boy, there most likely is more testosterone. And no, children are being taught to bash LGBT (for example: you are the basher).

3. I understand basic science, it is in fact my best subject. I am not talking about physical differences (external and internal), I'm talking about mental ones. And, having an imbalance in these chromosomes is clearly not a problem. You say you're not basing off of gender stereotypes, but it honestly seems that you are. These are differences in the chromosomes, there is no difference between the way that they will be parents.

4. Everyone can get STDs. And, you can't get STDs from sitting on toilets. It's been proven. That's merely a myth...

Side notes: You should work on is and are. There are some grammatical mistakes. You didn't give me much actual evidence, by the way.



2). Alright let's put it this way, just because someone would rather have something they are not ensured, rather than something they are ensured, does not entitle them to the thing they are not ensured. Rights are not fluid, or exchangeable, when you are entitled to something, I guess you could waiver it, but not exchange it for a different right.
The gay people wanting to be treated different than everybody else does not entitle them to this, just because they want different things than other people.

3). Transgender was classified as a mental disorder [1].
You claim that this does not affect them being parents, it happens to be, that it does affect their parenting. Oxytocin, is a neuro-chemical that parents direct toward their children, mothers obviously have more Oxytocin than the father, but still. Anyway, the gay people cannot have children, so there will be no Oxytocin directed toward this adopted child as it is not theirs [2].
Furthermore, a study has shown that gay marriage has an undeniable effect on the child's development [3].

4). Yes you can [4], and though everyone can get them, it is a higher chance if you are Gay [5].

Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by harrytruman 2 years ago
Sorry, I switched citation 5 with 4 by accident.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
you may know your gender by looking down, however human sexuality is not binary, human sexuality is a spectrum (like a rainbow), human sexuality can even change over time. The most masculine of men will have what some would call feminine traits, as will the most feminine of men have some masculine traits.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
Your argument sounds like religious homophobia. Consensual sex between adults is not immoral. Behavior puts you at risk, not your sexuality. Science is our best source for knowledge and science says gay people make fine parents.
This one is my favorite ..............
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by condeelmaster 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: I won't take into account the morality arguments because neither of the debaters successfully defined morality. Con's arguments were biased and hadn't any actual reasoning behind. Pro used this in his favour. Con was based his arguments upon beliefs, stereotypes and misleading interpretations of science. In contrast, Pro used reasoning and scientific facts. Summarizing, Pro had better arguments. The writing point goes to Pro because of the lots of writing errors Con had. Pro's sources were more reliable than Con's (wikipedia??? please, don't do that again!).