The Instigator
Mnya.Preston
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
RationalMadman
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Gay Marriage

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 2 votes the winner is...
RationalMadman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/1/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,266 times Debate No: 25400
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (19)
Votes (2)

 

Mnya.Preston

Pro

A persons spouse should be whoever they want it do be.
RationalMadman

Con

  • Most religions consider homosexuality a sin.
  • It would weaken the definition and respect for the institution of marriage.
  • It would further weaken the traditional family values essential to our society.
  • It could provide a slippery slope in the legality of marriage(e.g. having multiple wives or marrying an animal could be next).
  • It confuses children about gender roles and expectations of society, and only a man & woman can pro-create.
Virtually every religion in the world, including the major ones in this country, consider homosexuality unacceptable. It is offensive and a swipe to the religious freedom of the majority to have to recognize a relationship they consider sinful. The legal system in the United States evolved out of the laws contained in the Bible. We shouldn't go even farther to tear down those laws.

The 50 percent divorce rate has already weakened the definition of marriage. We shouldn't be taking further steps to define what marriage is. A law allowing gay marriage would increase the number of joke or non-serious marriages, such as a couple of friends who want to save on taxes. Marriage is the most sacred institution in this country, and every society considers it the joining of a man and a woman. It makes biological sense since only a man and woman can pro-create.

The building blocks of our society and the thing that makes it strong is the traditional family of man, woman, and children. It is what has sustained us through two world wars, terrorist attacks, a Great Depression, and numerous other challenges over the centuries. While friends & lovers come and go, your family is always there. The main reason our culture and values have started to crumble is the weakening of families. Introducing another form of "family" would only make the situation worse.

Gay rights activists claim that these marriages should be allowed because it doesn't hurt anyone, but it could start a chain reaction that destroys the whole idea of marriage. If someone wants to marry his dog, why shouldn't he be able to? What if someone wants to marry their brother or parent? What if someone wants to marry their blow-up doll or have 10 wives? Unless we develop some firm definition of what a marriage is, the options are endless. If these options sound absurd, remember that all it takes is a few activist judges to use the statute to open the door. It doesn't matter if 95 percent of the population disagrees with the policy, one judge can interpret the case the way he or she wants and use the doctrine of stare decisis to impose a law on everyone. Do you remember how two judges in California recently declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional? If the decision hadn't been overturned, it would have prevented millions of children from being able to say the pledge every morning, despite the fact that 95 percent of Americans disagreed with the decision.

Children learn about expectations and gender roles from society. It's difficult to teach the importance and traditions of the family when such confusion is thrust upon them. Only a man and woman can bear children, and for thousands of years, a man & woman headed household has carried generations of people through life.

Debate Round No. 1
Mnya.Preston

Pro

Mnya.Preston forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Mnya.Preston

Pro

Mnya.Preston forfeited this round.
RationalMadman

Con

Vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
Hmm, so I guess the rule about subjects getting the subjective case only applies when you want it to, MBP. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Are there any other rules that you would like to change so that they only apply to the cases to which you want them to apply or is this the ony one?
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
As I thought. You don't understand basic English. Illiterates like you are not worth my time.

"He is taller than I (am)" is correct. "He wants his spouse to be she" is not.

Bye, idiot.
Posted by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
why you do not understand this is a mystery to me*
Posted by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
is the subject, it takes the subjective case*
Posted by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
"He wants his spouse to be she" is correct grammar.

"He wants his spouse to be her" is incorrect grammar.

I'm sorry if you were never taught the rule of when to use subjective/objective cases, but ignorance is not excuse for making false statements.

I think you made the mistake because often people do not speak grammatically. We tend to say things like "He is taller than me" because that is what we are used to hearing, but it is actually "He is taller than I". Similarly, we often use objective forms such as in "It was me who stole the money." because it might sound natural but "me" renames the subject so it should be subjective.

Bottom line. If the word is subject, it takes the subject case. Why you do no understand this is a mystery to me. And don't pretend that you looked in the Oxford English Dictionary.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
I've not had an English teacher since my GCSEs, by the way. I've no need for them, since I'm not an illiterate fucktard. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about you.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
I'll put it in terms that even a simpleton like you might understand. In the nounal phrase, 'whomever' can be replaced with 'him', whereas 'whoever' can be replaced with 'he'.

"He wants his spouse to be she." This is what you are arguing is correct.

"He wants his spouse to be her." This is what is actually correct.

Clearly, it's 'whomever'. Don't ever try to argue with me about grammar again. If you're not bullshitting about being an English major, demand a refund; you're functionally illiterate.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
The Oxford English Dictionary is on my side in both cases. I trust it over an illiterate idiot on the internet.
Posted by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
I don't know how to explain it any more clearly to you. I thought I made it as explicit as possible, but I didn't realize you needed more help than most people. I'll try again: There is no action being performed, therefore there is no direct object, therefore there is no objective use of any word. Please look into a dictionary and you'll see that the word you're looking for is "nominal".

Think it over a few times before making comments that make you look foolish and immature.
Posted by Manbearpanda 4 years ago
Manbearpanda
Wrong. 'Whomever' is the object of the nounal phrase 'whomever he or she wants his or her spouse to be', not the subject. This is why it's 'whomever', not 'whoever'. Read up on basic English, you illiterate fucktard. And 'nounal' is a word. Unlike me, you should feel completely ashamed.

"He wants his spouse to be she. Herp derp." I hope you can now see why you were wrong.

As I said, never argue with me about grammar; you simply do not stand a chance, idiot.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
Mnya.PrestonRationalMadmanTied
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 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: Con made good arguments supporting why gay marriage is not beneficial to society. Pro conceded. Enough said.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
Mnya.PrestonRationalMadmanTied
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 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: FFp