The Instigator
JHack
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
RockvilleSoftworks
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Gay Marriage

Do you like this debate?NoYes-4
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...
RockvilleSoftworks
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/27/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 664 times Debate No: 31760
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

JHack

Pro

Yes gay marriage may be a sin but I'm not against it I'm a Christian but look at all the other sins that are legal religion needs to stay out of the constitution.
RockvilleSoftworks

Con

For the purposes of this argument, in order to win this debate I find it unnecessary to provide any justification against the controversial subject of gay marriage (at least for now), but to point out some elementary flaws on how you make the argument above...

1. You do not set the guidelines for this debate (agreed definitions, conditions, etc.)
2. As part of your pro argument, you claim to not be against it. All textbooks aside, this is probably the weakest way to make an argument, or any debate for that matter. Perhaps you should not be arguing in favor of a controversial subject such as gay marriage if you simply do not have a sufficiently adversarial opinion.
3. "look at all the other sins that are legal", such as what. Define sin. Give examples of legal sins. This is vagueness.
4. "religion needs to stay out of the constitution". The "Constitution" is the work of the founding fathers that establishes the ground of America. We cannot automatically assume that you are talking about state constitutions because you use the singular form which refers to the most acknowledged work, so in most peoples' minds, one glance at this statement might destroy your validity.

In summary, I do not need to even argue against gay marriage when there are such fundamental flaws in the way the initiator made this argument. Why spend a substantial amount of effort with sources and such when the person making the claim in the first place didn't bother to do even 1/100th of that.
Debate Round No. 1
JHack

Pro

Okay.
1. I shouldn't have to list conditions of this argument its simple for or against it, that's the whole point of this website.

2. I didn't say I was against it I said it was a sin re-read that bub "Yes gay marriage may be a sin but I'm NOT against it"
There is a difference in being against something and thinking it's a sin just because I think it's a sin doesn't mean I'm going to judge anyone for it or put them down. PUT it this way if you believe in something 110% and someone holds a gun to your head and says change your belief or I'm going to shoot you, you're not gong to change you belief if you honestly believe it and that's what you're doing when you try to tell gays they cant marry. They believe in it so their not changing their mind why should you tell them its wrong?

3. I'm talking about sin as what god defines in the bible that Christians shouldn't do, some that are legal include drinking, Getting tattoos, Even eating selfishly.

In summary 90% of your argument was invalid.
RockvilleSoftworks

Con

Again, let me perform quote by quote analysis on the somewhat remote attempt on a convincing argument above (although I have no clue what his argument is).

QUOTE: "1. I shouldn't have to list conditions of this argument its [sic] simple for or against it [sic], that's the whole point of this website."

Let's look back at an argument that demonstrates what happens when there are conditions or definitions. http://www.debate.org...

QUOTE: "2. I didn't say I was against it I said it was a sin re-read that bub [sic] 'Yes gay marriage may be a sin but I'm NOT against it' [sic]
There is a difference in being against something and thinking it's a sin just because I think it's a sin doesn't mean I'm going to judge anyone for it or put them down. [sic]"

Let me remind you \*facepalm*\ that you are supposed to be arguing for the highly controversial subject of Gay Marriage. Saying that you are not against it does not even imply that you are for it. I laughed out loud when I saw that you called me "bub".

QUOTE: "PUT it this way if you believe in something 110% and someone holds a gun to your head and says change your belief or I'm going to shoot you, [sic] ...."

I think I'd have the intelligence in this situation to change my belief for a brief amount of time to save my life, even though you probably would not.

QUOTE: "you're not gong to change you belief if you honestly believe it and that's what you're doing when you try to tell gays they cant marry. [sic] They believe in it so their not changing their [sic] mind why should you tell them its [sic] wrong?"

I not telling gays that they can't marry, but I'm voting against it. That's all I have to say about this useless banter.

QUOTE: "3. I'm talking about sin as what god [sic] defines in the bible that Christians shouldn't do, some that are legal include drinking, Getting [sic] tattoos, Even [sic] eating selfishly."

I'm an athiest, and that means I do not accept religious arguments. That being said, some people do. You are essentially arguing that all sins should be legal, by using other sins that are legal as justification for another sin to be legalized. Should we legalize murder and rape? According to you the answer is yes (at least based on this argument).

QUOTE: "In summary 90% of your argument was invalid."

\* Another facepalm *\
Debate Round No. 2
JHack

Pro

No I'm not saying all sin should be legalized I'm just saying if you want to look at it that way then yeah why not legalize them all I mean no sin is greater than another, and if you're not going to take religious arguments then why post on a debate listed in the religious section?

QUOTE: "I think I'd have the intelligence in this situation to change my belief for a brief amount of time to save my life, even though you probably would not."

If you 110% believe something with your whole heart without a shadow of doubt you wouldn't change your mind.

The way I see it is this... you're simply putting down my ideas because you know I'm right and you don't like it you're one of those I know I'm right no matter what you say kind of people, so why even be on this site?
RockvilleSoftworks

Con

QUOTE: If you 110% believe something with your whole heart without a shadow of doubt you wouldn't change your mind.

Okay, you can say 'Go ahead and shoot' while I save my own life. It's Darwinism at work.

Anybody who votes pro will be voting for murder, arson, rape, assault, theft, adultery, and a plethora of other sins to be legalized.

Vote Con, at least for the purposes of this argument.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by RockvilleSoftworks 3 years ago
RockvilleSoftworks
ikr
Posted by Nonsensicality 3 years ago
Nonsensicality
I'm for gay marriage too, but that was a pitiful topic statement on Pro's part. Really.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by jh1234l 3 years ago
jh1234l
JHackRockvilleSoftworksTied
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' has dropped con's argument on sinning and instead said that "I'm right, you're wrong" to unsuccessfully counter it, then said that con was the one to use "I'm right, you're wrong".
Vote Placed by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
JHackRockvilleSoftworksTied
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 had the burden of proof, but he did not argue in favor of gay marriage.