The Instigator
NorthDebater
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
xXCryptoXx
Con (against)
Winning
12 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 6 votes the winner is...
xXCryptoXx
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/7/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,031 times Debate No: 38624
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (6)

 

NorthDebater

Pro

Gay marriage should be allowed in the united states.
Debate Round No. 1
NorthDebater

Pro

Ok . This roung will go Affirmative, then you post your case, and an arguement to mine .

Everyone has the right to love whom ever they would like. A marriage is defined as "a bringing together of two souls in love" . Is a woman and a woman, or a man and a man, not souls? They are, and they both need the right to love who they love. This is why i stand in firm affirmation in todays resolution.

Contention 1:.Same-sex couples should be allowed to publicly celebrate their commitment in the same way as heterosexual couples. The Human Rights Campaign Foundation states that many same-sex couples "want the right to legally marry [and] honor their relationship in the greatest way our society has to offer..." This is through marriage. Homosexuals are humans too. They have rights too. And for this, they should have the right to marry who they love.

Conention 2. Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. Many benefits are only available to married couples, such as hospital visitation during an illness, taxation and inheritance rights, access to family health coverage, and protection in the event of the relationship ending. An Oct. 2, 2009 analysis by the New York Times estimates that a same-sex couple denied marriage benefits will incur an additional $41,196 to $467,562 in expenses over their lifetime compared to a married heterosexual couple. This is denying same sex couples things that normal couples have, which is going against the constitution.

Contention 3. The concept of "traditional marriage" being defined as one man and one woman is historically inaccurate. Given the prevalence of modern and ancient examples of family arrangements based on polygamy, communal child-rearing, the use of concubines and mistresses and the commonality of prostitution, heterosexual monogamy can be considered "unnatural" in evolutionary terms. So not only are you defining same sex marriage wrong, you are contradicting traditional marriage as well.

As i said, gay marriage should become a right . And HUMANS should have the right to love eachother.
xXCryptoXx

Con

Thank you for instigating this debate.

First off, not allowing gay couples to be married is not discrimination by any means. In order to say what discrimination is and what isn’t we must first analyze how marriage is defined and why.


Marriage is government regulated because the government recognizes that marriage has external benefits to it rather than marriage simply being about the relationship of a couple. The government also recognizes that these benefits marriage can bring when marriage is defined in a certain way can also be inherently good for the society.


The government has absolutely no interest in the personal lives of people, the only interest they have in marriage is the direct benefits marriage brings. Allowing gay marriage degrades the government’s interest in marriage only to the personal relationships of two people, but as explained earlier the government could care less about what people do with their private lives.


The government recognizes marriage between man and woman because despite the private relationship they have, their relationship still has a natural link to children to be loved by their mother and father. The government wants to promote these good family environments because these family units are good for the survival of a society.


After all, it’s a given fact that only a society that produces children and raises them properly will survive and the government wants to promote this.


The government promotes these relationships by dispensing benefits to married couples; this is not only a “thank you” for the couples who did get married, but it is also a way to get other heterosexual couples to get married.


Now that we’ve analyzed the government’s role in marriage we can understand that there is no discrimination against those who cannot fulfill the role in marriage that the government calls for. In addition, homosexuals can still be married, just like heterosexuals, regardless of sexual orientation.


To say homosexuals are discriminated against would be nearly the same as saying any couple that is currently excluded from marriage is being discriminated against.


Now that we understand the government’s role in marriage we can understand that there is no unjust discrimination going against any couple who cannot be married.


I will await any contentions you have to these arguments.


Contentions

I will now be contending to my opponent’s arguments.


Contention 1

“Same-sex couples should be allowed to publicly celebrate their commitment in the same way as heterosexual couples.”

The fact is, homosexuals can publicly celebrate their marriage, but not with each other. Without marital restrictions anyone could be married to anything and that would take away the societal efficiency marriage brings. In my opening arguments I explained further why we should keep marriage between man and woman.

“Homosexuals are humans too. They have rights too. And for this, they should have the right to marry who they love.”

Homosexuals do have rights. In fact, they have the exact same rights as anyone else. What is being proposed by gay marriage advocates is an extension of rights. However, since there is no good reason for an extension of rights, and because society is most efficient with marriage between man and woman, gay marriage should therefore not be legal.


Contention 2

“Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples.”

Homosexuals can enjoy the same benefits as heterosexuals, seeing that we have the exact same rights. Seeing that there is no good reason for an extension of rights, there is no reason to allow gay marriage.

Since benefits are dispensed because married couples promote the family unit, there is no reason to dispense rights to same-sex couples because they do not inherently promote the family unit.

It’s a reward system for the efficiency of the society, and same-sex couples do not fulfill the criteria for “earning” this reward.


Contention 3

I didn’t plan on arguing precisely for traditional marriage so there is no need to respond to this.

Debate Round No. 2
NorthDebater

Pro

NorthDebater forfeited this round.
xXCryptoXx

Con

What a shame.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by NorthDebater 3 years ago
NorthDebater
No Problem!(:
And Yeah, But, I Have Alot To Do For Congress, And A Few Speech Competitions, So When Im Fully Capable Of Giving A Good Arguement, I Will Challenge You!(:
Posted by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Thank you NorthDebater for being such a nice and gracious opponent.

I would be happy to debate you on the topic again, but strictly only if you want to.
Posted by NorthDebater 3 years ago
NorthDebater
I havent had access to my computer. He had an excellent case, and he deserves to win. Sorry for the forfiet! I was really looking forward to this. Thanks for the experience, and no problem. Also, Dragonfang, obviously there are flaws, because as i said, i am a freshman in highschool, and not experienced. Thank you for your thought though.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
: At 10/11/2013 11:05:24 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
: http://www.debate.org...
:
: Full Forfeit

I see a single round forfeit, which is painful to their case; but misrepresenting it as a full forfeit...
Posted by Dragonfang 3 years ago
Dragonfang
So much flaws and hidden assumptions in the argument...
Posted by briantheliberal 3 years ago
briantheliberal
I'm new too, and I am waiting on a challenger for the same exact topic.
Posted by briantheliberal 3 years ago
briantheliberal
I'm new too, and I am waiting on a challenger for the same exact topic.
Posted by briantheliberal 3 years ago
briantheliberal
I didn't mean it to be biased. Sorry.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Thanks NorthDebater, that actually means a lot to me. :D

It's nice knowing not everyone who supports gay marriage is completely against me.

Good luck to you also!
Posted by NorthDebater 3 years ago
NorthDebater
I mean, he probably will crush me, because im new, but just because you are for compulsory voting, doesnt mean you should automatically vote for me. xXCryptoXx .. Goodluck.(:
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
NorthDebaterxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited.
Vote Placed by 2-D 3 years ago
2-D
NorthDebaterxXCryptoXxTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, dropped arguments.
Vote Placed by Bruinshockeyfan 3 years ago
Bruinshockeyfan
NorthDebaterxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
NorthDebaterxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Beverlee 3 years ago
Beverlee
NorthDebaterxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: I would have liked to have seen some sources used in this debate. I gave Spelling and Grammar to Con, for a few typos by Pro that I thought were distracting. I also gave Con conduct, for the forfeiture. I gave arguments to Pro, because of some really silly statements made by Con. Like saying that only societies that procreate can survive (when nobody is saying that any society should stop procreating) and that LGBT people have the same rights as everyone else (which would be great, but.)
Vote Placed by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
NorthDebaterxXCryptoXxTied
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: FF