The Instigator
bubbatheclown
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
LuckyStars
Pro (for)
Tied
0 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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/2/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,746 times Debate No: 48225
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

bubbatheclown

Con

My opponent is to post his argument in Round 1. I ask my opponent not to make any kind of argument or rebuttal in Round 4, considering that I'm making no type of argument in Round 1.
Burden of Proof is shared by Pro and Con.
I ask voters to vote fairly when this debate enters the voting stage.
I wish good luck to my opponent, and may the debate begin.
LuckyStars

Pro

Great, thanks for making the debate Con.

The Rights of The People

It is legal for people to marry in America if you're straight. However, gay people aren't allowed to get married in various parts of America. No rational is actually given for this, but I'm sure my opponent shall put some up. There are no arguments that don't require support from religion, and still prove that gay marriage should not be legal. if their is no good reason to steal rights from people, then the rights should immediatly be returned.

One of the biggest problems is that it's not as if no one can marry- Straight people allowed to marry each other. This is clearly defining gays as second class citizens, as you're depriving them as rights while handing them out to others.

The definition of a second class citizen is
not given the same rights or treatment as the rest of the people in a society

(Found from Merriam Webster dicionary:http://www.learnersdictionary.com... )

Clearly, by banning gay marriage you are defing the gays as second class citizens.

The US Declaration of Independence clearly states:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"



It is therefore a fundamental right to marry, and against the "American way" to reduce citizens rights.

Back to Con.
Debate Round No. 1
bubbatheclown

Con

Forgive me if this seems kind of weak, though I did manage to do a tiny bit of research by typing in "LGBT" instead of "gay."

In Round 1, you focused mainly on the rights of homosexual people to marry. However, allowing gay marriage is effectively endorsing homosexuality, so I will dig a little deeper and see what's wrong with homosexuality.

Contention 1: Gays don't live long

In 1994, Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute co-wrote a paper titled "The Lifespan of homosexuals." According to this paper, homosexuals live to an average 43 years, due to health problems.
Before I continue, I would like to say that this paper has been heavily attacked by the Southern Poverty Law Center, as well as "unbiased" Wikipedia. They say that the research was unscientific, because Cameron's source was obituaries from gay magazines. However, I think that his sources were quite reliable. It was a magazine about gay people, written by gay people. Why would this magazine lie? Why would they paint themselves in a negative light like that? It makes no sense.
One thing that would have to be examined here would be the number of gay people whose obituaries were used in Paul Cameron's research. If he studied 5 LGBT deaths, then the research would definitely be flawed. However, if he used 100 deaths or even 1000 deaths, then his research must be taken seriously. Unfortunately, I do not know how many gay deaths he examined, but I do not think he would release this research unless he studied many gay deaths.

Contention 2: It's all about how you're raised

The Southern Poverty Law Center will deny that the way you were raised has any effect on sexual orientation, but they themselves said "a great many studies suggest that it is the result of biological and environmental forces." Hold up! Environmental "forces?" (Factors) As in the environment you're brought up in? You see, effectively they are admitting (though at the same time they'd never admit it) that one's upbringing does have an effect on it.
Methinks that if you're sexually abused on a child, it could have an effect on your "sexual orientation."

Contention 3: Many child molesters are gay

LGBT activists would protest this one more than any other conservative contention on this matter. They saw that most of the men who molest boys are heterosexual when it comes to adult women. I've got two things to say to this:
A. You ever heard of a "beard?" Also, they may want children and a wife to do the cooking and cleaning.
B. They may be bisexual with a twist. Bisexual is the "B" in LGBT.
C. If you molest both boys and girls, then you're also bisexual.

Contention 4: Many Homosexual people are promiscuous...big time

A man named "Paul Van de Ven et al" (strange name, I know) studied the sexual profiles of 2500 gay people and found that from 10 to 15 percent of them had from 500-1000 sexual partners in their lifetime, 10 to 15 percent of them had 1000+ partners in their lifetime, and that the average amount of sexual partners for gay people was 100-500.
I don't know if this guy actually existed, but I found these statistics on multiple places throughout the internet. And if this research was conducted as it was, well, that would put to doubt all denial of homosexual promiscuity. The sexual history of 2500 LGBT people says a lot, doesn't it?

An Overview:
1. They don't live long.
2. it's a result of their upbringing opposed to something they were born with, though I admit that it's possible to develop homosexual desires even in a healthy household.
3. A lot of them (though probably not most of them) are pedophiles.
4. Many of them are EXTREMELY promiscuous

If you legalize gay marriage, then you are encouraging the homosexual lifestyle,and all my contentions (backed up by studies) say that it's not exactly that great a thing to be gay.
I look forward to my opponent's rebuttal.
LuckyStars

Pro

"In Round 1, you focused mainly on the rights of homosexual people to marry. However, allowing gay marriage is effectively endorsing homosexuality, so I will dig a little deeper and see what's wrong with homosexuality"

It's really not. With that logic, because it's Legal to protest against the president, the president an government encourages protests against him. Legalization is not the same as endorsement, thus rendering every single one of your statements in this debate false.

"In 1994, Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute co-wrote a paper titled "The Lifespan of homosexuals." According to this paper, homosexuals live to an average 43 years, due to health problems.
Before I continue, I would like to say that this paper has been heavily attacked by the Southern Poverty Law Center, as well as "unbiased" Wikipedia. They say that the research was unscientific, because Cameron's source was obituaries from gay magazines. However, I think that his sources were quite reliable. It was a magazine about gay people, written by gay people. Why would this magazine lie? Why would they paint themselves in a negative light like that? It makes no sense.
One thing that would have to be examined here would be the number of gay people whose obituaries were used in Paul Cameron's research. If he studied 5 LGBT deaths, then the research would definitely be flawed. However, if he used 100 deaths or even 1000 deaths, then his research must be taken seriously. Unfortunately, I do not know how many gay deaths he examined, but I do not think he would release this research unless he studied many gay deaths."

1. No source.

2. No correlation between gay marriage being legalized and the lives they live.

3. With this logic, because old people won't live much longer they are forbidden to marry...

"Contention 2: It's all about how you're raised

The Southern Poverty Law Center will deny that the way you were raised has any effect on sexual orientation, but they themselves said "a great many studies suggest that it is the result of biological and environmental forces." Hold up! Environmental "forces?" (Factors) As in the environment you're brought up in? You see, effectively they are admitting (though at the same time they'd never admit it) that one's upbringing does have an effect on it.
Methinks that if you're sexually abused on a child, it could have an effect on your "sexual orientation.""

I'll show a valid source showing why your sexuality has little if anything to do with the environment... I'm not sure at all where my opponent is getting his information.

http://www.sciencedaily.com...

The source above explains that it is a thing you're born with, not something you develop over time.

"Contention 3: Many child molesters are gay

LGBT activists would protest this one more than any other conservative contention on this matter. They saw that most of the men who molest boys are heterosexual when it comes to adult women. I've got two things to say to this:
A. You ever heard of a "beard?" Also, they may want children and a wife to do the cooking and cleaning.
B. They may be bisexual with a twist. Bisexual is the "B" in LGBT.
C. If you molest both boys and girls, then you're also bisexual"

Um... Just because a large number of people who happen to be gay do tis doesn't mean it's the new social "Norm" for gays.
This still doesn't erase the fact: Most child molesters are straight...

"A man named "Paul Van de Ven et al" (strange name, I know) studied the sexual profiles of 2500 gay people and found that from 10 to 15 percent of them had from 500-1000 sexual partners in their lifetime, 10 to 15 percent of them had 1000+ partners in their lifetime, and that the average amount of sexual partners for gay people was 100-500.
I don't know if this guy actually existed, but I found these statistics on multiple places throughout the internet. And if this research was conducted as it was, well, that would put to doubt all denial of homosexual promiscuity. The sexual history of 2500 LGBT people says a lot, doesn't it"

1. Pro has no idea whether this guy existed.

2. Pro has no sources to prove this study or any related studies are true.

3. A persons sex life doesn't have anything to do with laws...

"If you legalize gay marriage, then you are encouraging the homosexual lifestyle,and all my contentions (backed up by studies) say that it's not exactly that great a thing to be gay.
I look forward to my opponent's rebuttal"

Yet again we have this message. It's not endorsing the gay lifestyle. With that logic, the Government encourages smoking cigars despite all the programs advising against it.

Legalization/=Support for the lifestyle.

Furthermore, there's not actually any correlation between the things my opponent has brought up and gay marriage... We could accept what he has said as absolute facts but he would still be holding an empty sack.

His arguments can all be used against him, and with his logic we should throw away the entire concept of marriage. I'd also like to point out all his arguments have no sources to back them up...

Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
bubbatheclown

Con

"It's really not. With that logic, because it's Legal to protest against the president, the president an government encourages protests against him. Legalization is not the same as endorsement, thus rendering every single one of your statements in this debate false."

Oh yeah it is. When you legalize something, you're saying "this behavior is not so bad that we have to legalize it." It's the same way legalization of marijuana will probably result in more marijuana users, but that's another debate.
What has kept many homosexuals from engaging in the homosexual lifestyle? That's right: society saying that it's not okay. When you legalize it, there's going to be more gays coming out of the closet, methinks.

I apologize for not answering your contention made in round 1: that gays not being allowed to marry makes them second class citizens.
Regardless of "sexual orientation," the act of marrying someone of the same sex is an action, an action that is the same for everybody regardless of who you are, and actions can be regulated without making anybody a second class citizen.

Now, let's move on to your rebuttals.

Here's the source for many of my arguments:

http://www.splcenter.org...

That's right: I got my arguments from the Southern Poverty Law Center, an outspoken pro-gay organization. I took much of what they said and provided a rebuttal.
Also, according to another source, Paul Cameron looked at 6000 gay obituaries.

http://legacysplc.wwwsplcenter.org...

Now, it's always possible that he cherry picked the obituaries of gay people who died early. However, if 6000 obituary articles who cherry picked, and these 6000 were a minority among gay people, how many articles do you think he looked at? The numbers would get absurdly high, and nobody would go through 100,000 articles.
Therefore, I find it extremely unlikely that he cherry picked. I think his research is legitimate.

So, homosexuality causes people to not live as long. The solution? Don't let them engage in homosexual acts.

Then, you provided a source which stated that gay men have similar brains to women. Is it not possible that their brains have been wired differently from years of being raised in dysfunctional households?

Then, you said:
"Um... Just because a large number of people who happen to be gay do tis doesn't mean it's the new social "Norm" for gays.
This still doesn't erase the fact: Most child molesters are straight..."

You're right, many gay people are not pedophile. However...you molest girls, you're straight. You molest boys and girls, you're bisexual. You molest only boys, you're gay. People say that such predatory behavior results from the way you were raised, and I couldn't agree more. Such an upbringing also explains how you're gay.

Then, about Paul Van de Ven et al, I am quite confident that he existed. Here's a link to his research:

http://www.jstor.org...

Before I end my turn, here's a few statistics on gay "marriages."

11% of gay marriages last one year or less. 31% of gay marriages last 1 to 3 years. 29% of gay marriages last 4 to 7 years. 14% of gay marriages last 8 to 11 years. 6% of gay marriages last 12 to 15 years. 4% of gay marriages last 16 to 19 years. 5% of gay marriages last 20 or more years.
Source: 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census

Meanwhile...
80% of normal marriages lasted at least 5 years. 66% of normal marriages lasted at least 10 years. 57% of normal marriages lasted at least 15 years. 50% of normal marriages lasted at least 20 years.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2001)

Pertaining to sexual fidelity:
85% of women married to men reported faithfulness to their husbands. 75% of men married to women reported faithfulness to their wives. 4.5% of homosexual men in a relationship reported faithfulness to their husbands.
Source: The Social Organization of Sexuality, 216; McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (1984): 252-253; Wiederman, "Extramarital Sex," 170.
It may be an outdated source, but it proves my point: homosexuals are unlikely to stay faithful to their spouses even if they do marry.

For their own health, do not let gay people have homosexual partnerships, much less marriage. They probably will not stay faithful anyway. Married straight couples are much more likely to stay together than homosexual couples, though I admit that divorce rates these days among straight couples are shameful.

Vote for con!
LuckyStars

Pro

J"What has kept many homosexuals from engaging in the homosexual lifestyle? That's right: society saying that it's not okay. When you legalize it, there's going to be more gays coming out of the closet, methinks"

That would actually support my argument I think. It's saying that action in tolerable, but it's not:

1. Encouraging people to do it.

It's legal to so unhealthy things, but it's not as if the government gets a jolt of glee every time someone eats a snack or smokes.

"apologize for not answering your contention made in round 1: that gays not being allowed to marry makes them second class citizens."

Apology accepted sir.

"Regardless of "sexual orientation," the act of marrying someone of the same sex is an action, an action that is the same for everybody regardless of who you are, and actions can be regulated without making anybody a second class citizen"

They have the right to marry who they love. It's not actually taking away the fact that everyone else has a right accept for them. I'll go more into why your reasoning for it NOT being legalized is flawed.

"Now, it's always possible that he cherry picked the obituaries of gay people who died early. However, if 6000 obituary articles who cherry picked, and these 6000 were a minority among gay people, how many articles do you think he looked at? The numbers would get absurdly high, and nobody would go through 100,000 articles.
Therefore, I find it extremely unlikely that he cherry picked. I think his research is legitimate.
So, homosexuality causes people to not live as long. The solution? Don't let them engage in homosexual acts"

I need to know how this works. It very likely is cherry picking or just a false cause...

There's no logic behind gay people living shorter lives. They would live even SHORTER lives if we suppressed their natural sexuality, as it would obviously cause them stress.

"Then, you provided a source which stated that gay men have similar brains to women. Is it not possible that their brains have been wired differently from years of being raised in dysfunctional households"

I don't think so... How would that work? Please show a source to prove that a gay persons brain can turn into that of a woman's.

"You're right, many gay people are not pedophile. However...you molest girls, you're straight. You molest boys and girls, you're bisexual. You molest only boys, you're gay. People say that such predatory behavior results from the way you were raised, and I couldn't agree more. Such an upbringing also explains how you're gay"

I'm not really sure where my opponent is going with this here. He's really just trying to say that some gay people, (Like he admitted not all gays) molest people, therefore they should not have the right to marry. This isn't really a valid argument. The fact that most molestations and rapes are performed by straights nullify this argument.

So you see, my opponents arguments revolves around the gay lifestyle involving terrible things, meaning for their own health they should not engage in this life style.

However, like I covered before, gay people are honestly gay. It's not as if they could change their sexuality. Con really shoots himself in the foot when he says that gays must have been raised in terrible households, as that would explain why they do such bad things! (Assuming they do...)

Gay marriage is not supporting the lifestyle. Supporting gay marriage solely supports gay people having the right to marry. There is no correlation between allowing gay people to marry and allowing gay people to (Insert wicked thought here..).

Cons rebuttal to this was saying legalizing something is saying it is okay to do. Even if we assumed that was the case, (Which I believe it's not.) it's support of the marriage, not the lifestyle behind it.

So make good choices. :)
Debate Round No. 3
bubbatheclown

Con

"It's legal to so unhealthy things, but it's not as if the government gets a jolt of glee every time someone eats a snack or smokes."

I suppose that's true, but:
1. The people running the government don't believe that homosexuality is unhealthy; thus they don't take action against it.
2. Homosexuality, if my cited sources are correct, is way more harmful than smoking or eating a twinkies bar.

"They have the right to marry who they love. It's not actually taking away the fact that everyone else has a right accept for them. I'll go more into why your reasoning for it NOT being legalized is flawed."

The alcoholic wants to spend the rest of his life with his beer bottles, because he loves beer. It doesn't seem that valid a point to me. Anyway, my cited sources have suggested that they (homosexuals) are not usually faithful to their partners.

"I need to know how this works. It very likely is cherry picking or just a false cause..."

I'm sorry if you find this repetitive, but what Paul Cameron did was look through the obituaries of 6000 openly LGBT people. He found that out of these 6000 they had an average life span of 43 years.
Now how do I know that he didn't cherry pick? I don't know this for a fact, but I'm pretty sure, because to cherry pick 6000 articles that favor your conclusion you have to look through a lot more than 6000 articles overall. I'd say perhaps 20,000 articles or more. If the number of gay people with this short a lifespan were really a minority, he'd have to look through perhaps 50,000+ obituaries. Now, just looking through 6000 obituaries would seriously tire me out. I couldn't possibly go through 50,000 obituaries or even 20,000 of them. It'd drive me bananas, and I'd likely give up before I completed 6000.

So how do I know that it's not a "false cause?"
Here's how false cause is defined:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...

Around 9 million Americans are LGBT, and I'm just going to assume that those numbers were close to the same in the year 1994, when the poll was conducted.
http://www.policymic.com...
6000 LGBT people make up around .067% of the total LGBT population, using the figures just provided.
So, you're telling me that this guy took a look at 6000 random gay obituaries and most of these came from a very small minority group of LGBT people who don't live long? That's like randomly selecting 6000 Americans from various locations and most of them being Native Americans, a group that make up 0.9% of the US Population.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
And please don't jump on me for using Wikipedia.
Unless Paul Cameron was really lucky, a lot more than .067% of gays live short lives.

Now that I've cleared that up, I'll move on.

"There's no logic behind gay people living shorter lives. They would live even SHORTER lives if we suppressed their natural sexuality, as it would obviously cause them stress."
I'm not necessarily saying that homosexuality and alcoholicism are the same, (though they can both reduce life spans considerably), but that's like saying you should let an alcoholic go back to drinking because it'll cause them stress not to drink?
Yes, alcohol withdrawal can be fatal, but I do not think this is the case for abstaining from the Gay lifestyle. I've never heard of someone dying because they switched from gay to straight, and there are at least a handful of Ex-Gay People
http://www.nytimes.com...

"I don't think so... How would that work? Please show a source to prove that a gay persons brain can turn into that of a woman's."
I hope this is what you asked for:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://psychology.about.com...

Brains can be rewired in many ways and because of many factors, so why is it such a huge leap to believe that people's brains can be rewired to be gay? And why can't people's brains be rewired to become straight again?

"I'm not really sure where my opponent is going with this here. He's really just trying to say that some gay people, (Like he admitted not all gays) molest people, therefore they should not have the right to marry. This isn't really a valid argument. The fact that most molestations and rapes are performed by straights nullify this argument."

Uh, okay. I guess I can give you this point, though I think you're wrong. Even if straight people did carry out most of the child molestation in the US, that's be expected, considering that straight people are the majority by far, the same way you'd expect most incarcerated people in the US to be white.

"So you see, my opponents arguments revolves around the gay lifestyle involving terrible things, meaning for their own health they should not engage in this life style."

They do indeed engage in harmful activities, as my sources have said.

"However, like I covered before, gay people are honestly gay. It's not as if they could change their sexuality. Con really shoots himself in the foot when he says that gays must have been raised in terrible households, as that would explain why they do such bad things! (Assuming they do...)"

Forgive me for using the same link twice in one round, but...
http://www.nytimes.com...

"Gay marriage is not supporting the lifestyle. Supporting gay marriage solely supports gay people having the right to marry. There is no correlation between allowing gay people to marry and allowing gay people to (Insert wicked thought here..)."

Fat people are less likely to be fat if you outlaw junk food, though a black market will appear. When you tell people that it's not okay to be a certain way, and society pressures them not to be this way, then they're less likely to be this way. Homosexual behavior should be banned, though there will always be somebody who's gonna act gay anyway.
Also, consider the 1950s. If homosexuality is in fact a genetic thing, then there must've been thousands gay people back in the 1950s, in American society. Yet they got married to someone of the opposite gender and lived decent lives.

"Cons rebuttal to this was saying legalizing something is saying it is okay to do. Even if we assumed that was the case, (Which I believe it's not.) it's support of the marriage, not the lifestyle behind it."

Did marijuana legalized make more people smoke marijuana? How was this not endorsing it?
I'm sorry if this last part's kind of weak, but I have to go.

Vote for Con!
LuckyStars

Pro

I can't put anything else in here as warranted by the rules.

My only regret is that I waited literally last minute to make my arguments.

I can't make any new arguments, so I'll have to end it here,
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by bubbatheclown 2 years ago
bubbatheclown
Seriously?! This was probably the best debate I've done yet, and nobody voted on it!
Posted by kbub 2 years ago
kbub
That source is terrible. It is so easy to manipulate a poll if it is not peer-reviewed.
Posted by bubbatheclown 2 years ago
bubbatheclown
I thank Pro for following the rules laid down at the beginning of this debate.
Posted by bubbatheclown 2 years ago
bubbatheclown
Also:
"In a survey of 1,099 lesbians, the Journal of Social Service Research found that slightly more than half of the lesbians reported that they had been abused by a female lover/partner. The researchers found that "the most frequently indicated forms of abuse were verbal/emotional/psychological abuse and combined physical-psychological abuse."[47]"
This is my source:
https://www.frc.org...
Posted by bubbatheclown 2 years ago
bubbatheclown
Oops, some of the research concerned gay couples, not gay married couples. Gay marriage has only been legal in a few states for the past two or three years.
Posted by LuckyStars 2 years ago
LuckyStars
I know.
Posted by bubbatheclown 2 years ago
bubbatheclown
I almost thought you weren't going to post. You almost ran out of time.
Posted by LuckyStars 2 years ago
LuckyStars
HA!

Nac
Posted by bubbatheclown 2 years ago
bubbatheclown
I encourage everyone who is affiliated with the DDO Members Union to show their support through switching to the DDO Members Union Insignia.
Posted by LuckyStars 2 years ago
LuckyStars
Dammit phone!

*Sources
No votes have been placed for this debate.