Debate Rounds (3)
I would like to thank KaylaSether for challenging me to this debate, and I graciously accept under the assumption that I will solely be arguing against homosexual marriage, not against homosexual people.
Since my partner hasn't provided any definitions, I will do the menial go-online-to-look-for-stuff work:
Homosexual - "a person who is sexually attracted to people of their own sex."
Marriage - "the legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship."
(All definitions are taken off of Google)
Before we start, I would like to clear up some misgivings my partner may have posted in the last round. I feel confident that he/she simply didn't read my views correctly. Here, I explain what I believe, and correct my partner on minor details. Notice, THESE ARE NOT MY POINTS. My proof will be presented in the second round.
"Gay marriage is not a disorder" - Gay marriage is a process, not a trait. Gayness itself is a disorder.
"They are normal just like straight people" - They aren't, because they are homosexual. But they definately shouldn't be descriminated against because of this.
"I has been scientifically proven to be biological and that it is not a disorder. It is in our genes." - Disorders are exclusively biological
"It is not a sin" - Yet the Christian bible condems this in the New and Old Testament. Muslims stone homosexuals. A majority of hinduistic religious feel they should start stoning as well. Bhuddism is against any sexual contact for enjoyment at all, and it is clear that homosexuals can't make babies.
Again, thank you for the challenge, and I look forward to your opening points! Good luck, and may the best debator win...
KaylaSether2 forfeited this round.
mfigurski80 forfeited this round.
KaylaSether2 forfeited this round.
Seems that nobody is really into this one. Oh well, I guess I might as well write something...
Gay marriage should be illegalized, by both the government and society, because it promotes homosexualism. Don't get me wrong, two homosexuals devoting themselves to each other isn't bad, it could actually be an idol for friendship, but marriage itself has three main flaws.
Number one, it shows that being a homosexual is alright. Number two, it gives the pair permission to do a little bit more than friends would do. And, number three, there are other options.
1. Let's start with the easier one. Homosexuals shouldn't, by any means, engage in sexual contact with, or around each other because, not only does it serve no purpose but pleasure, it also desanctifies the act of sex in healthy couples as well.
2. Okay, evolution obviously didn't mean for gays to ever exist. They're a contradiction of nature, and they can't reproduce. Even if just for that reason, for not messing with nature, we should stay on the cleared path. Homosexualism, in fact has been common in history too. Like Rome, Rome had seen a giant increase of homosexual activity about 300-400 years before it fell. The homosexualism trait, by many esteemed scientists, is the cause of many a wealthy nation's fall, and has in fact been attached as a cause. See, it goes like this:
1. Increased warfare, men and women are seperated for long periods of time.
2. Both groups start gaining homosexualistic traits.
3. Homosexualism becomes acceptable
4. Sex is desanctified, becomes used more for pleasure than for showing of love, or reproduction.
4.5 More Children. Much more children
5. Children become unwanted because of the pain and later price for upbringing, abortions ensue
6. Generations slowly pass their life in frolicking orgy-like lives, decreasing in population
7. Nation slowly falls because of loss of manpower. When it becomes weak enough for others to attcak, it dissapears.
This is followed by not only Rome, but Persia, Assyria, and a majority of wealthy nations. As you can see, America is definately going down the same path. We already have lots of abortions, and there will be much more really soon.
3. There is nothing preventing homosexuals from loving the opposite sex. Boys love their father, girs love their mother, and so can homosexuals. Many have actually done this, though it might take a really long while.
I also feel the need to give some rebuttals to the common arguement: freedom
This is kind of silly. What if, for example, a guy wants to beat his wife, rape his daughter, and throw his son into the basement to be eaten by rats? Wake up world. TOTAL FREEDOM doesn't exist, it never has, and never will. And thank God. Because freedom is where opinions start to seperate, freedom is where people start making enemies, freedom is what causes us to fight and kill our own species. Robots, they aren't free, and they don't kill themselves. If robots would be equal to humans in everything but their freedom, not only would they get a lot more done, they would probably be happier as well.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.