Debate Rounds (3)
I will be debating on the behalf of gay marriage being wrong.
Good luck and I look forward to reading your argument.
First of all, being gay is wrong to start off. It goes against a lot of religions. I for one do not believe being gay is at all okay. In the Bible it clearly states that being gay is a sin and so on. It also states a woman and a man should get married.
How does this affect you though?
Homosexuals are shoving their beliefs down societies throats. The gay pride parade for one, the way they dress (feminine and masculine), and the most important reason, the meaning of marriage. Now that gay marriage has been legalized, the meaning has changed to include, "people of the same sex" getting married as well. It's offensive and shouldn't be taken lightly.
Gay marriage is a sin and the only reason it was legalized was because of the lawyers. They argued mainly about feelings.
And yes I do understand getting married means you have some exclusive rights, etc. But I do not thing homosexuals should have the right to those.
1. Cherry picking morals from the bible.
From a moral perspective you are suggesting that being gay in the first place is wrong which goes beyond the point of gay marriage and becomes pure bigotry. I would first like to make it clear that you stated that you get your morals on this issue from the bible and you have every right to do so, however just because your moral view of what is right conflicts with someone's view doesn't mean that your view is right and their view is wrong because your opinion was formed from your faith. For example in Leviticus ,the book in the bible that people cite to say that being gay is a sin, it also says that eating shellfish is a sin, eating pork is a sin, eating meat on the Sabbath is a sin, and wearing cloths with mixed materials (polyester) is a sin and that you will go to hell for breaking these moral laws. Clearly modern day Christians don't follow many of these laws that are outlined in this book of the bible so why can you cherry pick the verse about having sex with another man and say that it still applies to modern culture when you seem to ignore the laws outlined in Leviticus that actually affect your life such as what clothes you can wear and what food you can eat.
2. How does this affect you though?
This affects me in two ways, politically and morally. Politically I used to say that I was a republican but I disagree with republicans on most social issues as do most young people in America. I no longer consider myself a republican because the republican party is trying to play to their voter base by taking insane stances on moral issues. They should know not many young people will agree with their stance on these social issues but they are so afraid that they will lose their older voter base that they wont take the right stance on issues like this. From a moral perspective I see it as a form of oppression and I want to stand up for people who are being mistreated obviously you think of gay people as less valuable than straights but this isn't the case every human being has the same value they are human beings and every human being deserves the same rights and opportunities as everyone else. If you love someone you have the right to get married to them so that you can seal the bond that you have with that person and also so that you can have the same legal rights as other married couples when it comes to things like taxes and hospital visitation rights. Whether you think gay marriage is a sin or not you should at least come to the conclusion that as human beings gay people deserve the same rights as we do.
3. It really doesn't matter what the bible says about marriage because marriage existed long before the bible.
Marriage is not a Christian concept and existed long before Christianity came about. The idea that the biblical definition of marriage is the absolute correct definition of marriage is a flawed view that only exist because of religions way of incorporating cultural laws of the time which leads to a non progressive attitude towards morals. I would also like to point out that many Christians especially Catholics mainly due to the new pope are mostly fine with gay marriage. It is totally possible to be supportive of gay marriage and still believe in your faith.
4. "And yes I do understand getting married means you have some exclusive rights, etc. But I do not thing homosexuals should have the right to those."
The reason why I said that what you are saying sounds like bigotry stems from this comment. You openly admit that getting married gives you exclusive rights but you don't think gay people should be allowed to have those rights. In other words you are openly saying that gay people should have less rights than straight people and that is just wrong on so many levels. Jesus stood for the oppressed and those people who had been beaten down by the powerful so why would you argue that Christianity would support unequal rights regardless of whether you think being gay is a sin or not. It is honestly fairly rare to see a Christian opposed to equal rights considering that Christianity is supposed to be all about giving equal rights to those who are oppressed.
5. You say that the new definition of marriage offends you
the new definition of marriage: a contract between two people who love each other. I see nothing wrong with the "new definition of marriage". It doesn't matter if it offends you because peoples rights trump people feelings. If I were to say I am offended that black people can vote then I would be rightly labeled as a bigot. The same applies to you when you say that you are offended by gay marriage.
6. No one is shoving their beliefs down anyone's throat except for people like you.
Gay people getting married has no effect on you at all and wont impact you personally in any way. However you trying to use your personal beliefs to prevent people who are gay from getting married affects all gay couples because it prevents them from having rights that they deserve as citizens in America who are willing to get married.
You are comparing sexuality to race and food. In the Bible, in Deuteronomy it states that you can eat everything. It also says that in Genesis. Also, I am cherry picking from the Bible because that is one of the most relevant things right now. This affects me because, "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." is the meaning of marriage. And marriage has been around for a long time, but I doubt gay marriage was ever a thing. Also, if I ever had kids I would never want them around gay people. Not saying this is for all gays, but they dress improper. The fact that they are, "embracing their sexuality" in that way is odd.
Okay, so I am pretty sure you said something about love is love and if you love someone you should get married to them. I don't know. But it was something along those lines. Anyway, if you believe that then you must also believe, polygamy, and a dad marrying a daughter or a daughter marrying her mother (both over 18), or a brother marrying his sister. And don't bring up the deformed babies and blah blah blah. They can adopt and so on. Just knowing a man and a man could marry each other is just as difficult as knowing a relative could marry a relative.
Also, I am trying to help people. Being homosexual is just wrong. So, if I inform homos of Christianity and Catholicism, well then it's not shoving it down their throats. A lot of Christians and Catholics don't agree with being gay. Take the Christians who were putting up their signs that. "Homo Sex Is A Sin" or "God Hates F*gs". A lot of gays don't believe in God or Jesus Christ. So I don't see how Jesus accepting everyone is even relevant. They don't believe in him so, I find that an invalid argument.
Sorry if I spelled anything wrong.
"You are comparing sexuality to race and food."
I never compared sexuality to food I compared the fact that you don't follow the rules in that book of the bible about food and clothing to the fact that you do take the rule in that book about gays seriously.
"In Deuteronomy it states that you can eat everything."
This is actually correct in Deuteronomy it does say that you can eat anything but it also says in Leviticus that you can't eat many types of things from cats to camels to shell fish. This just shows a contradiction in the bible and is no surprise to me but contradictions in the bible is for another debate.
To clarify what I mean by cherry picking I am talking about when you take one rule in the bible seriously but not the rule written right next to it. You ignore the rules about shell fish and such because it isn't a relevant rule anymore so people don't talk about it or follow it. I doesn't mean that it isn't ok for you to reference the bible as it is totally relevant to your argument.
The meaning of marriage and how people dress
Your meaning of marriage doesn't matter because your definition of marriage is not a legal one it is a biblical which has no relevance to the law of the United States of America because of separation of church and state. The legal definition of eligible to vote used to not include women or blacks but that doesn't mean that the old definition was correct just because it was the old definition. How people dress shouldn't matter it is a free country and everyone can dress however they want to. Would you want the government telling you that you can't get married because they don't like the way you dress?
The slippery slope
This debate is not about incest or polygamy. They are completely different topics and could be debated another time. The slippery slop argument is also a logical fallacy.http://www.logicalfallacies.info...
Also, I am trying to help people
Yof don't help people by taking away their right to marry. Also not as many as you think are against gay marriage as even the pope has said "If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?".
I urge you as a catholic to listen to your infallible pope in this situation.
Thanks again for not taking the time to read my argument. "sorry I didn't respond right away. I didn't want to read all of what you said." "Okay, so I am pretty sure you said something about love is love"
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Siladheil 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: RFD
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.