The Instigator
HanYolo
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Raikori-Lyonjart
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Gay Marriage

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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: 9/7/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 276 times Debate No: 79506
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

HanYolo

Con

Hey, I noticed in your Big Issues that you are pro Gay Marriage. I believe that it is contrary to our common Catholic faith, to natural law, and God's plan for each one of us. Let the battle begin!

Round One will be acceptance, 2 is opening arguments, 3 is rebuttals, 4 is rebuttal or those rebuttals, and 5 is whatever the heck it ends up being.

http://www.catholic.com...
Raikori-Lyonjart

Pro

It is not within the power of the catholic church to stop non-mortal sins. We can try to stop abortion, but things like prostitution and gay marriage, that's like trying to stop Hinduism or Islam. We don't need to interfere in such trivial matters. Would you have us waste our time on something like gay marriage when we can stop the murder of babies? There is no compare. Overall, I say live and let live. Why not let them sin if they so wish? All you are doing is promoting tradition by preventing their marriage. They will still be gay with or without a marriage license. Therefore I say that it is simply inconceivable to stop them. That is simply, in my opinion, derogatory of them as humans. Humans have free will, so I say let them have the right to do what they want with their lives and leave the judgment to god.
Debate Round No. 1
HanYolo

Con

First off, who said that it isn't mortal? Engaging in homosexual activity is the same as doing it outside of marriage. Both of them are mortal, and both of them are not trivial by any means. I don't think it matters whether we can stop it or not. I can promise you that we cannot stop murder, does that mean it should be legalized? Just because we cannot fully end something doesn't mean that we shouldn't try.
I do agree that the murder of babies is horrible and should be stopped, but the family is the most important and fundamental part of society. Society was built and made for the family, not vice versa. The family must be protected, which means marriage must be protected. This isn't an either or situation between abortion and marriage. We have to protect both the family, and the unborn lives coming into them.
What's wrong with your "live and let live" idea, is that it goes against what it means to be Christian. Look at the Early Church, especially the martyrs. We know the martyrs are Saints, which means they are extremely holy and are close to God. Martyr means witness. If the Saints believed in live and let liv, they wouldn't have carried Christianity to the world risking their lives in the process. We are called to be like Jesus, impossible, I know, but God asks for the impossible, and in striving for it, you'll achieve the extraordinary. Did Jesus believe in "live and let live"? I don't think so. Did he say, "Go and make acquaintances of all the nations". our Christian duty is to save souls. I don't think it would be in line with selfless love to watch someone walk off a cliff and not o anything to stop it. Did you know that it is actually a sin to be an accessory to another's sin? By that I mean either taking part in it, promoting it, commanding it, consenting to it, provoking it, praising it, concealing it, defending it, or just by silence. The final one, my good sir, is what you are promoting.
Alos, this is my fault. I should have already made the difference between marriage and civil unions. Marriage is the divine institution of one man and one woman. No matter how many Courts or Presidents try to change it, that's what it is. When you say" Prevent their marriage", you really mean "Prevent their whateverthehecktheywanttocallitbutitisn'tmarriage".
One false assumption that I think you have made is that I am trying to prevent their Gay-ness. I'm not at all. I know the futility of it and see no harm in gay attraction at all, its when you act on it is when it becomes sinful.
Okay, I see where you can get the idea of "Wow, that's impossible, we shouldn't try it". But didn't Our Lord say "With God, all things are possible"?
It's not clear to me what you are referring to as derogatory. If you mean that trying to prevent their sin, I would beg to differ. If you mean discriminating them or trying to make them straight or whatever, I can agree with you there.
Okay, Humans have free will. Meaning they can do whatever they want. It does not mean they should do whatever they want. Indeed that i the very reason we have laws. To regulate how people should use their free will. Some things are forbidden by law even though we have the capacity to do such things. Remember in Jurassic Park, when Malcolm says, "Your scientists were so wrapped up in what they could do that they didn't stop to think if they should". Humans have free will, and thus, the capacity to do many wonderful things, as well as to commit horrendous crimes. Your argument through free will thus makes no sense. Thought that reasoning I can legalize anything. "I murdered my cousin yesterday, but its okay because I have free will." That doesn't make any sense at all.
We as Christians are given the tasks to love our neighbors. I as a devout Catholic cannot say with a clean conscience that I love someone, when I willfully let them commit spiritual suicide.
Raikori-Lyonjart

Pro

Although it is true that free will must be contained, at the same time, there is little reason why you should have such a strict view on such a simple thing. We do not have laws that say that you MUST RESPECT ALL PEOPLE, or that you cannot covet others, no. We, as Catholics, leave it up to each other to follow doctrine, and be there for support. As most gays are NOT Catholic, nor WANT to be catholic, it is simply beyond our realm of influence to interfere. I do not deny it as a sin. What I do deny is our right to prohibit their marriage. Such an ideal belongs to a bygone era of close minded peons. There is no place for us in the lives of those who reject us, and do not want our teachings. All we do by blockading it, is raise resentment of the Catholic church. If we did not try so hard to make everyone agree with us and compensate us, we could truly be a far more Benevolent institution. The heart of Jesus's teaching is to love all people. If all that one harbors is resentment, then you have already committed sin without even doing anything.
Debate Round No. 2
HanYolo

Con

HanYolo forfeited this round.
Raikori-Lyonjart

Pro

Raikori-Lyonjart forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
HanYolo

Con

HanYolo forfeited this round.
Raikori-Lyonjart

Pro

Raikori-Lyonjart forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
HanYolo

Con

HanYolo forfeited this round.
Raikori-Lyonjart

Pro

Raikori-Lyonjart forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by roguetech 1 year ago
roguetech
Even that is over stating it. These debates come down to whether people should be persecuted. Plain and simple.
Posted by MizzEnigma 1 year ago
MizzEnigma
God loves everyone and the judgment is ultimately left up to him on what happens to them when they die. Who are we to take anyone's happiness away while we are here on Earth? If they want to be married, they should go for it if that is what makes them happy. What these debates come down to: Should we reject them and show that who they are is wrong or let them be happy? What they do is no real concern for anyone else besides themselves...
Posted by roguetech 1 year ago
roguetech
I do so love it when two religious people start debating about how much God hates something. Almost always good for a laugh.

Like "Society was built and made for the family, not vice versa..." Sure, those Mesopotamians were all about family. We know that because a book written thousands of years later mentions something about a man and a woman.

I say "almost always", not because it usually is good for a laugh, but because it's almost worth a laugh. The argument generally ends up being a debate about how much other people's business is your business, because Jesus always enjoyed butting into stuff not his concern.

Like this: "Okay, Humans have free will. Meaning they can do whatever they want. It does not mean they should do whatever they want. Indeed that i the very reason we have laws."

In other words, people will do what they want, unless we stop them from enjoying their lives. Well, if that's what God wants to do, then that's between God and everyone, not you and everyone.

BTW, neither one of you is even talking about "gay marriage" (aka same-gender marriage), you're talking about homosexuality.
No votes have been placed for this debate.