The Instigator
debater777
Con (against)
Losing
44 Points
The Contender
Rockylightning
Pro (for)
Winning
51 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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2010 Category: News
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,434 times Debate No: 11460
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (31)
Votes (20)

 

debater777

Con

I challenge rockylightning to a debate on "gay marriage" (cancelled earlier). Please keep it 5000 characters maximum. Thanks!
Rockylightning

Pro

Off you go.
Debate Round No. 1
debater777

Con

Firstly, I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this challenge. I would like to start this debate with a quote DIRECTLY from the Bible itself.
"Male and female, He created them" Genesis 1:27
This verse clearly states that we humans were created to a plan- male and female complementing each other.
My first main argument is as follows;
I. God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, nor Madam and Eve
A. Genesis also teaches that God instituted and designed marriage between a man and a woman (verses 2:18- 2:25)
The complementary structure of the male and female anatomy is obviously designed for the normal husband-wife relationships. Clearly, design in human biology supports heterosexuality and contradicts homosexuality.
The combination of male and female enables man to produce and nurture offspring as commanded in Genesis 1:28 "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth." This command is repeated to Noah after the Flood (Genesis 8:15-17). But procreation is not the only reason God made humans as sexual beings.
The BUWA report affirms "that sexual intimacy between husband and wife is good, and is intended by God for bonding, pleasure and procreation."
God gave man and woman complementary roles in order to strengthen the family unit. Woman was to be the helper that man needed (Genesis 2:18). However, the woman's role as the helpmate is certainly not an inferior one. The enterprising God-fearing woman in Proverbs 31:10-31 is an inspiring role model.
My second point is as follows;
II. Homosexual activity is notoriously disease-prone
Andrew Lansdown points out that "Homosexual activity is notoriously disease-prone. In addition to diseases associated with heterosexual promiscuity, homosexual actions facilitate the transmission of anal herpes, hepatitis B, intestinal parasites, Kaposi's Sarcoma and AIDS."
Research on the life expectancy of a group of homosexual men in Canada in the early 1990s indicated that they could expect 8-21 years less lifespan than other men.
If we vote no on gay marriage, we can help put a stop to the spreading of these deadly diseases. Even though the gays and lesbians might not appreciate this kind gesture now, they will when they are spared from viruses like AIDS.
My last argument for this round is as follows;
III. Biological or social factors may contribute to a person's bent toward homosexual behavior, but does not excuse it.
Some people have a strong bent towards stealing or abuse of alcohol, but they still choose to engage or not engage in this behavior the law rightly holds them accountable.
The final report of the Baptist Union of Western Australia (BUWA) Task Force on Human Sexuality affirms that "the Bible is clear that sin involves choice, and it unequivocally condemns homosexual behavior as sin." ~Matthew 19:1-12~
Since other groups who have been discriminated against (such as women, blacks and the disabled) have been given equal opportunity, homosexuals claim that they, too, should be liberated. However, as one Christian expert has said "Gender, race and impairment all relate to what a person is, whereas homosexuality relates to what a person does."
These are all my points for the second round, and I await my opponent's refutes and arguments!
Rockylightning

Pro

Refutations:

\\\ God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, nor Madam and Eve
A. Genesis also teaches that God instituted and designed marriage between a man and a woman (verses 2:18- 2:25)
The complementary structure of the male and female anatomy is obviously designed for the normal husband-wife relationships. Clearly, design in human biology supports heterosexuality and contradicts homosexuality.
The combination of male and female enables man to produce and nurture offspring as commanded in Genesis 1:28 "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth." This command is repeated to Noah after the Flood (Genesis 8:15-17). But procreation is not the only reason God made humans as sexual beings.///

I see your point, but pushing aside religion, there is CLEAR scientific evidence that people are BORN gay, and only realize it during puberty, although this may not be in accordance with current biology, but you can't deny people the right. Even if that point was valid, since when did religion triumph over science? It never has and never will!

\\\Homosexual activity is notoriously disease-prone
Andrew Lansdown points out that "Homosexual activity is notoriously disease-prone. In addition to diseases associated with heterosexual promiscuity, homosexual actions facilitate the transmission of anal herpes, hepatitis B, intestinal parasites, Kaposi's Sarcoma and AIDS."
Research on the life expectancy of a group of homosexual men in Canada in the early 1990s indicated that they could expect 8-21 years less lifespan than other men.
If we vote no on gay marriage, we can help put a stop to the spreading of these deadly diseases. Even though the gays and lesbians might not appreciate this kind gesture now, they will when they are spared from viruses like AIDS.///

This actually is my point. Homosexuals KNOWINGLY go into their relationship knowing these diseases. This shows that they don't care whatsoever. This is passion at it's fullest, and why gay marriage should be legal.

\\\Biological or social factors may contribute to a person's bent toward homosexual behavior, but does not excuse it.
Some people have a strong bent towards stealing or abuse of alcohol, but they still choose to engage or not engage in this behavior the law rightly holds them accountable.
The final report of the Baptist Union of Western Australia (BUWA) Task Force on Human Sexuality affirms that "the Bible is clear that sin involves choice, and it unequivocally condemns homosexual behavior as sin." ~Matthew 19:1-12~
Since other groups who have been discriminated against (such as women, blacks and the disabled) have been given equal opportunity, homosexuals claim that they, too, should be liberated. However, as one Christian expert has said "Gender, race and impairment all relate to what a person is, whereas homosexuality relates to what a person does."///

Again, quoting religions...

So let me gt this straight, according to a CHURCH, being born gay is a SIN. This is like calling mentally retarded people sinners, this is like calling people with ANY type of birth defect a SINNER. HOW is it right to do this? How can we call ourselves a species if we reticule the pioneers of evolution?

Points:

1. Scientific evidence proves that people are BORN gay
There are obvious cases where very simple animals such as insects and bacteria perform homosexual behavior. Organisms such as these cannot just "choose" or "be influenced" by people in their lives. To insects, there is mom, dad, and food. Lets put 2 and 2 together, people are organisms, more basic organisms are born being gay, that means that HUMANS ARE BORN GAY!

http://en.wikipedia.org...

So the con as YET to prove to me that homosexuals should be ridiculed because of their genetics. Would this mean that we call retards sinners, or people with diseases from birth sinners? I think not!

I urge a pro vote

VOTE PRO!
Debate Round No. 2
debater777

Con

Here I go refuting his refutes and simple point!
//...Pushing aside religion, there is CLEAR scientific evidence that people are BORN gay...//
My opponent never stated within his speech the scientific evidence, which I would like him to do.
//This is like calling mentally retarded people sinners, this is like calling people with ANY type of birth defect a SINNER.//
Actually, my point was that in most religions (Catholic, Christian, Muslim, etc.) it is a sin to be a HOMOSEXUAL, not a mentally retarded person. Also, looking deeper into his point, my opponent argued his own side calling homosexuals people with birth defects.
//but pushing aside religion...//
There is PROOF, which I will state in my speech, that people place their religious beliefs higher than simple scientific polls and surveys- it seems to me you are telling people voting on this subject all around the world to simply ABANDON their religious beliefs and take science over their god(s).
//Homosexuals KNOWINGLY go into their relationship knowing these diseases.//
My opponent stated no evidence or sources PROVING homosexuals know about these diseases and viruses.
//There are obvious cases where very simple animals such as insects and bacteria perform homosexual behavior.//
Yes, simple animals like insects and bacteria may perform homosexual activity, but they are COMPLETELY different than humans. The human body is very complex, unlike the simple structure of an insect or bacteria. Also, it is not unusual in the world of insects (and bacteria) to perform homosexual behavior. My opponent cannot say I contradicted myself because, I will repeat what I said before, there is a HUGE and prominent difference between insects and human beings.
Now onto my own arguments:
I. It is not considered normal behavior to engage in homosexual activities.
We humans are in this world for many things, but especially to reproduce. If we allow gay marriage, how will it be possible for the thousands of gay couples to reproduce? That is my question to you the reader.
My opponent may ask "What is normal?" The definition of normal, from Merriam-Webster dictionary is as follows:
"Relating to, involving, or being a normal curve or normal distribution".
Now ask yourself, is homosexual activity normal based on this definition?
Now, I said earlier in my refutes that I would refute his point about pushing aside religion. When asked what they would do if scientists were to disprove a particular religious belief, nearly two-thirds (64%) of people say they would continue to hold to what their religion teaches rather than accept the contrary scientific finding, according to the results of an October 2006 Time magazine poll. Indeed, in a May 2007 Gallup poll, more people cite their belief in Jesus (19%), God (16%) or religion generally (16%).
SOURCE: answers.yahoo.com
Because this is my last round, I would like to say EXACTLY why one should vote 'no' on gay marriage (restating main points)
I. God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, nor Madam and Eve
II. Homosexual activity is notoriously disease-prone
III. Biological or social factors may contribute to a person's bent toward homosexual behavior, but does not excuse it.
And lastly,
IV. It is not considered normal behavior to engage in homosexual behavior.
For these reasons and many more, the opposition (saying no) has a much bigger impact, and should therefore win this debate.

VOTE FOR OPPOSITION!!!

SOURCES:
answers.yahoo.com
wikianswers.net
atheism.about.com (neither prop nor opp- states both sides)
www.cwfa.org
Rockylightning

Pro

\\\Actually, my point was that in most religions (Catholic, Christian, Muslim, etc.) it is a sin to be a HOMOSEXUAL, not a mentally retarded person. Also, looking deeper into his point, my opponent argued his own side calling homosexuals people with birth defects.///

You do not understand my point. What I was arguing was that there is clear evidence that homosexuality is uncontrollable and is decided before birth. So are we going to call ALL people with uncontrollable birth defects sinners? NO!

\\\There is PROOF, which I will state in my speech, that people place their religious beliefs higher than simple scientific polls and surveys- it seems to me you are telling people voting on this subject all around the world to simply ABANDON their religious beliefs and take science over their god(s)///

Not to get into a religion over science debate.... whether to choose the insanity that is religion or the facts and statistics that are science is the voters choice. But I assure you, that scientific facts get us farther than religion does. Just because religion is the popular belief doesn't mean its the right one. Take slavery, the majority liked it, but that doesn't mean its right!

\\\My opponent stated no evidence or sources PROVING homosexuals know about these diseases and viruses.///

My opponent has stated no sources or evidence PROVING homosexuals DON'T know about these diseases. Everyone has herd of AIDS, Herpes, etc. Either from other people or sex ed. class.

\\\Yes, simple animals like insects and bacteria may perform homosexual activity, but they are COMPLETELY different than humans. The human body is very complex, unlike the simple structure of an insect or bacteria. Also, it is not unusual in the world of insects (and bacteria) to perform homosexual behavior. My opponent cannot say I contradicted myself because, I will repeat what I said before, there is a HUGE and prominent difference between insects and human beings.///

Yes there is a difference, but not a huge one. According to the latest reality, evolution is the best explanation for life. And according to evolution, we all evolved from one organism. So we may be different, but there comes a point where HUMAN DNA is exactly the same as INSECT DNA. Not all the time, but sometimes. It is very likely that homosexuality is in this small fraction of DNA!

\\\We humans are in this world for many things, but especially to reproduce. If we allow gay marriage, how will it be possible for the thousands of gay couples to reproduce? That is my question to you the reader.///

Gay couples CANNOT reproduce. It is physically impossible. But you can't force them to reproduce! I do not exactly understand this point and wished my opponent had expanded upon it.

\\\Now ask yourself, is homosexual activity normal based on this definition?///

Do we live in a country where people are forced to live "normally"? I thought the bill of rights guaranteed us rights that cannot be taken away. We cannot say "you're not normal, so you can't marry" everyone has freedom of expression, and if freedom of expression is being homosexual, then that's fine!

\\\ Now, I said earlier in my refutes that I would refute his point about pushing aside religion. When asked what they would do if scientists were to disprove a particular religious belief, nearly two-thirds (64%) of people say they would continue to hold to what their religion teaches rather than accept the contrary scientific finding, according to the results of an October 2006 Time magazine poll. Indeed, in a May 2007 Gallup poll, more people cite their belief in Jesus (19%), God (16%) or religion generally (16%).
SOURCE: answers.yahoo.com///

First, as I have said before, the popular opinion isn't always the right one. If the majority of people believe in religion over science, that's their problem. Just because the majority of America believes in that does not mean that you've won. Second, answers.yahoo.com is NOT a RELIABLE source! Anyone can answer that, who knows if you made another account and answered yourself? No one does. So if that's your source, I URGE the voters to see this error. The same goes with wikianswers.

1. Scientific evidence proves that people are BORN gay
There are obvious cases where very simple animals such as insects and bacteria perform homosexual behavior. Organisms such as these cannot just "choose" or "be influenced" by people in their lives. To insects, there is mom, dad, and food. Lets put 2 and 2 together, people are organisms, more basic organisms are born being gay, that means that HUMANS ARE BORN GAY!

http://en.wikipedia.org......
http://en.wikipedia.org...

For this point, which has not been debated clearly and effectively I urge you, the voter, to put aside your current beliefs, and vote for the side that has truly won this debate... which is the affirmative.

===VOTE PRO!===

-Zapped
Debate Round No. 3
31 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by debater777 6 years ago
debater777
Rocky, im gessing u dont like carman. i mean, werent u in a debate w/ him/her?
Posted by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
you can votebomb others
Posted by debater777 6 years ago
debater777
Cant u only vote bomb ur OWN debate? Just because u vote for one person all 6 categories doesnt mean they vote bomb
Posted by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
Carman is the new resident votebomber
Posted by rougeagent21 6 years ago
rougeagent21
Rocky seems to assume that this is a scientific debate, despite CON's opening arguments. If you accept the debate, you agree to the instigator's terms...the debate cannot be decided without first establishing what one must do to "win." I can only gives points to CON for spelling.
Posted by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
What i'm saying is the popular opinion isn't always the correct one. Take slavery for example.
Posted by debater777 6 years ago
debater777
Nvr mind. We shood stop the mini debate within the debate. Sry, I got carried away :)
Posted by debater777 6 years ago
debater777
I don't really understand what you mean by saying that 3/4 of the US isn't "correct" in their doing so. Can you expand a little? Thanks
Posted by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
Just because 3/4 of the US is religious dosn't mean they're correct in doing so. It may mean that 3/4 of the US could be beleiving a book written many years ago to keep the peace in a chaotic world.
Posted by debater777 6 years ago
debater777
Over 75% of the US looks up to some holy book. For example, Muslims honor the Quran; Jews look up the the Torah, and Christians (whether Orthodox, Lutheran, etc.) honor the Bible. It's there decision- I could have quoted anything from the Torah or Quran, but I decided with the Bible. It's not a crime to quote from one's holy book.
20 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Shestakov 6 years ago
Shestakov
debater777RockylightningTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Vote Placed by Awed 6 years ago
Awed
debater777RockylightningTied
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 
Vote Placed by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
debater777RockylightningTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DebatePro 6 years ago
DebatePro
debater777RockylightningTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by debater777 6 years ago
debater777
debater777RockylightningTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by carman16 6 years ago
carman16
debater777RockylightningTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by sidobagga 6 years ago
sidobagga
debater777RockylightningTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 6 years ago
rougeagent21
debater777RockylightningTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Vote Placed by Nimmiko 6 years ago
Nimmiko
debater777RockylightningTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Vote Placed by Switchlapse 6 years ago
Switchlapse
debater777RockylightningTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23