The Instigator
brandon69
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
InnovativeEphemera
Pro (for)
Winning
20 Points

Gay Rights

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 3 votes the winner is...
InnovativeEphemera
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/7/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 379 times Debate No: 62807
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

brandon69

Con

Gays should NOT be able to have similar rights to those of regular marriage. They should not be able to influence kids in public by kissing, holding hands, or being married.
InnovativeEphemera

Pro

I accept your challenge.

First, I will address the issue of rights and marriage. I will then deconstruct your bizarre assertion that homosexual behaviour 'influences kids'.

__________________________________

Here is an excerpt of mine from a previous debate on this topic:

"The right to engage in a relationship with another person is fundamental to the human condition. Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." [http://www.un.org...]
Furthermore, Article 2 of the same declaration demands "[e]veryone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind..."

I also made the case that,

- Having relationships with other people is not a privilege, it is a right
- Formalising that relationship through marriage is also a right
- Two homosexuals getting married does not infringe upon anyone else's rights to marriage
- It is the business of those two people. No one else.

I will now address your assertion that homosexuality is something that can influence children.

The scientific literature is clear on this topic: homosexuality is not a choice [http://www.iflscience.com...]. As an example, I present this thought experiment. I am a heterosexual male, and I have a girlfriend. I enjoy kissing her and spooning and all the things that go along with being in a relationship with a female. To me, the idea of kissing/having sex with a male does not even remotely excite me, and causes a pretty unpleasant feeling; I would not wish to engage in a relationship with a man. I could not possibly choose to want to have sex with a man, because I am heterosexual and I'm just not built that way. Could you possibly foresee yourself making the CHOICE to sleep with someone of the same gender? Unless you are born homo-, bi- or asexual, you are going to be attracted to people of the opposite gender. However, being born gay would mean that this thought experiment works in reverse. The thought of sleeping with someone of the opposite sex likely repulses them, and yet they are forced to do so to conform to artificial, arbitrary social standards which aren't helpful to anyone. The only two people that are affect by a gay couple are the people in that relationship. Children seeing a gay couple might become more tolerant, or feel more comfortable coming out if they already are gay, but it will certainly not 'turn them gay'. This is just absurd.

Best of luck for you round.
Debate Round No. 1
brandon69

Con

brandon69 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
brandon69

Con

brandon69 forfeited this round.
InnovativeEphemera

Pro

The matter is resolved in the affirmative.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by dragonfire1414 2 years ago
dragonfire1414
brandon69InnovativeEphemeraTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Apparently negative's words of hate can't stand up to a thinking man.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
brandon69InnovativeEphemeraTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by republicofdhar 2 years ago
republicofdhar
brandon69InnovativeEphemeraTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con, the instigator, made absolutely no arguments, only assertions. It appears to be a trend among many of the inherently prejudiced, to make contentious claims and then disappear. Nonetheless, had he returned, he would probably have had a hard time refuting Pro's very well reasoned arguments. Very poor conduct on Con's part. All points to Pro.