The Instigator
CAPLlock
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
16kadams
Con (against)
Winning
4 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 2 votes the winner is...
16kadams
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/17/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 864 times Debate No: 19929
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

CAPLlock

Pro

R1 is for questions you might have. And acceptance.

Ask your questions in the comments, if not, you will automatically argee with my rules and etc.

The res. is Gay men and women should be able to marry
16kadams

Con

I accept, no questions.
Debate Round No. 1
CAPLlock

Pro

This debate is a LD debate.

Gay should be able to marry because:


Nothing bad would happen.

What will happen, that is so harmful to society? If so does that mean we should ban ALL things that cause events that are harmful?

Right to happiness.

If gay people want to marry, so be it. It would be illegal to ban gay people marrying.

Christian stuff

Gay people could be an atheist. Would it be good ethics to apply Christian rules one atheist?
16kadams

Con

"Nothing bad would happen.

What will happen, that is so harmful to society? If so does that mean we should ban ALL things that cause events that are harmful?"

Letme answer the questions in there before fully refuting the statement.

1. We should not ban everything that is harmul, only things that are detrimental to a society as a whole. Gay mamages the society, that will be explained next.
2, Many things bad would happen. I will explain a few of them.

a. The divorce rate in America for first marriage, vs second or third marriage
50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce
adding gay marriage would add on to that mess, further weakening the institution of marriage.
http://www.divorcerate.org...
b. AIDS
Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)1 represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s. In 2006, MSM accounted for more than half (53%) of all new HIV infections in the United States, and MSM with a history of injection drug use (MSM-IDU) accounted for an additional 4% of new infections. At the end of 2006, more than half (53%) of all people living with HIV in the United States were MSM or MSM-IDU. Since the beginning of the US epidemic, MSM have consistently represented the largest percentage of persons diagnosed with AIDS and persons with an AIDS diagnosis who have died.

http://www.cdc.gov...

So gays have a high % of aids, and letting them marry uld actually increase the number of aids patients because since thy have a 50% divorce rate, they can spre to their next spouse.

c. Christians

America is still mostly chrisian, and allowing gay marriage would royally make them mad. Here's why christians anti-gay:


Genesis 19 (Sodom and Gomorrah)

 Leviticus 18:22

Romans 1:17-32

1 Corinthians 6:9-13 (and 1 Timothy 1:9-14)

The reason I have not spelled it out is because most people know what are in these verses.

"Right to happiness.

If gay people want to marry, so be it. It would be illegal to ban gay people marrying."

There is no right to happiness in out constitution any law. Also it is not illegal to ban gays from marrying because we do it now.
It law is illegal then why is it still there? So that point is false.


"Christian stuff

Gay people could be an atheist. Would it be good ethics to apply Christian rules one atheist? "

Well your christian stuff is against the bible, and my christian stuff. Since you want christian rules to apply then gay marriage should be illegal. So you just fed my argument.

C1: Is against religeon

Alreadexplained

C2: They have more of a chance to have AIDS

Well I explained that their group of people has a lot of aids infections in it, but I will explain in more detail.

In 2007, MSM were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women.

So 44 times more likely to get aids if you have sex with men. wow.

From 2005–2008, estimated diagnoses of HIV infection increased approximately 17% among MSM.

So their infection rate is on the rise.
http://www.cdc.gov...

C3: Same sex couple have no right to marrige

In no american law (that has been accepted in all the states), in our conitution, and in international law there is no right to marriage. And most societys accept that fact. For more info: http://www.cpjustice.org...

C4: It is not natural

Since it is not natural to marry a dog, that concept shoul dbe illegal. That same rule applies to gays.


A. Dean Byrd, PhD, Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of Utah School of Medicine, wrote the following statement in his May 27, 2001 article titled "The Innate-Immutable Argument Finds No Basis in Science," available on the The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) website Narth.com:

"There is no support in the scientific research for the conclusion that homosexuality is biologically determined."

So biologically it is not natural.


Citizens for Community Values, a non-governmental organization, wrote the following opinion in "The Homosexual Issue: Where Do We Stand - and Why?," published on its website CCV.org (accessed Feb. 27, 2008):

"It should be noted here also that homosexuality is not genetic. This false claim has been repeated so often and so loudly that a disturbing majority of the public has accepted it as truth. Absolutely no research supports this claim. To the contrary, thousands of people have overcome this desire, have withdrawn from homosexual behavior and have gone on to enjoy fulfilling heterosexual relationships."

Same thing.



Also another argument used by pro gay marriage crowd is that their hypothalmus is smaller, false.


William Byne, MD, PhD, Director of the Laboratory of Neuroanatomy and Morphometrics at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, wrote in his 1995 article "Science and Belief: Psychobiological Research on Sexual Orientation," published in the Journal of Homosexuality, that:


"The search for anatomical sex differences in the brain has a long history of producing results that were consistent with the researchers' biases but were ultimately discredited by their inability to be replicated...


Even though reports of structural sex differences abound, the only structural sex difference in the human brain that has proven to be consistently replicable is the dimorphism in its overall size, which is large in men; the extent to which this difference is simply in proportion to the sex difference in body size is controversial."

So studies that say this are controversial, and have no proof. He is skeptical, and thinks their false.


This concludes my case as of now, I will add on to it, keep refuting yours, and add more contention most likely next round.







Debate Round No. 2
CAPLlock

Pro

CAPLlock forfeited this round.
16kadams

Con

Extend all arguments
Debate Round No. 3
CAPLlock

Pro

I'm sorry for the FF.


a. The divorce rate in America for first marriage, vs second or third marriage
50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce
adding gay marriage would add on to that mess, further weakening the institution of marriage.
http://www.divorcerate.org......


I don't see why GM(Gay Marriage) would mess up the institution of marriage more then normal


b. AIDS
Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)1 represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s. In 2006, MSM accounted for more than half (53%) of all new HIV infections in the United States, and MSM with a history of injection drug use (MSM-IDU) accounted for an additional 4% of new infections. At the end of 2006, more than half (53%) of all people living with HIV in the United States were MSM or MSM-IDU. Since the beginning of the US epidemic, MSM have consistently represented the largest percentage of persons diagnosed with AIDS and persons with an AIDS diagnosis who have died.

Gay Marriage has nothing to do with AIDS. Dont have sex with anyone with AIDS. Gays know this.

So gays have a high % of aids, and letting them marry uld actually increase the number of aids patients because since thy have a 50% divorce rate, they can spre to their next spouse.

Prove please.

c. Christians

America is still mostly chrisian, and allowing gay marriage would royally make them mad. Here's why christians anti-gay:

Genesis 19 (Sodom and Gomorrah)

 Leviticus 18:22

Romans 1:17-32
1 Corinthians 6:9-13 (and 1 Timothy 1:9-14)

The reason I have not spelled it out is because most people know what are in these verses.
It doesn't matter. Your "Appealing to the majority"


Well your christian stuff is against the bible, and my christian stuff.
Since you want christian rules to apply then gay marriage should be illegal. So you just fed my argument.
I never mentioned my religon. I also never said any of this.



C2: They have more of a chance to have AIDS

Well I explained that their group of people has a lot of aids infections in it, but I will explain in more detail.

In 2007, MSM were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women.


































Gay people have the same chance has everyone esle.

C4: It is not natural

Since it is not natural to marry a dog, that concept shoul dbe illegal. That same rule applies to gays.

So anything thats not from nature is bad? How about lab made drugs? Are they bad?





16kadams

Con

"I don't see why GM(Gay Marriage) would mess up the institution of marriage more then normal"

According to a Dutch study, same-sex "partnerships" for young men are temporal at best, and men in "steady partnerships" have an average of eight partners per year aside from their "main" partner.

So therefore when caught cheating they will break up, and if married divorce.

A recent study on homosexual relationships finds they last 1-1/2 years on average [1]

So since their relationships are shorter, they would divorce more. Raising the divorce rate, and therefor hurting the institution of marriage.

"Gay Marriage has nothing to do with AIDS. Dont have sex with anyone with AIDS. Gays know this."

lol, straight people know this, yet they still get aids. Also In my recent health class a gay male was in a civil union yet obtained HIV, then it turned into aids. So other than drugs people get it from a marriage:

The most common ways that people become infected with HIV are:

* having s*xual intercourse with an infected partner.
* injecting drugs using a needle or syringe that has been used by someone who is infected.
* as a baby of an infected mother, during pregnancy, labour or delivery, or through breastfeeding.
[2]

So people still get aids through s*x. Even smart people can get aids, and you never know if your perhaps aids unless you and him/her get checked. So, they can still get aids and spread it around when married.

"Prove please."

I did prove that they have high percentages of aids above. And since they can spread it to their spouse then it applies. I will prove it again.

I used a government source last time, but I will use another non-governmental source proving my point.

Around 48% of all people diagnosed with AIDS in America in 2007 were probably exposed to HIV through male-to-male sexual contact. [3]

There are also other parts of the world where men who have sex with men, many of whom do not identify themselves as gay, are affected by HIV. For example, the primary HIV transmission route in Latin America is sex between men. In Brazil, men who have sex with men accounted for 40% of all AIDS diagnoses among males between 2000 and 2005. [3]

Also I will also use the next evidence about your "they will be careful argument"

Despite the continuing impact of HIV & AIDS there are signs that awareness is waning among young people. For example, research with British teenagers has shown decreasing awareness of HIV & AIDS. [3]

So awareness is decreasing. So being careful is becoming less likely.

"I never mentioned my religion. I also never said any of this."

I know but first round you said: "If gay people want to marry, so be it. It would be illegal to ban gay people marrying.

Christian stuff

Gay people could be an atheist. Would it be good ethics to apply Christian rules one atheist? "

end quote

So you used the christian argument, and I tried to refute it. So yes, I destroyed your argument.

"Gay people have the same chance has everyone esle."

Why? You argue they should, so show me and the voters a good reason why. Also I will show you that they do not have same rights. (they do in new york, hawaii, a few other states, and sates that have civil unions). S about 1/2 of the states grant = rights to them, but once again, prove why they should have them.

Go to my 4 source that proves that gays don't have the same rights...yet...and well, the laws are on my side.

"So anything thats not from nature is bad? How about lab made drugs? Are they bad?"

a few things, yes lab made drugs are bad. lol. Why ask that, those are unnatural btw. But now the naturalist argument:

Marrying a horse is unnatural, so since marring a man naturally is bad too.

Also we should reject unnatural things a it has harm, aka aids in this case. Some unnatural things are good, aka glasses and such, but much of the time unnatural things are detrimental, like lab made drugs.

Now I will add a few more arguments.

lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender = (LGBT) teens.

Gays are more likely to do drugs

A study by Dr. Michael P. Marshal of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center revealed that LGBT teens are 190 percent more likely to use drugs and alcohol than are heterosexual teens, and that the usage rate is even higher among certain subgroups. [5]

For example, Marshal's study, which was published in the April 2008 edition of the journal Addiction, documented that the prevalence of drug or alcohol use among bisexual youth is 340 percent greater than the rate among straight teens. Among lesbian youth, the number rises to 400 percent. [5]

This is a great reason because If they do drugs, they may make, talk into, or tell their parter to try them. Not all gays do drugs, but they are at higher risk. So if you keep gay marriage illegal they won't spread it to their partners as much because marriage includes trust, and boyfreind and girlfreind have less of that. So, if they are married their wife/husband would problem listen to them more often.

Also gays are more likely to sustain abuse from their partners.

sing a cross-sectional survey sample of 817 men who have sex with men (MSM) in the Chicago area, this study tested the effect of psychological and demographic factors generally associated with intimate partner abuse and examined their relationship to various health problems. Overall, 32.4% (n = 265) of participants reported any form of relationship abuse in a past or current relationship; 20.6% (n = 168) reported a history of verbal abuse ("threatened physically or sexually, publicly humiliated, or controlled"), 19.2% (n = 157) reported physical violence ("hit, kicked, shoved, burned, cut, or otherwise physically hurt"), and 18.5% (n = 151) reported unwanted sexual activity. [6]

ew...well yes do you want more or less partners abused? Less, so don't allow gay marriage.

Also even though the bible argument is a bad one, I used it because he tried to use the christian one, so if you want answers for you Christians go here: http://www.catholic.com...

So far I have been having fun. :) good luck, and I hope my footnotes are correct because sometimes I mix them up when I have so many sources. I await your response :) VOTE CON

Sources:

http://www.washingtontimes.com... [1]
http://www.avert.org... [2]
http://www.avert.org... [3]
http://www.enderminh.com... [4]
http://www.teen-drug-abuse.org... [5]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... [6]
Debate Round No. 4
CAPLlock

Pro

This debate is getting messy.


Letting GM be allowed won't stop AIDS. It will always be around no matter what.

For example; two gays, Bob and Jack have smex. Jack has AIDS. Bob then gets AIDS.


But, did Jack get AIDS from being careless or something esle? 16k didnt prove this.


-----------------------------------------------------


"I never mentioned my religion. I also never said any of this."

I know but first round you said: "If gay people want to marry, so be it. It would be illegal to ban gay people marrying.

How does that prove anything? Christains (which I am) shouldn't hate gays. There is nothing in that snipbit that proves this point.

------------------------------------------------------


So you used the christian argument, and I tried to refute it. So yes, I destroyed your argument

Im sorry, but this is unclear.
------------------------------------------------------


Why? You argue they should, so show me and the voters a good reason why. Also I will show you that they do not have same rights. (they do in new york, hawaii, a few other states, and sates that have civil unions). S about 1/2 of the states grant = rights to them, but once again, prove why they should have them.

Because there is no good reason why not.
As said, your giving special rights to non-gays.
------------------------------------------------------


a few things, yes lab made drugs are bad. lol. Why ask that, those are unnatural btw. But now the naturalist argument:

Marrying a horse is unnatural, so since marring a man naturally is bad too.

Also we should reject unnatural things a it has harm, aka aids in this case. Some unnatural things are good, aka glasses and such, but much of the time unnatural things are detrimental, like lab made drugs.

This is what I like to call "the Nature Fallacy". You cant say GM is bad because it is unnatural, because not all unnatural things are bad. Houses, cars, books, meds, clothes etc. You need more then "Because it is unnatural"

--------------------------------------------------------

Gays are more likely to do drugs

Banning GM wont stop this.
-------------------------------------------------------

Also gays are more likely to sustain abuse from their partners.

sing a cross-sectional survey sample of 817 men who have sex with men (MSM) in the Chicago area, this study tested the effect of psychological and demographic factors generally associated with intimate partner abuse and examined their relationship to various health problems. Overall, 32.4% (n = 265) of participants reported any form of relationship abuse in a past or current relationship; 20.6% (n = 168) reported a history of verbal abuse ("threatened physically or sexually, publicly humiliated, or controlled"), 19.2% (n = 157) reported physical violence ("hit, kicked, shoved, burned, cut, or otherwise physically hurt"), and 18.5% (n = 151) reported unwanted sexual activity. [6]

So? What is stopping them from finding a nice person?

---------------------------------------------------
16kadams

Con

Thanks for the debate =)

"Letting GM be allowed won't stop AIDS. It will always be around no matter what. "

It's true, but allowing it won't stop the spread, or slow it down. Also when married you have trust then you do it then its a whoops moment. This can happen to anyone. But chances are is that jack did have a careless. Also as shown below, since they have many partners they spread it a lot. So yes, even marriage doesn't stop it, and helps spread it because of the stats stated.

"How does that prove anything? Christains (which I am) shouldn't hate gays. There is nothing in that snipbit that proves this point."

I agree, I do not hate gays. But religeon bans them from marriage. So you brougt up christianity, my duty was to refute it, and it was done. The bible bans it. So I have refuted your argument with the verses above.

"Im sorry, but this is unclear."

I was refuting this:
"Christian stuff

Gay people could be an atheist. Would it be good ethics to apply Christian rules one atheist? "

And it was refuted. I will use the same erses again.
Genesis 19 (Sodom and Gomorrah)

 Leviticus 18:22

Romans 1:17-32

1 Corinthians 6:9-13 (and 1 Timothy 1:9-14)

that is my proof, and if you don't belive this is ani-gay then look it up.


"Because there is no good reason why not.
As said, your giving special rights to non-gays."

Since you where proposing this law you had the BOP, you never fufiled that ey deserve these non-gay rights.

"This is what I like to call "the Nature Fallacy". You cant say GM is bad because it is unnatural, because
not all unnatural things are bad. Houses, cars, books, meds, clothes etc. You need more then "Because it is unnatural"



It is an important reason, why give rights to a non exitant race? If it is unnatural then they do not exist. So giving rights to non existant beings is odd. There is evidence for both sides, odd you didn't try to refute it.

"Banning GM wont stop this."

Legilizing it won't either. Guys look at m former argument for more info.

"So? What is stopping them from finding a nice person? "

Nothing, I am just saying that their at a higher risk. By a lot. Another reason to ban gay marriage.

Now I feel like adding more arguments, voters please don't say drops count as conssecions, but add thes in to my final arguments,

These arguments are written by a gay person I think due to his "we view" things and sytax.

Gay relationships are qualitatively different from straight relationships. We understand sex differently; we have a different model for what our partners means to us and their places in our lives. The fundamental model of marriage that most heterosexuals embrace--and famously proclaim as "family values"--just doesn't apply to us. And we shouldn't want it to. [1]

Gay relationships are not based on this kind of attraction at all. Sexual attraction is not about the complementarity of the physical organs. Gay people don't have sex in order to complete a bio-hormonal process. Our sex is not about glands and organs.
Gay people don't see their partners as "other halves,"with body parts and traits and gender-defined roles that complete them. [1]

I think that he is saying that gay s*x isn't for love, rather for pleasure, downgrading the point of marriage. I do not know how true that is, but this PHD guy must have some truth in there.


Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a “separate but equal” institution is always constitutional.

the gay crowd alwys says that it isn't = because it doesn't have tax benifits, yes it does because you file taxes as partered, married, single etc.


Robert Knight, are critical because they say civil unions endow the same rights and privileges of heterosexual marriages — alleging that they allow same-sex marriage by using a different name.


http://www.lsnjlaw.org...




well thats it...have fun! vote con! or po whichever one you thought won. =)


http://tobyjohnson.com... [1]


Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
Typo, I meant to ask you 19kadams. just get you two mixed up I guess.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
@ maikuru

sorry
Posted by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
All of these font, style, and spacing changes throughout the debate are very distracting.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
Lordknuckle, want to debate this sometime?
Posted by CAPLlock 4 years ago
CAPLlock
Sorry for the FF. I could not post a good debate since im on moblie
Posted by CAPLlock 4 years ago
CAPLlock
You have not posted any questions. As said in the first round you are binded by my rules and etc.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
should i take this...or not...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 4 years ago
ConservativePolitico
CAPLlock16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had way more convincing arguments while Pro spent a lot of time whining and trying to make Con elaborate more while providing very little new evidence himself. Easy argument win for Con.
Vote Placed by cameronl35 4 years ago
cameronl35
CAPLlock16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for now