The Instigator
kenballer
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Wallstreetatheist
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points

Gay marriage is a Civil rights issue

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 4 votes the winner is...
Wallstreetatheist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/14/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,707 times Debate No: 21292
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (4)

 

kenballer

Con

Sorry for the delay
Wallstreetatheist

Pro

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
kenballer

Con

THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE

In Murphy v. Ramsey (1885) the U.S. Supreme Court stated:

"[C]ertainly no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary in the founding of a free, self-governing commonwealth, fit to rank as one of
the coordinate state of the Union, than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one MAN and one WOMAN in the holy state of matrimony; the sure
foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guaranty of the reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement."

The U.S. Supreme Court has always defined marriage to be between a man and a woman for the continuation of society and never did they say that the fundamental right to marry included same sex marriage or even plural marriage. In fact, in both cases, the Supreme Court rejected the existence of such definitions or rights in the past. Now, let me provide the evidence that there is no fundamental right to gay marriage

5 years after the Loving decision, The U.S. Supreme Court in Baker v. Nelson in 1972 regarding the issue of Same sex marriage when they endorsed a Minnesota supreme court decision. The case will show you that the same court in Loving v Virginia not only distinguished same sex marriage from interracial marriage, but established it as a right that does not exist under the constitution and never did. They also rejected and refuted many of the other same arguments gay activists make today. There are plenty of state and federal courts that mention Baker as a U.S. SCOTUS ruling: http://en.wikipedia.org...

"The institution of marriage as a union man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis. Skinner V. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541, 62 S.Ct. 1110, 1113, 86 L.Ed. 1655, 1660 (1942), which invalidated Oklahoma's Habitual Criminal Sterilization Act on equal protection grounds, stated in part: "Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race." This historic institution manifestly is more deeply founded than the asserted contemporary concept of marriage and societal interests for which petitioners contend. The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a charter for RESTRUCTURING it by judicial LEGISLATION."

http://www.cas.umt.edu...

As you can see, Marriage wouldn't be "fundamental" to the "existence" and "survival" of humanity if it was completely delinked from procreation or had nothing to do with reproductive potential. Marriage is the regulation of procreation and rearing of children. This has been deemed the most compelling of ALL compelling state interests by the U.S. supreme court several more times. Let me explain precisely why this is the case.

The Purpose of CIVIL Marriage:

The traditional view of marriage is based on the anatomical possibility or "natural teleology of the body" where only a man and a woman, and only two people, not three, can generate a child and raise the child through the natural complimentary element of both genders. Since this is the case, The law has a presumption of reproductive and child-rearing of potential on the part of heterosexual couples.

Procreation and rearing of children is a biologically driven act that happens in nature. As an insurance policy,The state issues Marriage licenses just in case a couple naturally procreates either by accident or by choice without legal and social support in order to regulate procreation/ rearing of children.

The Means to Achieve this Purpose:

The state uses the traditional idea of marriage ,as a means to achieve this purpose, in order to encourage heterosexual couples to obtain a marriage license. There are two theories involving the structure and stability of families where the idea of marriage achieves this purpose:

A. The Responsible Procreation Theory

One way is through the responsible procreation theory which involves establishing family stablity within heterosexual relationships. Family stability is about how many transitions in the environment the child may experience during the child development process. The state uses the notion of Marriage to encourage couples to procreate and/or rear their children in a stable environment that is best situated to raise children.

There is empirical evidence that supports the responsible procreation theory. In terms of the selection process, Studies show that people, who cohabit, compared to those who don't, have less traditional ideals or views of marriage. Then, according to other studies, they would not only be more likely to cohabit but more likely to divorce from prior cohabitation.

This means whether the cause of the good child outcomes from couples is based on the idea of traditional marriage that people believe in or the physical experience of marriage, it does not matter. It would still be warranted for the state to use and promote a traditonal notion of marriage to ensure a stable home.

Just go to this website for the studies p.2: http://eprints.qut.edu.au...
Or http://www.smartmarriages.com...

B. The Optimal partnership theory

Another approach is through the optimal partnership theory which involves family structure. Family structure is about who the child is being raised with during the child development process.
The state uses marriage to promote the ideal partnership between two biological married parents.

There is also empirical evidence supporting the optimal partnership theory. Almost Every study demonstrates that children from two biological parents fare better in every category of social and psychological measurement. They are less likely to be poor, to exhibit behavioral problems, to struggle in school etc. than children in any other living arrangement. Here is an institute that mention the studies:
http://www.urban.org...

EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE

Discrimination: "treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.

1. Sex Equality

Bans on interracial marriage were about the segregation of protected classes ,which has been deemed in the Brown decision to be another form of discrimination,. When it comes to the Sexes, The Supreme Court has never ruled integration to be a form of discrimination. Thus, there is no discrimination between the sexes because men and woman can equally marry someone of the opposite sex and both cannot marry the same sex.

Sexual Orientation Equality

As I explained before, the purpose of marriage is for encouraging responsible procreation and this is why there is a fundamental right to marry someone of the opposite sex only. Thus, there is no evidence of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation either because gays and straights can equally marry somebody of the opposite sex for responsible procreation and rearing of children.
Wallstreetatheist

Pro

Gay Marriage is a civil rights issue.

My opponent's case does not directly address the resolution, so we are left in ambiguous confusion between several of his views. Does he think gay marriage is a religious issue? a moral issue? a biological issue? a civil rights issue? We'll have to find out in the next round.

My case will link gay marriage through the property rights and equality, and thus qualify it as a civil rights issue.

Civil rights: The rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality. [1]

Civil rights have a legal as well as a philosophical basis. In the United States civil rights are usually thought of in terms of the specific rights guaranteed in the Constitution: freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press, and the rights to due process of law and to equal protection under the law. [2]

Certain civil rights (such as the right to equality, freedom, good governance, justice, and due process of law) are inalienable like human rights and natural rights. [3]

The Equal Protection Clause

Every current amendment to the constitution was written to protect the civil rights of a group of people or all people (e.g. press, religious sects, free speech, racial minorities, etc.) Whereas states and laws regulate, the constitution deregulates, untangles, liberates, and protects the civil rights of its people. The US constitution states, “to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men” The Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, the government may not "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." State laws against gay marriage violate the spirit of this amendment by denying consenting gay people of legal standing the ability to marry, while allowing other people to marry. Furthermore, laws prohibiting gay marriage are written to "protect the sanctity of marriage." If the government striving to protect sanctity with legislation, then it is "[making] law respecting an establishment of religion," which is an activity expressly prohibited under the First Amendment to the US Constitution. By depriving a specific group of people (gay people) of the freedom to marry while allowing other groups to do so freely is a blatant violation of equal protection of the laws, and therefore, of civil rights.

Full Faith and Credit Clause

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.” This clause exists so that the civil rights of a certain state’s people do not become invalidated when they enter into different states. This is a civil right that all citizens in the United States enjoy. However, one group’s rights have been infringed upon: when gay people marry in Massachusettes for example, and they move to Texas, their marriage is no longer considered valid. All the legal, financial, and societal benefits that flow from the governmental (civil) perspective of marriage cease to exist; thus, annulling the marital rights of that couple. This is another blatant violation of civil rights and stands in direct opposition to the spirit and letter of the US constitution.

Separation between Church and State

Our founding fathers knew of the horrors that could be unleashed upon civil rights when a government allies itself with religion, forming a theocracy. So they took measures to make sure this would not be a feature of their new republic. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” This is called the wall/separation between church and state. When a legislature enacts a law designed to protect sanctity of a marriage from a religious standpoint, they are conflicting with this Establishment Clause that was designed to respect the civil rights of its citizens by protecting against theocratic bullying.

Property Rights

Laws that prohibit the gay couples from using inheritance, hospital visitation, adoption, and other legal and financial and tax benefits of marriage are inherently discriminatory against the civil liberties and civil rights of its citizens through the property rights which we enjoy.

Thanks

[1] https://www.google.com...

[2] http://www.infoplease.com...

[3] http://www.businessdictionary.com...

Debate Round No. 2
kenballer

Con

kenballer forfeited this round.
Wallstreetatheist

Pro

THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE

My opponent mentions the case Murphy v. Ramsey (1885) in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Utah’s bigamy and polygamy by defining marriage between one man and one woman. This was done as purely numerical in nature, so no marriages of 2 men and one woman or 3 women and 1 man, etc.. Also, if the supreme court defines marriage as such through any ruling for the sake of argument, it is not passing that statement into law or depriving homosexuals of ever achieving marriage equality. Also, this contention doesn’t touch on the due process clause. Most of my opponent’s case is comprised of large quotes that show that marriage is an issue of civil law, and thus an individual’s right to marry exists, and gay marriage is a civil rights issue. He implicitly affirms the resolution,


The Purpose of CIVIL Marriage:

“The traditional view of marriage is based on the anatomical possibility or ‘natural teleology of the body’”
There are numerous flaws with this argument including the infertility, transvestites, and older couples who no longer have functioning of their sexual organs. This fails for a variety of reasons, and you didn’t tie it into the resolution. Most likely copy and pasted from another debate... Traditional marriage as you conceive it is not traditional marriage. Traditional marriage followed this forumla: a person said “I marry you,” then the other person said, “I marry you.” Then they were married. Marriage hardly ever took place in the church, and only knew about it because many kept records.


“Procreation and rearing of children is a biologically driven act that happens in nature.”
Yes, but nature also features 1,500 animal species that engage in homosexual behavior and homosexual relationships. If we look at your argument from nature, the natural teleogy argument assists gay marriage due to homosexual relationships existing in nature. Natural law then would achieve and uphold equality for all people.


The Optimal partnership theory
As far as family is concerned, gay parents actually raise children better on average than heterosexual parents, because 50% heterosexual parents have a child on accident, whereas homosexual parents actively choose to adopt and think about the decision.
[http://people.virginia.edu...]


EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE

Doesn’t address law.

Sex Equality

Irrelevant

Sexual Orientation Equality

If you were for sexual orientation equality, you would be for allowing gays to participate in a basic civil right: the right to marry.



My Case
My opponent dropped all of my contentions, as he forfeited the debate.

Take away all of the religious, social or other considerations, and look at it plainly: the word "marriage" is used on every level of government to describe how we are taxed, hold property, inherit property, establish credit, etc. That fact cannot be changed. The government treats married people differently than it does single people. This is a part of civil law, and treating homosexually gay people differently than straight people violates equality and makes it a civil rights issue.


I urge a strong Pro vote on this resolution. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Callen13 2 years ago
Callen13
ah i see.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 2 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
@Callen13
Forfeit
Posted by Callen13 2 years ago
Callen13
what does FF stand for?
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
I would debate this with pro >:D
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 2 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
Hello..?
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 2 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
Fix the sides, so that I argue for the civil rights issue, and you argue against. Change the rounds to 3 total, and I will accept.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 2 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
You are Con on the resolution, "Gay marriage is not a Civil rights issue," which mean you think it is a civil rights issue. I agree, so there is no reason for us to debate on it on this forum.

Also, I really don't care about gay marriage. What is your best argument against it?

Change this to a total of 3 rounds and I'll accept.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
kenballerWallstreetatheistTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Callen13 2 years ago
Callen13
kenballerWallstreetatheistTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con FF
Vote Placed by TUF 2 years ago
TUF
kenballerWallstreetatheistTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by cheesedingo1 2 years ago
cheesedingo1
kenballerWallstreetatheistTied
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 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: FF. nuf said.