The Instigator
123456789123456789
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JasperFrancisShickadance
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Gay marriage is moral and should be legalized

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...
JasperFrancisShickadance
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/28/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 828 times Debate No: 55586
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

123456789123456789

Pro

Round one, Acceptance. No new arguments may be presented in round 4, only rebuttals.
Good luck!!
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

I accept. *Shakes sweaty hands*

First I would like to say how gay marriage is already legal in MANY places so that's not much of an issue for you.

Let the arguing begin!
Debate Round No. 1
123456789123456789

Pro

Foreword: Gay marriage is only legal in 19 states in the US. Gay marriage is legal in 17 countries world wide, 19 if you count the US and Mexico, but it is only legal in certain places in those countries. and

I will now present my arguments:

P1) Unjust bigotry: People are discriminated against for their sexuality, even to the point of lynching [1]. In the workplace, some gay employees will be paid less, fired, or not hired in the first place do to these prejudices [2]. The legalization and normalization of gay marriage would help with this issue greatly.

P2) Financial benefits: By the law, marriages are both a civil and financial union, denying gay people this right will hurt their income and assets. This could cause debt to rise or poorer credit. [3]

P3) Tax benefits: Gay unions could bring in many millions of dollars tax revenue year round [4a]. This is proven by the NYC city income increase with gay marriage [4b].

P4) Fairness: It is not at all fair if the LGBT community cannot marry but the heterosexual community cannot.

P5) It is not a choice: If it were a choice no one would be gay. Not because it is wrong, because of the discrimination.

P6) Who is it hurting: If you are right, being gay is not moral and gays will go to hell, (if that is in fact what you believe) they are already going to hell and it doesn't matter if they can get married lawfully.

P7) Government: The USA has no official religion, its ideals of impartiality should reflect that.

I will now rebut possible arguments by my opponent:

R1) Argument rebutted, It is agains the bible: specifically it is against Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13, If we choose to follow Leviticus, polyester should also be illegal, Leviticus 19:19 says not to mix fabrics.

R2) Argument rebutted, God hates gays: John 4:8 "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.", if this is true god does not hate gays. If god is love and hates gays he is the opposite of himself, which is impossible.

R3) Argument rebutted, Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve: I prey to god you don't use this argument, it is the N-word for LGBT people.

R3) Argument rebutted, Only use the word "marriage" for straight unions, use the term "Civil Union" for LGBT unions: So, separate but equal. That turned out great!!! (sarcasm)

I will now pose questions to my opponent:

Q1) if god hates gays, why does he do so?

Q2) What harm does it do?

Q3) If god hates gays, why do they exist

[f1] http://www.pewforum.org...
[1] http://www.wsws.org......
[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com......
[3] http://money.howstuffworks.com...... (read all slides)
[4a] http://www-personal.umich.edu......
[4b] http://money.cnn.com......
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

P1. I don't know why people treat gays less except for the fact that it goes against traditional vows and a lot are offended and some just don't want normal marriage to change. Some bosses don't allow gays because it interferes with their work and goes against what the boss believes for his company.

Clarification: why is gay marriage considered wrong to some people? Because marriage is only intended for a man and a woman. Same sex ruins the meaning of family, it ruins the friendships of the kids, and it leaves one gender out (this shouldn't be the right environment for children to grow up in).

P2. ?

P3. Is our goal to get money for the economy and government? Go back to the clarification I wrote and it all comes down to families. Gays might bring in money but the families are still different. The criminal activity will go up in numbers because of the kids having 'no dad' or 'no mom.'

http://thefatherlessgeneration.wordpress.com...

P5. ?

P6. As a Christian (like me) morality is not relevant. I believe in God and the Bible. The Bible says marriage is strictly man and woman, that's how sex happens, that's how it should stay because if the family is not that way then there is someone left out (either the mom or the dad). Children go under custody. It is not a matter of religion, IT IS JUST WHAT WE THINK IS RIGHT.

R1. When was the Bible written? Anyways, Leviticus is a journal of a person about 3,000 years ago. Polyester was not "banned" by God. Perhaps it was there culture

R2. I don't believe God hates (except evil), in fact he has a place in his heart for everyone including gays. We are all human, incapable of being perfect, and no sin is worse than another. But since gay marriage goes against what God intends for us, Christians disagree with gays. But we don't hate them.

Your questions are not specified, but for Q2 I will say this: gays hurt families. See the website I gave. I think I answered the rest earlier.
Debate Round No. 2
123456789123456789

Pro

I did not present more sources because I did not supply new arguments.
I thank my opponent and will now rebut his points:

P1. Who decides what "traditional vows" are? Also, who says what "normal marriage" is? Either way, bigotry is bigotry.
On the clarification: Who says marriage is for a man and a woman. How does it ruin the meaning of family? If each party loves each other and want to spend their lives together, who are we to stop them? Give me one instance and a source of gay marriage ruining the kid's friendships, then talk to me about that. Ok, if we cannot leave out one gender, why is being a single parent legal?

Clarification of P2. This point covered the financial benefits of marriage denied to homosexuals.

P3. Actually this website is more against single parents. Also how does it ruin marriage? If it both brings money in, and helps other people, it should be legal.

P4. Uhh you didn't rebut that.

P5. My fifth point states that no person would choose to be gay because of the problems they have, this was a point to state that we need to let them be themselves.

P6. So, morality is irrelevant??? The ten commandments are morals and I believe you find those relevant. Yes and who exactly made The United States, a religiously free nation, should be governed by the bible? Feeling the religious freedom right now. Again, what about single parents, that leaves out one parent. Sex is not the purpose of marriage!!! If it was infertile couples should not be allowed to marry. Well, you are against gay marriage because of the bible, it is a matter of religion. Calm down I'm not persecuting you, I respect your opinion.

R1. You have no way of knowing that the opinion that homosexuals are an "atrocity" wasn't part of their culture.

R2. Ok I understand, you may not hate them. Conversely, there are those that do hate gays (I.E. homophobic people). I do not believe you hate gays. I was simply rebutting the argument that god does.

About Q1. You actually did not answer that.

Q2. Like I stated before, If that is why gay marriage should be illegal, so should single parenting.

About Q3. You really didn't answer this question either
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

First, gay marriage isn't the same kind of thing as single parenting but there are similarities which do bring them both onto this topic more so -- such as the fact that they are both a different way of having a family, (gay marriage with kid[s] isn't any more a family than single parenting is). I am against single parenting from the same perspective as gay marriage, but there are different reasons for single parenting such as the

P1. From the web: 'Traditional = existing in or as part of a tradition; long-existing. Habitually done.' The vows at a normal, traditional wedding, says things like this: "I now pronounce you husband and wife" or "You may kiss the bride." Not that this is the most important argument, but what happens at a gay wedding: "You are now wife and wife,
or...well, I just have to post this site!

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

P2. For centuries, people have considered "marriage" along the lines of 'a man and a woman who come together,' most of the time not only because they love each other but because they want kids. This arises another situation: what will the gays do if they want kids? Adoption, the biggest option, is odd because not only does the adopted kid not know who his biological parents are, but he has two moms/dads who are married but cannot have sex. Say there's a boy who just got adopted by two [married] women. His only guidance will be from a gender that don't have the same interests or experiences as he. Imagine his life, other kids asking him about his dad, etc. Also there are many cases where a guy/girl has sex with someone and runs off, with the child, soon to get a gay marriage and put more questions and missing links into the child's life. Talking about legalization though, single parenting is, a lot of times, not a choice and that is a reason the government allows that. This is ALSO messed up and, like I said, I don't agree with it one bit, but gay marriage is a choice that could be devastating to a child and/or the people around them.

P3. Again, money isn't the issue here and I stated my reason why I think being gay ruins the definition of marriage. Where does it help others?

P4 I think it's not fair to people like me, who don't agree with this sort of marriage, that now we all have to assume that it's could be anybody getting married to anybody when you say the word 'marriage.' We all have to understand the consequences of allowing anybody to be gay because if we don't things will change dramatically, mostly bad changes that most Americans do not want. (Sorry, I was going to rebut that but I got sidetracked..!)

P5. You say 'let them be themselves' and it makes me wonder if you care who/what people marry. I love dogs but that doesn't mean I should marry them. Even if they could talk and share feelings, dogs wouldn't be aloud to marry humans, and it's the same sort of thing with same-sex. It doesn't make sense.

Don't Limit the Freedom to Marry Cats!

P6. It says lots of times in the Bible that God hates evil and the immoral is evil. Being gay, according to God, IS immoral, but does that mean God hates the actual gay people? Not at all. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 clearly says 'Do not be deceived: neither sexually immoral... ...nor men who practice homosexuality.' But many verses also say 'God loves all.'

I will argue with the statement that 'I am against gay marriage because of the Bible,' although I do believe the Bible is right at all times and evangelism is my ultimate goal; I say that our society will be forever changed because of legalizing this type of marriage. More hearts broken. The word 'marry' itself means 'to come together, join in form of marriage' but if you think about what happens afterwards, several OTHER words come to mind also: including 'divorce,' 'fights,' etc. Imagine the wide variety of crushes you will be able to have once the word 'gay' becomes normal. Imagine how much the divorce rates will go UP, and the numbers of which gender is more single, blah blah blah, and I don't want that for America's society. It's more than just love for the partner, it's love for the children, and that can't happen properly without a mother-father environment, for example it makes it easier for a kid to understand and relate to each gender with two distinct and diverse [opposite-sex] parents. When the children are young they go through development stages, from infancies needing motherhood to young boys needing a man to guide them and give masculine identity.

http://www.openbible.info...

R1. What you said about not knowing the people in the Bible's time's culture doesn't have to do with legalizing gay marriage everywhere and the PROBLEMS I have brought up about the concept. If you're really interested, the other verses in the Bible say obvious things about homosexual immorality so I believe God doesn't WANT gay to be allowed or done.

R2. I want to make it CRYSTAL CLEAR that God does NOT hate or tempt anybody. He created us all and wants us to do NOT what man's laws say, and assuming God did create us, He also has the capacity to know what's ahead and what's right and wrong.
Q1 God doesn't hate gays, like the Bible says. That's what I believe and yes, I did say that before.

Q2. Harm:

a). Homosexuals can sue people who are exercising their religious beliefs. Now this goes AGAINST everything you were saying about how Americans are free to practice religions, etc.
b). Gays are NOT, like you said they WERE, a build to financial improvement in government. Did you know, in fact, that homosexuals don't live as long as heterosexuals? This means more health bills to pay. HIV/AIDS are common in the LGBT communities.
c). Gay marriage means having the morals of the minority forced upon the majority.
d). As I said, legalization of gay marriage would mean redefinition of 'marriage' in the first place and this new definition is also forced upon the majority (see A and C).
e). Society can be harmed also with the fact that population goes down. with so many gay marriages.
f). It exposes adopted children within potential homosexual unions to ridicule from others.

I end with this question: where does the 'freedom to marry anyone' help our society?
Debate Round No. 3
123456789123456789

Pro

123456789123456789 forfeited this round.
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

I am angry that my opponent didn't reply to my thoughts. I awaited, eagerly, for rebuttals of what I said, but because he forfeited I will not give any more arguments.

I think I proved my point (how Gay Marriage is not moral and shouldn't be legalized). Thank-you for putting up this debate, pro.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
Religious morality is based on a book that condones rape and slavery amongst other things.

REAL morality is based on empathy.
Treat others the way you want to be treated.
Posted by Forgiven 2 years ago
Forgiven
123456789123456789, I don't understand your first sentence. Going on, God's morals are not subjective. If they were subjective, then there would still be no real right and wrong or good and bad. God's nature is good. He has set morals that are objective, which means that whether we think that they are right or wrong or good or bad doesn't really matter. For example, let's say that my house is a cube, but someone believes that my house is a sphere. Does that make it a sphere? Of course not! It is still a cube no matter what someone else believes! God has defined right and wrong and good and bad. He doesn't believe it anything is good or bad or right or wrong; He knows whether it is good or bad or right or wrong! It's like saying, "well I don't believe murder is wrong," in court. Will they still convict you? Yes! It is still illegal no matter what we believe. Also, to say that I, "know God through blind faith," is silly. First off, faith isn't how to "know" God. Faith is believing in Him when there may not be evidence (though logical arguments can be made to support His existence). Secondly, there is no such thing as, "blind faith." That's still just called, "faith." Like I said, I believe that many things point to His existence. I don't just believe in God because someone walked up to me and said, "God is real." Later you say, "a book which may or may not have been written by this god" What book? I never indicated that God wrote a book. As a matter of fact, I have no reason to believe that God has written any books for us to read. While I do see how that would be a credible source, I never said there was one. However, I will say that I believe the Bible is God-breathed. I don't think He is the author, but certainly the inspiration.
Posted by 123456789123456789 2 years ago
123456789123456789
I did not decide that it inarguably moral. The title and my being pro says this is what I believe and that I am open to debate. Also, does that mean that the judge's subjective morals are those that we need to follow? Is it the subjective morals of your god who you know about through blind faith and a book which may or may not have been written by this god?
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
Agreed, Forgiven, and well said. My opponent should hear you out.
Posted by Forgiven 2 years ago
Forgiven
Time out, who decided that gay marriage is moral? You? Because I believe in objective morals that God has bestowed upon us. I don't really think it matters if we think it is good or bad or right or wrong because that doesn't change whether it actually is good or bad or right or wrong. I believe that the Just Judge gets to decide. Besides, if I believed in subjective morals (People believing in whatever they believe is right and wrong or good and bad), then what happens when ours are different? What if I say, "Killing humans for fun is moral."? Who are you to tell me that it's not? So...does that mean that I just get to kill people because I believe that it's okay? So why since you believe gay marriage should be legal, should I believe it, too? Even IF I believed in subjective morals deriving from no real foundation and I said I don't believe that homosexuality is moral! Then who's right? God has defined what is right and what is wrong, and I follow God, so that's why I can't agree with even the fact that you believe that gay marriage is moral.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by travis18352 2 years ago
travis18352
123456789123456789JasperFrancisShickadanceTied
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: pro forfitted
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
123456789123456789JasperFrancisShickadanceTied
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.