The Instigator
Yraelz
Con (against)
Winning
54 Points
The Contender
Advidoct
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points

Gay marriage should be illegal.

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: 3/9/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,928 times Debate No: 2855
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (19)

 

Yraelz

Con

I extend this debate challenge to Conspicuous_Conservative along with a thank you for accepting my last debate topic. Should Conspicuous_Conservative decline my debate challenge I ask that my opponent have thought out this issue carefully before accepting the challenge.

I ask that voters vote on who does the better debating in this case and not on what stance you support. As much as voting on an agreeable stance seems appealing, it simply moots the point of debate and creates an opinion poll. I have voted many times on issues I have opposed in favor of the better debater and I ask that voters pay me the same courtesy.

My stance:

I am against the idea that Gay marriage should be illegal. My feelings and thoughts lead to support the position that gay marriage should be as legal as any other form of marriage.

I now stand open for my opponents case.
Advidoct

Pro

Advidoct forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
Yraelz

Con

The fact that my opponent either closed his account or had his account closed makes it rather hard for me to debate him. But I suppose I'll make a point so there is something actually standing on my side in this debate round.

Point 1: I stand in firm affirmation of the idea that homosexuality is not a conscious choice but rather the product of a persons environment and genetic makeup. I affirm this point because of my experience as a human. As a human, I am incapable of changing my sexual preference. It is impossible for me to right now decide that I suddenly like men. Maybe I am unique in this aspect, perhaps everyone reading this debate has the amazing ability to change who or even what they are attracted to. I however, through conversation with others, seriously doubt that anyone reading this debate has the ability to change sexual preference on a whim.

Therefor, a gay person, being a person, does not have the ability to change sexual preferences. If we as a society are to say that they do have this ability then we as a society concede that they are in some way superhuman. However having talked with gays I have never received the idea from them that they can change their sexual orientation at will. Thus through my experience I can only assume that they are like the rest of the human race. (A novel thought.... lol)

My point is this. If a gay person has not the ability to change his or her sexual desire should we therefor punish him by not allowing a union. If persay a train driver was driving a train and the breaks went out on it would we punish him for the people killed? If a was physically thrown into a pile of highly explosive materials which in turn killed many people, would we blame her? Obviously not, gays are no different, if they do not have a choice then why bother punishing them.

Point 2: The novel idea that perhaps being gay is not wrong. Does it actually bring any negative effects to our society?

Point 3: Gays don't hurt people with their actions do they? Taking this from a republican stand point, what right does the government have to regulate the personal lives of its citizens. I may not agree with being gay (I don't personally care) but that doesn't mean I agree with the government regulating their personal lives.

The end....
Advidoct

Pro

Advidoct forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Yraelz

Con

That was special....

"Extend all points, my opponent obviously says nothing as his account was banned for some reason."

=)
Advidoct

Pro

Advidoct forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by HellKat 8 years ago
HellKat
Most, but then we get some people on here who just don't seem to care because they think they're right. But you have a point, that sounds like a good idea.
Posted by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
it would force people to either a) leave an intelligent, articulated reason for voting for a particular side or b) show everyone which voters are mindless/bias idiots.
most people dont want to be thought an idiot, so theyll leave a good rfd.
Posted by HellKat 8 years ago
HellKat
Oh ok. But what exactly would that do?
Posted by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
RFD is debate shorthand for reason for decision. if the site required one then people would have to post a reason for whichever side they voted for.
Posted by HellKat 8 years ago
HellKat
What's an RDF? Whatever it is I agree with you.
Posted by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
ya, alot of people just read the topic and vote on which side they agree on, regardless of how the debate went. which is why an RFD should be required...
Posted by HellKat 8 years ago
HellKat
I can't believe he acctually got two votes... oh wait, yes I can, idiots are everywhere.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Sorry, I was going on the false premise that if Gays were proven to be equal in regard to straights they would afford the same rights by default. =)
Posted by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
since pro never wrote/talked ill just critique cons case.
1 personally i don't entirely believe sexual orientation is wholly genetic argument, i also don't think it helped your case.
2 instead of just having a tag, explain your point
3 true, but again, nothing to do with marriage
this case is advocating the legalization not gay marriage, but the legalization of being gay. your points don't actually address the issue of gay marriage at all, just the issue of being gay.
i would of brought in a civil liberties point, that since straight people can marry and get special benefits for doing so, denying gays the right to marry is discriminatory.
Posted by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
Wow! Great debate! You were both very enlightening!
19 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by HellKat 8 years ago
HellKat
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by livi 8 years ago
livi
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by eweb53 8 years ago
eweb53
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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 
Vote Placed by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by liberalconservative 8 years ago
liberalconservative
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Harboggles 8 years ago
Harboggles
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by mrqwerty 8 years ago
mrqwerty
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by DrAlexander 8 years ago
DrAlexander
YraelzAdvidoctTied
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:30