The Instigator
kfarls
Pro (for)
Winning
40 Points
The Contender
Richard89
Con (against)
Losing
32 Points

Gay marriage should be legalized.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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: 1/9/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,509 times Debate No: 1610
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (21)

 

kfarls

Pro

Marriage and its definition has evolved over time, as society has evolved. It seems utterly ridiculous that in the United States, a country that prides itself on freedom, such a menial issue is even up for debate. This should not be a right gays should have to fight for, it should be one automatically bestowed on every citizen.
Richard89

Con

First of all I would like to correct you on your statement that gay marriage is a "menial issue." It is in fact one of the defining issues of our time. Historically the definition of marriage has rested on a bedrock of tradition, legal precedent, moral conviction, and theology that has been given complete support by the overwhelming majority of the people.
The first and most obvious argument against gay marriage is that of the devastating consequences it would have on the family and-more specifically-the children. There is overwhelming evidence that proves that both a father and mother are needed for a child's proper development. In 1990, a San Francisco task force on family policy led by lesbian activist Roberta Achtenberg defined the family as a "unit of interdependent and interacting persons, related together over time by strong social and emotional bonds and/or by ties of marriage, birth, and adoption." This concept would turn family into nothing more than a bizarre free-for-all.
A second point to make in this discussion is that by legalizing gay marriage you have opened up Pandora's Box. With the recognition of marriage as a right instead of a union based on tradition and moral conviction you have started down a slippery slope that includes polygamous and incestuous relationships. Once introduced it will make marriage nothing more than an interpretation of rights as seen by a black-robed judge. Is this really evidence of a society evolving? It would seem more appropriate to see it as a culture on a recessive downward spiral towards the basest of human lusts and desires.
Another argument that can be brought to bear on gay marriage in the more legal and practical arena is that concerning propagating society. When a state recognizes a marriage, it bestows upon the couple benefits which are costly to the state as well as other individuals. Examples include collecting a deceased spouse's social security, claiming an extra tax exemption, and having the right to be covered under a spouse's health insurance policy, etc. This is done because a marriage between heterosexuals is likely to result in a family with children, and propagation of society is a definite state interest. therefore, states have-to some degree or other-restricted couples unlikely to produce children from marriage. Needless to say, homosexual relationships do nothing to serve the state interest of propagating society and, therefore, the states do not grant them the costly benefits of marriage. I put this argument here not as one of the highest importance, but rather to show that even from a practical viewpoint gay marriage is detrimental to society.
Although I doubt but sincerely hope I have changed your views, I do hope that I have shown this subject to be of far greater importance than you originally gave it credit for. These three subjects by no means encompass the spectrum of the subject, but I think that they are sufficient for the moment.
Debate Round No. 1
kfarls

Pro

kfarls forfeited this round.
Richard89

Con

Nothing more to say at the moment because the debtor has not responded to the original rebuttal....is this one hundred characters yet?
Debate Round No. 2
kfarls

Pro

When I previously stated that this was a "menial issue" I simply meant that there are far greater issues in today's society that we should be focusing on, instead of one that seems allow many conservatives and theists to spread hate against a certain group. In response to your comment about studies finding that a mother and father are needed to help a child fully develop, there have been far more studies that found children raised by same-sex parents suffer no more than children of heterosexual parents. In fact, many of these children were found to be more open-minded than there counterparts due to the type of family they grew up in. This "Pandora's Box" that so many people speak of seems unfair. Heterosexuals are permitted to marry one person that is unrelated to them and whom they love. This would be the same circumstance for same-sex couples. Marriage means that two people are committed to each other for life, seemingly ruling out polygamous couples because they include more than two people. The argument that extending marriage to same-sex couples would be costly to the state is invalid. People who are married are actually less of a burden on the state than people who are not. This is because there are two sources of income instead of one. Also, people in stable relationships usually strive to purchase a home, and homeowners must be fairly financially stable. People should not be denied liberties because the state may have to doll out more health care or social security benefits to spouses. If this were the case, why didn't we continue to ban inter-racial marriage? Because it was not fair! In rebuttal of your last point, which was that same-sex couples are less likely to produce children and this is why the state restricts their ability to marry, there are many same-sex couples that produce children. Also, there are many heterosexual couples that decide not to have children. The odds of same-sex couples having children are lower, yes, but this is in part due to the many difficulties these couples face when trying to adopt or using other methods of having children. The state not only restricts their ability to marry, but their ability to have children, so your argument does not seem fair to these couples.

Gay marriage seems to be an issue that has been hijacked by the religious right as a way to "fight" a common enemy. Their Bible tells them that homosexuality is wrong, so they decide that they should restrict these people's rights. However, the problem with this is that the Bible is not the be all, or end all, and it certainly should not be used to excuse actions. Marriage is not a religious issue; it only becomes religious when a couple decides to marry in a church. It is a civil issue, I mean, atheists can marry. They are not denied this right because they are not religious and do not marry in a church.

I do not want to open this "Pandora's Box", I simply think that marriage should be defined as a union between two unrelated people, whether they are of the same-sex or not.
Richard89

Con

Well I guess the the best way to start is by saying that I must continue to disagree with you that there are far greater issues in society.
"children raised by same-sex parents suffer no more than children of heterosexual parents. In fact, many of these children were found to be more open-minded than there counterparts due to the type of family they grew up in."
Well I must say that the evidence disagrees with you. In fact, Richard Baer of Cornell University wrote: "The unavoidable fact (one that unfortunately is routinely sidestepped or even denied by professionals in fields like psychology and human development) is that children desperately need both male and female role models--ideally fathers and mothers--who throughout their formative years will nurture them and help them become mature, compassionate, honest, and well-adjusted adults. Same-sex marriage does not contribute to this goal. Indeed, legalizing same-sex marriage or even civil unions would likely make it even easier than it is today for homosexuals to adopt children--seriously disadvantaging such children. It may sound harsh, but justice requires that the state should discriminate against both gays and singles who want to adopt children. Of course, there are exceptions, but if we care about the well-being of children, this should be the general rule." These are the words of one not "blinded" by "religious hatred."
Marriage has always been defined as a union between one man and one woman. Long-term homosexual relationships are far less common than the suggested, and the great majority of those which do last more than a few years(especially among male homosexuals) typically include sexual partners "on the side." What kind of a role model is that for children? In fact the truth is, gays already have the same "rights" as everyone else. They are allowed to marry someone of the opposite sex, but they are clamoring for an extra right that applies solely to them. James Skillen of the Center for Public Justice maintains, same-sex marriage is not a civil rights issue at all. It is a pre-constitutional issue, a question of how society chooses to define marriage.
Finally I wish to point out the serious health issues involved with gay activity. Mission America has a comprehensive list of the dangers of encouraging gay activity:

"There is growing evidence that bisexual identity and practices are developing as a popular trend among some middle school and high school students as a result of the promotion of homosexual experimentation. The "package" of fluid sexual practices, featuring oral sex, is being sold to kids through many sex education programs and the popular culture. This trend has disastrous public health implications. Homosexuality involves practices that are dangerous and high-risk to the body, which is designed for heterosexual function, so the first priority of adults who really care for youth should be to help them at all costs avoid these behaviors. Some of these unsafe practices are anal sexual intercourse, foreign objects used in sexual intercourse, anal or oral sex with strangers, and promiscuity. Because of such activities, countless health studies have documented that sexually transmitted disease and injury is much higher among homosexuals than in the population at large. Failure to disclose these facts or attempts to discredit them is the equivalent of educational and medical malpractice. Educational programs that in any way condone or support homosexuality should be stopped immediately in all U.S. schools."

I realize this is a debate over gay marriage and not homosexuality in general, but I point it out as yet another detrimental factor to society and family in general. I believe this is the last thing we, as a nation, should condone and support through special privileges and rights. Is this really a lifestyle we wish to encourage in our society? I wish I could write more, but I'm afraid that is all I have time for. Thank you for the opportunity to debate a vital issue facing this country.
GOD BLESS
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by JonJon 9 years ago
JonJon
Well gay marriage is important to gays. But I agree, in the scheme of the catastrophe the Bush maladminstration has been, there are much more pressing issues. I'm gay, married to a member of the same sex here in germany. Most of my friends are straight and treat us like we're just one of the gang. When I come the the states and introduce the man who bears my last name to the rest of my family, it will be awkward. There is an issue here. I can't bring my husband back to the states to live with me; however, I'm legally able to live here. I'm moving to London in a few weeks for work and our marriage is recognized there without a hitch. the US really sucks in this department.
Posted by MMnumber99 9 years ago
MMnumber99
Ok it is a small issue. Tell the guy who just lost his job to outsourcing that gay marriage is more important. Tell it to the wives of our troops on their third tours of duty. tell it to the ever shrinking middle class. That's why the republicans have lost steam, they pick on gays to drum up support, and divert attention from real issues that they do NOTHING about.
Posted by Richard89 9 years ago
Richard89
Please tell me I didn't waste my time on you, kfarls. I would appreciate a response within the allotted time.
21 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 6 years ago
quarterexchange
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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: countering Kal's vote bomb. Pro forfeited, had even spelling with Con, and posted no sources yet Kal gave Pro points in all those cateragories
Vote Placed by Kals 8 years ago
Kals
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by roastshow 9 years ago
roastshow
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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 dairygirl4u2c 9 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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 Conservative 9 years ago
Conservative
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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 blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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 Black.Nite17 9 years ago
Black.Nite17
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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 Chob 9 years ago
Chob
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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 prepsexpot69 9 years ago
prepsexpot69
kfarlsRichard89Tied
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