The Instigator
gdgirl1234
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Dmot
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Gay marriage 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 3 votes the winner is...
Dmot
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/20/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 454 times Debate No: 36852
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

gdgirl1234

Pro

Everyone deserves rights and no one should be judged. In Russia, gays are severely discriminated against, with fines for just holding hands, which is just a simple act of love.
Dmot

Con

We have only 1000 characters, not a lot of space. I will be brief. But first, I do not dislike or judge gays

1) The government should stay out of people's lives as much as possible unless there is sufficiently good reason to become involved
2) Recognizing the union of two people and granting it legal benefits is government involvement
From 1 and 2:
3) The government should stay out of recognizing the union of two people and granting it legal benefits unless there is sufficiently good reason otherwise
4) There is not sufficiently good reason to get involved in the union of two men or two women
From 3 and 4:
5) It follows that the gvt. should not recognize the union of two men or women with title or benefits

1 Seems to be the principal of our gvt and a good reasonable rule of thumb
2 is self evident
4 is the big thing to prove. I think that unless pro provides a good reason to recognize the union of 2men/women my argument stands
I say there is not b/c romance is not enough
Debate Round No. 1
gdgirl1234

Pro

gdgirl1234 forfeited this round.
Dmot

Con

My opponent has forfeited this round. So I will proceed to defend premise 4 above.
Premise 4 basically just says that the union of two men or two women does not need to be recognized by the gvt. Given that the default should be minimized gvt and the standard, what we do now, it seems as though it is pro's job to give good reasons to say two men/women need recognition from gvt....still I will say why they don't:
1) Personal relationships are key to society however they don't involve securing human rights. The ppl involved have a right to be in the relationship and not be discriminated against, but the gvt shouldn't get involved in that
2) Personal relationships are important for social order but they develop fine without the gvt.
3) If the gvt gets involved in the relationship between 2 men/women, does this mean they should get involved in platonic friendships as well? what of 3 ppl? Most would say that's over the top. But what's the difference just cuz theyre gay?
Debate Round No. 2
gdgirl1234

Pro

gdgirl1234 forfeited this round.
Dmot

Con

Even though my opponent was the one that started this debate, it seems as though they have nothing to offer in the form of an argument. For the sake of all who might read this, I will just defend premise 4 a little more by saying why some reasons to justify gvt involvement are not really good.

Romance- Are feelings really good enough justification to get the gvt involved in people's lives? Why stop at romance? There are other feelings out there...

Equality- All ppl r equal. Not all relationships are (obvious). Lets for the sake of argument say that they are though. It still does not follow that they are all deserving of the same benefits from the gvt.

Happiness- Happiness is good but it isn't the gvt's job to just make ppl happy. Lots of ppl would be happy with tax breaks, doesn't mean everyone is getting them.

Stability- Stable relationships are good. Only in the case of necessity should the gvt get involved tho. Stability should remain personal.

That's all. Vote con
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
@HenryGBR

Not in the US. We tend to use Z instead of S more... Anything in the US that ends in '...ised' is spelled '...ized"

Legalized
Generalized
Miniaturized
etc...
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
leandro.sanchez
Everyone deserves rights and no one should be judged
if the debatte would be about that i would participate
so pedophiles and mass murders shoud not be judge you first argument is relly debattebel but the debatte isnt
Posted by HenryGBR 3 years ago
HenryGBR
Firstly 'legalised' is spelt with an 's'. Secondly, how can anyone actually oppose this? Thirdly, the word limit is tiny.
Posted by jzonda415 3 years ago
jzonda415
I would accept, but character limit is too small.
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
leandro.sanchez
good chance to find some one to argue against that
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by leonardlewis4 3 years ago
leonardlewis4
gdgirl1234DmotTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: - Conduct to Con for posting to every round. Pro forfeited every round after the first. - S&G to Con... Pro's only post contained excessive comma use. Con posted more content, and though he made S&G mistakes, it can't be compared to Pro's lacking 2-sentence stance throughout the entire debate. - Obviously, Con's arguments were more convincing since Pro forfeited every round after the first and only provided a grand total of 30 words to support the position. My 'reasons for voting decision' are more lengthy than the Pro arguments. :) - Sources to Con as well (though he only sourced himself)... He deserves all the points.
Vote Placed by Mrparkers 3 years ago
Mrparkers
gdgirl1234DmotTied
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
Vote Placed by basketball 3 years ago
basketball
gdgirl1234DmotTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: jkh;kl