The Instigator
SimonZ
Pro (for)
Winning
26 Points
The Contender
suj
Con (against)
Losing
18 Points

Gay marriage should not be legalized by any governing body in the United States of America.

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
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: 12/15/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,996 times Debate No: 461
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (15)

 

SimonZ

Pro

This is an extremely controversial subject in the United States. I would like to start my argument with an explanation of my views.
I am a Christian and due to my beliefs I do not find gay marriage to be morally acceptable. This does not under any circumstance preclude that I believe it should be outlawed. My argument is that it should not be legally recognized by the governing body at the state or federal level. By this I also mean that it should not be legalized by any county, town or city as well. I am not arguing for the outlawing of homosexual relations. As a country it would be a complete and utter reversal of what our country has held as Constitutional for over 200 years. I am purely arguing against the legal recognition of gay marriage in the United States of America.
As a side note, this also entails civil unions. A civil union is just a way to side step gay marriage controversy.

Do not take up this argument if you cannot put forth a coherent and educated standing on the topic at hand. If you feel like listing reasons why I should be considered a bigot or anti-gay proponent then please do not waste your time. I am looking for someone who can put forth a well rounded rebuttal to my argument and truly wishes to examine the U.S policy on homosexual marriage in America. Also note that I did not say we should outlaw gay marriage, merely that we should not legalize it or civil unions.
suj

Con

I, on the other hand, do believe that gay marriage should be legalized. What is soo bad about 2 guys or 2 girls getting married? Isn't love the driving force in the marriage!?!
Debate Round No. 1
SimonZ

Pro

I do not disagree with your argument. While I do not support homosexuality I do not feel it is my nor anyone else's place to keep two people from having a relationship. Homosexual couples who want to be married are no different than other couples who are likewise in love, in and most cases, they are often more in love than a heterosexual couple. Homosexual couples know that in order to petition for marriage they must jump through many hoops and expose themselves to criticism from outside sources. This is not the case for heterosexual couples and thus I think these couples are more inclined to marry on a whim instead of truly considering whether or not they really love one another enough to integrate their lives.
While this is all well and good, marriage is a establishment created by the governing body of the United States and as such, in order to be legally married a couple must seek the approval of this marriage by the government. What homosexual couples are asking for is the recognition by the government of their marriage to one another. This has mainly to do with the benefits that come from a legalized marriage. It has been our nation's policy that we do no recognize homosexual communions. This is what is so perplexing about the current and most popular argument in the name of gay marriage. The argument is that a government has no right to ban homosexual marriages and the government, recognizing their inability to do so, has done nothing of the sort. Homosexuals contend that that government has no say in who can and cannot marry. Unfortunately, the government is the body that has sole power in the recognition of marriage between two people and it has ruled that a marriage is the communion between a man and a woman. If two gay people would like to marry then let them, but it will not be recognized by the government. This throws a kink the main argument put forth by gay marriage advocates who repeatedly call for the government to not interfere with the continuation of homosexual marriages. The bottom line in this: homosexuals are free to marry or commune with whomever they wish. The government has no right to establish a policy against homosexual relations. What it does have a right to do is recognize them and since gay people seek that recognition, it is the right of the government to establish a policy on what couples can marry. If gay people want recognition by the government of their marriages then they will not/nor do they have the Constitutional right to do so.
Having put forth my argument I am eager to hear yours.
suj

Con

suj forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
SimonZ

Pro

Forfeiting is not a good way to win. Anyone else want to finish this? We can just start a new debate or something.
suj

Con

suj forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Neruda 9 years ago
Neruda
I'll re-debate you if you would like to restart. I already have a counter argument forming in this ole noggin of mine.
Posted by Karoz 9 years ago
Karoz
While I disagree with your views SimonZ and believe your starting argument was flawed, you clearly beat suj in the "debate"(Although I obviously wouldn't call three poorly constructed sentences, and then forfeiting the rest of the debate an actual debate.).

I think I could debate you on this, so if you want to recreate it and invite me to join the debate I'd be glad to.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Mharman 3 months ago
Mharman
SimonZsujTied
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:40 
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
SimonZsujTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.
Vote Placed by Sludge 9 years ago
Sludge
SimonZsujTied
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 Chob 9 years ago
Chob
SimonZsujTied
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 SimonZ 9 years ago
SimonZ
SimonZsujTied
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 kvaughan 9 years ago
kvaughan
SimonZsujTied
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 alden262 9 years ago
alden262
SimonZsujTied
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 Lacan 9 years ago
Lacan
SimonZsujTied
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 Neruda 9 years ago
Neruda
SimonZsujTied
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 ashiiAESTHETIC 9 years ago
ashiiAESTHETIC
SimonZsujTied
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