The Instigator
Jcmiamiu7
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
ProConIK
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Gay marriage should not be recognized by the state

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 1 vote the winner is...
Jcmiamiu7
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 3/20/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 579 times Debate No: 72074
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

Jcmiamiu7

Pro

Okay this will probably cause controversy so there are some rules:
- no insulting during the debate
- you may say an argument is invalid, but no declaring victory or claiming you win the round/argument.
- no using emotional arguments.. Use mostly reason in arguments

First round is acceptance only
Last round will not be rebuttals. No "getting the last word in". Only summarize your argument will a paragraph as a conclusion.

Hopefully this will be a good debate
ProConIK

Con

I am happy to accept this debate! :)
Debate Round No. 1
Jcmiamiu7

Pro

Okay I thank my opponent for accepting the debate
The premise of my argument is that the state should not accept gay marriage as official because
- it forces them to give them tax breaks to gay couples, even though that defies the original purpose of tax breaks
- it encourages non traditional families as normal or just the same
- it is not marriage. This movement attempts to redefine a defined word.
- it is best for a child to be raised in a standard household- with a mother and a father.

While Im not saying it should be illegal to be gay or anything, I do believe "legalizing" gay marriage would be encouraging something that is not beneficial to society to happen, and normalize something that is not supposed to be "good"

Please only state your premise and General argument first round, then 3rd we can start rebuting
ProConIK

Con

I think it shows that the state made a change and accepted it. The states are proud.
Debate Round No. 2
Jcmiamiu7

Pro

What? Could you rebut my points next round please
I'll expand

A) federal government tax break are given to usually straight couples to promote nuclear families, keeping parents together, and allowing them to get good economic standing so they can have kids and such. The federal government would be forced to give gay couples tax breaks that they neither deserve nor require, as they don't use the regular family structure and can't produce kids.

B) A family consists of a mother, father, kids, and the extended family. That is a family. A family is NOT a group of people who love or really like each other. You can't change the definition, unless youre talking about Charles manson's "family".

C) Gay couples can get together, do whatever they want, and be a couple as much as they want. They can even get married anywhere in the US, except in some places the state won't recognize it. So they can do all this if they want to be a couple that bad. But, what they should not be able to do is get married. Marriage is a union between a man, woman, and usually the government. We are physically and mentally meant to be united, and that is undenyable. If we were not meant to be with the opposite sex, then why did we evolve into 2 sexes. Why are we not asexual? It's because it's best to be united and have people develop from 2 parents, differing in sex.

D) children are best raised and developed in standard households. I am not claiming gay couples cannot raise kids without them being incompetent or anything. But kids are best developed and perform best when raised in straight households. It's a fact. Kids that are raised in one parent houses or gay houses are not raised naturally and in many cases even speak out against gay marriage [1]. It leads to sexual confusion. Many people will probably call me a bigot or homophobe or some word that conformists use to pressure people into accepting the more powerful scenario. But all this is just avoiding facts. I mean, we are meant to be raised my a mother and a father. Not 2 fathers or 2 mothers. I don't care if they want to do whatever they want sexually, but allowing 2 people of the same sex to get married is a sign of the degradation of our society.

[1] http://m.cnsnews.com...

I still haven't really gone in depth... I'm waiting for you to give a real response
ProConIK

Con

ProConIK forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Jcmiamiu7

Pro

Extend my arguments
ProConIK

Con

ProConIK forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Jcmiamiu7

Pro

Extend my arguments
ProConIK

Con

ProConIK forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Jcmiamiu7 1 year ago
Jcmiamiu7
Now I know you're biased. You seem to know little about the other side of the argument, and probably will claim there is no other side. Claiming there are no arguments means you've never heard any arguments. First, almost all arguments against gays are not religious, and being traditional doesn't make them bad. youre just making claims out of nowhere using hate and "bigotry" as you would say.
I figured I would lose this debate because of people like you who only argue with hate and biased one sided arguments. If I'm convinced otherwise, I'll switch my side. And im not sure what you're talking about.. Those are all things people discuss all the time. If anything, religion has taking a back seat.

Haha.... All national polls??? Maybe by msnbc... I don't think you realize the majority of the American population leans conservative on most issues. It's called the silent majority. The vocal minority is the one you're probably assuming speaks for america. How about you just stay off arguing in the comments or just make a debate yourself alright? And if you feel the need to comment again, at least try to explain yourself without ranting about how religious people are killing your social Marxist utopia.
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
missmedic
What you believe affects how you think. There are no good secular grounds for claiming that homosexuality is either morally defective or socially harmful, and that those who advance such claims hold a traditional, largely religious bias against gays.
Treating a person unfairly because of there sexual orientation is immoral. People would rather shame gays than let orphans have a family. It is disheartening that fictitious religious arguments are given so much attention while actual real world problems, such as climate change, banking regulations and energy policies, remain pushed to the back of our minds. Do we move into the future, or stay bound in a past with archaic laws and mores that no longer represent who we are as human beings? All national polls, show public opinion supports equal rights. The will of the people decides who we are, not a supernatural agent.
Posted by Jcmiamiu7 1 year ago
Jcmiamiu7
Missmedic... No religious arguments will be used. I believe strongly in a God and basic things but am not that religious. Here, you yourself just made a biased argument, assuming several things with no evidence of reason to. If you don't like it, then make your own debate. Where you got the religious assumption im not sure, but you clearly are biased yourself. Good luck in the future
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
missmedic
Pro will not be able to make a reasonable nonbiased argument, and be forced to use religious faith to justify hatred and bigotry as fair treatment for a group of fellow humans. Some folks who strongly believe in a certain god or religion create hell on earth for others, so they can have a good place in heaven...so they think!
Posted by AlternativeDavid 1 year ago
AlternativeDavid
I find every single argument by Pro to be absolutely ludicrous. I'm very tempted to refute them in the comments but nothing irks me more than when people do that.
Posted by Varrack 1 year ago
Varrack
Wait never mind. You're pro lol
Posted by Varrack 1 year ago
Varrack
Just a note: the libertarian position holds that *no* marriages should be recognized by the state, so it is possible that you may have to argue against that if one of them accepts.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
Jcmiamiu7ProConIK
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Con ff several times. All other categories were tied.