The Instigator
lovelife
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
Korashk
Con (against)
Winning
40 Points

Gay marriage

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 8 votes the winner is...
Korashk
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/23/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,480 times Debate No: 12606
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (8)

 

lovelife

Pro

My position is that gays deserve the same rights as everyone else. If you are able to marry your girlfriend, why would you want a lesbian marrying her girlfriend?

Through the years gays have been fighting for equality and acceptance. The thought that civil unions are the same thing as marriage is wrong. If a heterosexual couple has a right to choose which, why should a homosexual couple not have the same right?

Gay marriage does not affect anyone not wanting to be a part of it, so basically if you don't want to marry another guy, you don't have to. The fight is for equality, and choice, banning their marriage is wrong because it is close minded and hinders other peoples rights.

http://dictionary.reference.com...
Korashk

Con

.
.
.

Terms clarified:
Marriage - the legal definition
Civil Marriage - a term that I use to illustrate the concept of a type of marriage that does not include financial factors.
Civil benefits - refers to all of the non-financial benefits of marriage except for the immigration fast-lane

~~~~~~~~
Argument
~~~~~~~~

Contention 1:
Marriage violates the 14th amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

The 14th amendment guarantees all citizens of the United States equal protection under the law [1]. Citizens that are married are granted rights that are not afforded to those that are not married. In fact the number of individual rights granted to those who are married outnumbers those granted to individuals not married by over 1000 [2]. Some specific examples of unjust freedoms gained through marriage is that it allows any non-resident of America to gain an immigration 'fast lane,' or it makes it easier for them to move to this country and they can ignore many traditional immigration regulations. Marriage also grants spousal exemption from estate taxes [3]. I do not believe that a person deserves special treatment simply because they had an emotion that made them want to spend their life with another person [2].
~

Contention 2:
Most of the civil benefits of marriage can be gained through alternate legal avenues that do not involve marriage.

For instance there are forms that you can fill out on-line that grant another individual your power of attorney [6, 7]. I ask that you read the provided link [4] to learn about this concept if you are currently unaware of what it entails. You can also cerate a last will and testament that does many things for you legally, even if those involved are not married.
~

It is for these reasons that I believe that homosexual marriage should not be legalized. My arguments are valid based on the transitive property, if I oppose all marriage then I by necessity oppose gay marriage.

I look forward to my opponent's response and hope that this can remain a semantics-free debate.

P.S. Your link doesn't seem relevant to your arguments.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://www.hrc.org...
[3] http://www.shusterman.com...
[4] http://www.expertlaw.com...
[5] http://www.expertlaw.com...
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[7] http://www.expertlaw.com...
Debate Round No. 1
lovelife

Pro

I thank my opponent to an original response (one I have never seen so far), and I also hope for a semantics free debate.

I would like to point out that marriage is not going anywhere anytime soon, and in order to be fair to every individual it should include everyone's will. Meaning two consensual adults should be able to marry each other regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, place of organ, or any other such factor. He seems to be worried that there will be an increase in immigration, which I do not oppose, however we could alter the rights so that in order to be married in this country both parties must have lived in the country for X amount of time, or the one immigrating must go through legal procedures. Of course I do not see why if immigration is the purpose they would want to marry same gender.

I am aware that you can have wills and powers of attorneys, but it is not the same. If marriage exists it should be fair to all parties. Even if you are against marriage I am sure you can agree to equality.

Also I'm sorry I was using that to define marriage and should have specified as such.
Korashk

Con

I thank my opponent for her response. Also, before we go any further I'd like to formally define marriage because your link didn't work.

http://topics.law.cornell.edu...

~~~~~~~~
Responses
~~~~~~~~

///I would like to point out that marriage is not going anywhere anytime soon, and in order to be fair to every individual it should include everyone's will. Meaning two consensual adults should be able to marry each other regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, place of organ, or any other such factor.///

The point that my scenario is unlikely is moot. We also disagree on what is fair. I don't think it's fair that people should be able to benefit financially because they have an emotional connection with another person.
~

///He seems to be worried that there will be an increase in immigration, which I do not oppose, however we could alter the rights so that in order to be married in this country both parties must have lived in the country for X amount of time, or the one immigrating must go through legal procedures.///

I'm not worried about immigration; I'm just opposed to legislation that favors one group over another. An example of this is that it is easier to immigrate if you marry an American. This is unjust.

Bringing up arguments about changing the definition of marriage to support your argument is also not really a valid option as your stance is that marriage should be granted, not some other legal binding with the same title.
~

///Even if you are against marriage I am sure you can agree to equality.///

I do agree to equality, which is why I disagree with marriage.
~

I await my opponent's response and hopes that she waits to respond.
Debate Round No. 2
lovelife

Pro

It is true that married couples get rights, but with rights comes responsibilty. Most of the rights they have aren't even that big of a deal. Most of the information can be found here, http://en.wikipedia.org...

I'm pretty sure that if you marry an American you still have to go through the legal process. My uncle (from England) married my aunt and he had to get a green card and do all that still.

My stance is it should be legal for everybody, or nobody. You can't grant some individuals one right but not others because they don't like someone of the opposite gender. Since marriage wont be taken out any time soon, gay marriage should be legalized.

I agree that everyone should have the same opportunity for happiness and if strait marriage is legal, gay marriage also should be too.

Some other links that may be interesting:

http://www.catholiceducation.org...
http://nofo.blogspot.com...

I hope I waited long enough and I thank my opponent for this debate.
Korashk

Con

I thank my opponent for delaying her response.

~~~~~~~
Rebuttals
~~~~~~~

///Most of the rights they have aren't even that big of a deal.///

Let's take a look at some of these rights that "aren't a big deal," shall we:

* Larger benefits under some [government] programs if married
* Preferential hiring for spouses of veterans in government jobs
* Tax-free transfer of property
* Threats against spouses of various federal employees is a federal crime
* For those divorced or widowed, the right to many of ex- or late spouse's benefits

These are just a few of the benefits that being married affords a person. Now, why should they be able to receive these benefits? They aren't available to your average person. A person shouldn't be able to significantly benefit from the government because of what amounts to having a stronger than normal emotional connection to another individual.
~

///I'm pretty sure that if you marry an American you still have to go through the legal process. My uncle (from England) married my aunt and he had to get a green card and do all that still.///

You do, but it is much, much, much easier via spousal sponsorship.
~

///Since marriage wont be taken out any time soon, gay marriage should be legalized.///

The point is moot, the viability of my position does not affect it's legitimacy.
~

With that the debate is concluded, vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
Like donkeys can't sleeep in bathtubs, you can't go whaling in oklahoma, it is illegal to walk backwards on a tuesday eating a burger, it is ilegal to kiss for more than 8 1/2 mins (something like that) in oklahoma, oral sex is illegal in oklahoma etc.
Posted by Yurlene 6 years ago
Yurlene
Legally defined is such a smock for saying by popular votes. If that was the case, we would have some silly laws still in place right about now.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
lol I feel so vote bombed. Oh well lmao it was still pretty fun.
Posted by Korashk 6 years ago
Korashk
You people really shouldn't be giving me all 7.
Posted by burnbird14 6 years ago
burnbird14
Personally, I think gay marriage is rediculous - and I'm gay! Marriage itself is legally defined as something between men and women.. HOWEVER, I don't condone marriage in a legal context because it denies certain people - aka, gay people - certain legal and financial rights. Therefore, marriages should be considered in all ways - except religiously - equal to domestic and legal partnerships.
Posted by Korashk 6 years ago
Korashk
You'll probably get points, I submitted the round at midnight EST almost. Not many players are active in the middle of the night.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
o I didn't expect to win. I didn't know I'd get no points tho. I guess I reay did suck that much.
Posted by Korashk 6 years ago
Korashk
Bad pyromaniac. I'd like an RFD as to why you gave me 7 points.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
Oh nvm I can post it right before leaving, I thought there was another round after that it still works out just fine.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
I'm leaving on Friday so I'll prolly respond late tomorrow or early Friday. (I just found out, and most likely will be able to post the last round but hard to tell since dad's an internet nazi)
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by wayneii308 6 years ago
wayneii308
lovelifeKorashkTied
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 Yurlene 6 years ago
Yurlene
lovelifeKorashkTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Lafayette_Lion 6 years ago
Lafayette_Lion
lovelifeKorashkTied
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:25 
Vote Placed by I-am-a-panda 6 years ago
I-am-a-panda
lovelifeKorashkTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Procrastarian 6 years ago
Procrastarian
lovelifeKorashkTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by burnbird14 6 years ago
burnbird14
lovelifeKorashkTied
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 
Vote Placed by Pyromaniac 6 years ago
Pyromaniac
lovelifeKorashkTied
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 
Vote Placed by Korashk 6 years ago
Korashk
lovelifeKorashkTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05