The Instigator
Commondebator
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
mg2
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Gay marriages should be legal, (In America) regardless of cultural background

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 4 votes the winner is...
Commondebator
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/23/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 716 times Debate No: 65711
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (4)

 

Commondebator

Pro

First round is acceptance.

Would appreciate federal and moral views.

BoP is on both sides
mg2

Con

No. Marriage is socially aligned when it joins men and women to produce offspring that will continue the same process over and over again. Same-sex marriage can suppress the role of each individual to spread their kind because they cannot produce offspring's. Same-sex marriage is purely lust and self-indiscipline.
Debate Round No. 1
Commondebator

Pro

Thanks for the acceptance con. I will perform rebuttals in the following rounds, as round one was acceptance.



I. Gay marriage is a choice, and a right reserved to the people

This is not to be confused with sexual orientation, which I will bring up in my following rounds. Now,

Marriage is a choice, for the person choices by his/her likings. Disregarding all religious views for now,

marriage in the U.S is solely upon the person’s choice. No one should be stripped of their right to marry,

if both party’s consent based on sexual orientation. It is our constitutional right to marry regardless of who

it may be.

II. Being gay is not a choice. (Even if my opponent argues that it is, that should not impact the right)

Now, it may be argued on both sides if being gay is a choice or not. This part of my argument regards the

religious views of the person. My opponent’s argument may be “Since marriage is religious, and it is

against our religion to be gay, therefore you cannot marry being gay.” If my opponent ever brings up

this argument, my reply would be that since being gay is not a choice, you cannot bring inequality

to the person based on a choice that the person never had during birth. I will bring up scientific

views of being gay on following rounds. Also, if marriage was solely a church issue, it would

inflict “separation of church and state”


III. From a moral (and religious) point of view, gay marriage should be legal

Now, this part of my argument has no evidence, but I would like to bring it up. If two christians get

married, it means that they truly do love each other to disregard their religion. The same thing applies

to a federal view, and those being gay is not harming anyone else, therefore it should be legal. Again,

this part of my argument is mostly assumptions, but I would like to refer it. Basically, not legalizing

marriage is inflicting someone’s love. (Cheesy, but bear with me. Im the one had to type this)



I leave arguments are rebuttals to my opponent.
mg2

Con

1. Allowing gay couples to wed will further weaken the institution of marriage.

Traditional marriage is already threatened with high divorce rates (between 40% and 50%) and with 40.6% of babies being born to unmarried mothers in 2008. Allowing same-sex couples to marry would further weaken the institution. As argued by Ryan T. Anderson, William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and a Free Society at The Heritage Foundation, "In recent decades, marriage has been weakened by a revisionist view that is more about adults" desires than children"s needs... Redefining marriage to include same-sex relationships is the culmination of this revisionism, and it would leave emotional intensity as the only thing that sets marriage apart from other bonds." http://gaymarriage.procon.org...

The right that you are referring pertains to selfish desires of adults and thus threatens to ruin the world in the future. Marriage must be preserved for both man and woman as their conjoined entity is both capable of producing childrens and of teaching values as well.

2. Gay marriage could potentially lead down a "slippery slope" giving people in polygamous, incestuous, bestial, and other nontraditional relationships the right to marry.

Glen Lavy, JD, senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, argued in a May 21, 2008 Los Angeles Times Op-Ed, "The movement for polygamy and polyamory is poised to use the successes of same-sex couples as a springboard for further deinstitutionalizing marriage." In April 2013, Slate published a plea for legal polygamy by writer Jillian Keenan: "Just like heterosexual marriage is no better or worse than homosexual marriage, marriage between two consenting adults is not inherently more or less 'correct' than marriage among three (or four, or six) consenting adults." http://gaymarriage.procon.org...

Truly, approving this kind of marriage will eventually lead to unlimited preferences of sexuality as the male and the female are capable of being gay or lesbian respectively. These preferences will soon yield into polygamy and will eventually make us look barbaric in the future.

3. Gay marriage may lead to more children being raised in same-sex households, which are not an optimum environment because children need both a mother and father.

Girls who are raised apart from their fathers are reportedly at higher risk for early sexual activity and teenage pregnancy. Children without a mother are deprived of the emotional security and unique advice that mothers provide. An Apr. 2001 study published in American Sociological Review suggested that children with lesbian or gay parents are more likely to engage in homosexual behavior. In the 1997 book Growing up in a Lesbian Family: Effects on Child Development, Fiona Tasker, PhD, and Susan Golombok, PhD, observed that 25% of sampled young adults raised by lesbian mothers had engaged in a homoerotic relationship, compared to 0% of sampled young adults raised by heterosexual mothers.
http://gaymarriage.procon.org...

Legalizing same-sex marriage will potentially increase the number of homosexual people which is not healthy to any community. Motherly and fatherly advices are always the best options in teaching values, they can't be replaced with entities whose only desire is to satisfy their insatiable lust.

4. Marriage is a privilege, not a right.

Society can choose to endorse certain types of sexual arrangements and give support in the form of benefits to these arrangements. Marriage was created to allow society to support heterosexual couples in procreation and society can choose not to give the same benefits to same-sex couples. http://gaymarriage.procon.org...

The family is the smallest unit of the society while marriage was created for the purpose of family orderliness, in effect the society as a whole. Legalizing same-sex marriage will just defeat the said purpose.

5. The institution of marriage is sexist and oppressive; it should not be expanded but weakened. Paula Ettelbrick, JD, Professor of Law and Women's Studies, wrote in 1989, "Marriage runs contrary to two of the primary goals of the lesbian and gay movement: the affirmation of gay identity and culture and the validation of many forms of relationships." The leaders of the Gay Liberation Front in New York said in July 1969, "We expose the institution of marriage as one of the most insidious and basic sustainers of the system. The family is the microcosm of oppression."

My arguments did not mean to disrespect the homosexuals, I just don't like the idea of uniting them under the blessing of the law.
Debate Round No. 2
Commondebator

Pro

I thank my opponent for his argument.

1. Divorce rates lower in states that allow same sex marriages

This part of my argument (and the followings) may be used to further extend my regular argument or used as a rebuttal. In states where same-sex marriages are legally recognized, the divorce rate is 20 percent lower than in states that only allow marriages between a man and a woman. For example, Massachusetts, which was the first state to legalize same-sex marriage (in 2004), also has the lowest divorce rate in the country.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

2. Adoption almost doubled since gay marriage

Although raising children may have decreased during gay marriage, adoption has almost doubled.(1) From a moral point of view, saving an orphan is much better than not. A russian study reported that 10% of orphans committed suicide. Other things can also impact orphans such as unemployment, and imprisonment. (2)Increasing gay marriage can lead to decreasing orphanage, and as mentioned before- decreasing divorce as well.

1. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu...

2. http://skywardjourney.wordpress.com...

4. "The family is the smallest unit of the society while marriage was created for the purpose of family orderliness, in effect the society as a whole. Legalizing same-sex marriage will just defeat the said purpose."

When my opponent states family, I believe he also refers to children. I fail to see how it may defeat the purpose, when gay marriage is also raising a child, but with 2 of the same sex parents. This may not be most beneficial for the child (as explained my my opponent), but it certainly is better than not being adopted.

I thank my opponent for such an interesting debate
mg2

Con

1. It Is Not Marriage

Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and well-being of the spouses.

The promoters of same-sex "marriage" propose something entirely different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.

http://www.tfpstudentaction.org...

By amending the law, we can call it as a marriage, but considering the real purpose of marriage will disqualify it. Marriage was created for the survival of cultural values and it's people and it was never created to join two purely selfish desires.

2. Adoption doubles since gay marriage?

If you mean to help the homeless children by same-sex marriage, then that would be wrong. A strong family value is still the best foundation against abandoned children and broken families. Consider the ff. study from http://www.frc.org...

Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
Have lower educational attainment
Report less safety and security in their family of origin
Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
Are more likely to suffer from depression
Have been arrested more often
If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

Thank you for such a challenging debate!
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 2 years ago
Jzyehoshua
Con could have also pointed out that the vast bulk of adoption is done by Christians opposed to gay marriage, and that homosexuals adopting is less common. The arguments were there to be made but Con did not notice.
Posted by Jzyehoshua 2 years ago
Jzyehoshua
Pro made really bad arguments toward the end that Con could have called out by pointing out that marriage rates have dropped, not just divorces, in states where gay marriage is allowed, and that this also explains the adoption increase. The evidence examined in totality actually defeats Pro's argument but unfortunately Con failed to notice Pro's mistake.
Posted by Commondebator 2 years ago
Commondebator
Whoops! Sorry for the false numbers!!
Posted by Leo.Messi 2 years ago
Leo.Messi
Good arguments. I will watch this debate closely.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by NoMagic 2 years ago
NoMagic
Commondebatormg2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's problem in this debate is that there are no good arguments against gay marriage. Pro wins
Vote Placed by gomergcc 2 years ago
gomergcc
Commondebatormg2Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made several claims with out any source. Con repeatedly used studies that used biased sampling. Of 0% of heterosexual mothers have homosexual children how is there any homosexual people ever? Con made a few spelling and grammar mistakes. Pro should have used the many supreme court rulings on marriage as a right. Pro could have used that gay marriages happened in ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece and Rome.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
Commondebatormg2Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro droop Con's argument that it's a privilege So arguments to Con.
Vote Placed by Gabe1e 2 years ago
Gabe1e
Commondebatormg2Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has had better arguments and rebuttals, stating that more adoptions have happened because of gay marriage. Con didn't really rebut that well, the article was kind of confusing too. Also, Pro stated it is a "right to the people." Con then stated that is a "privilege." Definition of privilege: "a special RIGHT, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people." In this case, the citizens being the people. So, a privilege is technically a right, it's just a special right. Because of this, Pro's rebuttal's were better, a point for conduct. Pro's mistake with the numbers was a silly, small error, and it shouldn't be penalized. Both used good sources, but even though I believe that gay marriage should not be legal, Pro won this, 4-0.