Gay people should be free to get married with out being judged
Debate Rounds (3)
1. I am not arguing against people with same sex attraction. I am not calling their lifestyles wrong in any way. I am not arguing over the romantic/sexual interest of these people at all. The debates over the morality of the gay lifestyle and the romance between two people of the same sex I am not going to argue at all.
2. I respect, and we all should, each and every human being gay or straight. We need to recognize the value in every person and whatever conclusion is the correct conclusion regarding this issue, this point should stand. Further, we should not define people as gay or straight. A person is much more than that and deserves more than to be seen as one with simply their sexual preference.
3. This is not about religion. This is not an argument about what religions should do or about religious doctrine on marriage. It is an argument about the government's role in marriage.
I am going to be arguing the following: "There are no good reasons to recognize the relationship between two men or two women as marriage" This is all. I will not be arguing any of the following:
a. Gayness or gay people or gay acts is sinful or unnatural
b. Gays are bad
c. anything about the bible, God, Church, etc.
d. That two men or women in love should not be allowed to live together
e. That the government should forbid and suppress private ceremonies, religious or otherwise, that celebrate the love of gays (including those ceremonies which are called marriages).
So now we need a landscape, a field of play so to speak for discussion same sex marriage. This has do be done without bias. So I say we start off with no pre-conceived notions. Let's start with the facts: We live in a world where the government regulates some things and grants certain benefits to some people and some groups under some circumstances. Private people become romantically involved with one another and sexually involved and often want to recognize their unions as "marriage." This is because marriage is an ancient institution that has had much significance over the years. At the same time however marriage has taken on many different forms. Generally, for various reasons, some better than others, governments have gotten involved in this relationship of marriage.
Currently, there are many people who become romantically and sexually involved in relationships with others of the same sex. They want to celelbrate their love and therefore have spiritual, religious, personal, social, etc. gatherings and celebrations to celebrate their union. They often call these celebrations marriages. These same sex couples live as spouses to one another. They currently are asking for the government to grant their unions the title and benefits of "marriage" that are granted to man and woman. The government must next evaluate this request and determine whether or not they should grant this request.
So far, I hope you agree with me. There is nothing controversial here. It is just a statement of context so we can argue about the leginimacy of gay marriage. Okay, now the question is posed: Should the government recognize the romantic union of two men or two women?
I would argue no. Here is why:
1) The government should generally keep their nose out of people's personal business unless there is serious reason to get involved.
2) Relationships between two people involve two individual's own personal feelings and commitments.
3) There is no good reason that the government has to be involved in the personal relationships between two people or three people or four people etc.
4) There might be some exceptions to this but ONLY IF there is good reason for the government to become involved which involves the common good or securing the rights of individual people to be protected under the law
5) There is not sufficient reason for the government to recognize the union of two people of the same sex with a special title and benefits (I will leave aside business relationships or something like that. I am talking about the personal relationship between the two people. obviously there are implications of enforcing contracts and things like that in other scenarios. But since we are arguing about gay marriage, it comes down to the government recognizing the relationship because of love).
The conclusion of the above is that the government does not have sufficient reason to recognize two same sex individuals as married under the law.
That is my argument. It basically hinges on one question "Is there a good reason for the government (which generally stays uninvolved in people's personal lives) to become involved in the personal relationship with two men or two women who are in love and want to celebrate that love?"
The argument stands whether or not gayness is good or natural. For all this argument is considered, same sex romance and sexual acts are the best thing since sliced bread...but because of their private and personal nature, there is not compelling reason for the government to become involved.
The argument stands whether or not gay people are good, bad, born this way, etc. The argument stands even if having same sex attraction gave you a dignity beyond that of other people because it has nothing to do with the people who ask for the legal recognition but everything to do with the union itself.
This argument stands regardless of what we do about man-women relationships. marriage as traditionally defined bwteen a man and a woman may be good or bad. The government may or may not have an interest in recognizing this union. The answer to this question is not affected or related to whether or not the government should recognize the union of two men or two women.
This argument stands even if the love of two people of the same sex is stronger and more permanent and more joyous than those of the opposite sex. Remember, it isn't about love. The question is not whether or not there love is good or worthy or real. The question is simple: Does the government have sufficient reason to legally get involved in the private relationship of two people of the same sex.
Presumably, you are going to answer that the government does have good reason to get involved in this kind of relationship. I would like to hear your reasons. Since it is reasonable to accept the idea that the government in general should stay out of people's private personal lives, I would say that the burden of proof is on you to show that the norm (government uninvolved) does not apply here.
Thank-you, now present your reasons and I will respond.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.