The Instigator
KilannaGreen
Pro (for)
Tied
7 Points
The Contender
Domr
Con (against)
Tied
7 Points

Gays should have the same rights as everyone else

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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/30/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,454 times Debate No: 61083
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (21)
Votes (4)

 

KilannaGreen

Pro

I believe that all people gay, straight,lesbian,blue,purple it doesn't matter everyone should have the same rights and opportunities others have. This is because gay people are treated differently in many communities like the straight and religious communities. They always argue that homosexual people are not normal because they simply can not procreate. While this is true there are many straight people who can't procreate either, so because those people can't reproduce they should be treated less than of a heterosexual person. This should not be true.
Domr

Con

Thank you Pro for making this debate.

Pro must affirm that "Gays should have the same rights as everyone else".
(I am assuming heterosexual's is what Pro is referring to.)


I also strongly assume we are speaking of the rights of straight or gay citizens in the US.
(Religion is not a matter of rights per the separation of church and state, so I ask to keep your arguments regarding the lawful rights of citizens.)


I will leave most the the majority of the opening arguments up to Pro, but I must ask you to answer one question in your opening round.


What rights do Heterosexual US citizens have contrary to those rights of a Homosexual US citizen?

Thank you, and good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
KilannaGreen

Pro

I'm glad you have joined this debate Domr.

There are many rights that many homosexuals do not have. And many of them are medical and government related things.
one of them include blood donation. Lets say a homosexual is going to a blood drive and they wish to help give blood donations. When they take the survey for the blood donation there is a question which then asks if the donor is a homosexual or has been active in any homosexual behavior. After the questions are answered and the survey is reviewed the nurse will tell the donor he/she cannot participate in the blood donation because of the following question that was answered.

Another right that homosexuals do not have is partners have virtually no right to impact how death wishes are carried out which means they can even be over turned by the family despite a clear will. These can include custody decisions, funeral arrangements and real estate ownership decisions.

There are many other rights that includes gay marriage that I could speak of but for the sake of making this shirt and sweet I won't go into all of the rights that heterosexual people have verse the rights homosexuals have. I would like to conclude my statement by saying this isn't all about who cares about who more this is about fairness and equality between sexual orientation.

I'd like to thank you again for debating this topic with me. This his my first time on debate.org and I'm enjoying it already.
Domr

Con

Thank you for your arguments, it seems you have made 2 points on Gay rights, and how they differ from heterosexuals.

1. blood donations
2. partner authority over death wishes

Rebuttals:

1. Giving blood is not a right given to citizens. It is a choice. Blood donation centers are not govermnet officiated, meaning the rights of citizen unforunately do not apply. This point does not affect the rights of straight vs. gay.

2. This is essentially a point advocating gay marriage equality. This is giving extra rights to homosexuals. EVERYONE has a right to marry someone of the opposite gender. Heterosexual marriage has a number of rights including advocating the death wishes of your heterosexual marriage partner.

If a homosexual declines to marry someone of the opposite sex, they are in turn forfeiting the same right everyone has. In asking for homosexual marriage, The gay community is actually asking for a different right.


So Gay people have the EXACT same rights as straight people.
Debate Round No. 2
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 3 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
Also, If you sent replies on any other debates to me that I've missed, let me know, I find it difficult to keep track I'm afraid.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 3 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
You know that Magna Carta you said you kept from the british? The only clause of relevance in that left in force in England is due process of the law, you know, the one where people go to court when they commit a crime? Why do you highlight "kid"? Does due process in America not apply to adults? As for cops not wanting to draw their guns, that's kinda my point. Cops going around like their with blackwater in fellujah. That works out at about what? 1:1000? Still higher than in Ireland, im afraid to say. In fact, to the best of my knowledge that rate is 0, for any deaths in the process of arrest. I'm sure you're brother is, and I'm sure he was good at the job he did, or is doing as well, as any professional peace officer should be. And no, that's just plain wrong, and if you actually believe that you have to be kidding yourself.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
we did seem to stray from that. And as far as those cops in furgeson. Did you also see the black thugs that looted and destroyed property of people who had nothing to do with the shooting. Did you see the face of the cop that that "kid" beat . Or did you not realize that brown went for that smaller cops gun. What do you suppose he would have done if he had control of it?No, that "kid" certainly was no angel.And neither are the poverty pimps like al Sharpton.Why isn'e reverend al in Detroit decrying all the murders of blacks on blacks. Of the 400,000 arrests last year in America, only 400 were shot by police. I am sure most cops would not want to draw their guns if they can prevent it. And certainly would not want to fire them.My brother was a cop for 18 years and is proud that he never had to fire his weapon. Just don't aim a gun at the police and you will be alright.As far as homelessness is concerned. There is no such thing. It is worklessness. A mcdonalds job would get anyone a cheap apartment somewhere.I have yet to see a homeless guy so debilitated that he cannot work.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 3 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
I also fail to see what any of this has to do with the actual question in the debate by the way!:)
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 3 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
So you have a problem with me being left handed now as well?, and please, stop calling me english aswell. I'm not english, im not liberal, I'm not, well. Anything you've assumed about me so far. Yes, I've paid my taxes. It's shocking, isn't it? Imagine, paying ones taxes and being proud to do so. Because guess what? I'm proud of my country, because we don't leave our people to die if they don't have the money for healthcare if it can be prevented. We don't leave our people to go homeless if they can't afford housing, or not give them a college education if they have the intelligence to make the use of it. No, the French defeated the greatest power in history. Hell, you were even bought and paid for by the Royal Treasury. Not you personally, of course, the rebel forces and their equipment, and their training for a lot of it as well.
That being said, I suppose I should thank you guys for bankrupting the Monarchy, otherwise there would have been no French Revolution. I'm not disagreeing with you because of any label you choose to brand yourself with either, Btw, and I should apologise if you think I am. Also, only three articles in the Magna Carta are still in force, why did you decide to keep it? Now, I guess I should also apologise for my "backward" comment, I had images in my mind of the cops in Furguson when I said it, and it was far to reminiscent of our troops in the Golan for me.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
The problem you lefties have is you always want to help people out of other peoples pockets. Have you emptied your bank account before you took to emptiing another man's. I dare say you don't.We conservatives just do not raise flags announcing when we give.All I know from history that we defeated the greatest military power at the time.With no government to back us up. We did send you scurrying with your tails between your legs.Now we do want to give credit where it is due.We did keep the best that England have to offer, like the magna carta.And don't think I am prejudiced . I am English and Cherokee indian.And after the war of 1812, we seemed to put our differences behind us.I do not disagree with you because you are English, but because you are liberal. Always wanting to force your ideas on us through government force.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 3 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
Hahaha, English? Why do you make a habit out of making wrong assumptions? And I'm sure you will do and say whatever you want, your making that quite obvious to the world. Yeah, I have no problem with that, because I have no problem with a nation which believes in looking out for one another, unlike the selfishness exhibited by the right,. Yeah I'm sure that nine year old was so well trained, as well as all of your mass murderers, and here we go again! I'd love to see your AR-15 up against an ICBM. Also, you do realise the UK was whooping your asses until continental Europe decided to pitch in.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
You call us backward, you didn't have that opinion when hitler was cramming Germany down your throat.Do you know why Japan never attacked the west coast of America.They made the statement that they would have to face a gun from behind every blade of grass.And I believe I will stay and do what I can to stem the tide of government intrusion. I am not alone in this.You English want government to hold your hand from birth to deatjh. We in America, for the most part, will take care of ourselves, thank you. And that "well regulated" meant well trained in 17th century America. In fact, the first American government urged people to own guns.As our government slipped from a republic to a democracy, guns became a problem for government. And we couldn't have sent you English back to king George if we were not an armed society. We did not have a government to fight for us.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 3 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
Nope. If you have a problem with taxes, you can leave. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. And no, they don't come with guns drawn, though maybe they do in America, I've seen how backward that place is. I know, your immorality was the one challenging morality, and I therefore was obliged to answer, and thereby be challenged. I'm glad we agree now though that your viewpoint is immoral, and I'm sure we know what the cause if that is. Actually, they do recognise your beliefs, as that is effectively what liberty fundamentally is. A recognition of the rights of another, in this case, the right of worship in the manner that they choose.
No, the second amendment means absolutely nothing to me. Just out of curiosity, does well regulated mean anything to you? Another pointless simple line of rhetoric for a simplistic world view. I do not have to worry about criminals in my neighbourhood either, because nobody has a gun, and because we are smart enough to have a well trained and unarmed police force and govern our state as a bastion of common sense, though it's a bit funny, you have a problem with government force and want them simultaneously to be armed. Lol.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
When I say government force, that is just what government does. It forces people to pay taxes . Just don't pay and they can come with guns drawn. At the least make you sell all you have to pay up.If all they want is to be together, civil unions would fill that .You are the one that is morally challenged.Why do I , as a christain, have to recognize their union. I don't, no more than they have to recognize by beliefs.And cops should be armed. Second amendment mean anything to you. Because the only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. And the police are not first responders, the victim is.If government has taken away his right to self-defence, then we are at the mercy of criminals. I do not have to worry about criminals in my neighborhood, everybody owns a gun. They are smart enough to ply their trade in gun free zones which liberalism has mandated.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by thenewkidd 3 years ago
thenewkidd
KilannaGreenDomrTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Though ethically I am for Pro on this, I feel the debate went towards the con on this, There were other ways Pro could have attacked this issue head on with using the constitution to his benefit than using "human privileges" and stating that they are rights when that is a fallacy.
Vote Placed by Mister_Man 3 years ago
Mister_Man
KilannaGreenDomrTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: This is the same thing as being against Feminism because men and women are already treated equally. Pro implied gays do not have the same rights, while Con showed that they did. It's a strange topic of argument, as gays do have the same rights... it's hard to vote because you would assume Con would take the position that gays should not have the same rights, and instead he showed that they already have the same rights. Pro's argument wasn't much, considering he pointed out "rights" that gays already have, and Con's argument wasn't pertaining to the topic at hand. I have to vote Con simply because he argued against Pro and did beat him in the debate, even if it wasn't necessarily on topic.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
KilannaGreenDomrTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: con accidentally made points for PRO, he talked about how gays have rights like everyone else.... -.-
Vote Placed by TrasguTravieso 3 years ago
TrasguTravieso
KilannaGreenDomrTied
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 set forth a very convincing case, but for Pro's position. The prompt was that Gays should have the same rights as others, Con therefore had to argue that they shouldn't, he instead argued that they do. Judging on the basis of the prompt, therefore, I must award the debate to Pro.