The Instigator
urapai
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
TheInterlang
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Gays should not get married

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 2 votes the winner is...
TheInterlang
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/9/2013 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 729 times Debate No: 42001
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

urapai

Pro

Please do not swear....
Please accept ideas, but don't be afraid to rebuttal....
Please don't take too much time to write debates....
No personal attacks.... no bullying....
TheInterlang

Con

There is no reason why gay/lesbian/transgendered shouldn't get to marry. It doesn't affect anyone at all, as long as both people are consenting.

"But they can't have children..." First, not everyone can have children. Second, even if a straight couple wants to have children, they might not want to. Third, gays are still able to adopt. There are plenty of parentless kids in the world who need parents.

"But doesn't every child deserve a mom and a dad?" Gay adoption doesn't pull kids from a nuclear family. It pulls them from a cruel, dark child center where they may spend their entire childhood. Every child doesn't deserve child deserves loving parents (whether it is a mom, a dad, a mom and a dad, 2 dads, or 2 moms). We really need some people to adopt the millions of starving children, instead of just putting more on this overpopulated globe.
Debate Round No. 1
urapai

Pro

Though your comment about adoption was impeccably well thought out, I see it in a different perspective. In those child centres, those children are well enough fed. Now let us say that a child was adopted, unfortunately, many will offend the child because of his 2 dads or mom's. he will have a harder life. This child could have had the chance to be adopted into a happily well family, but instead, the child was adopted into this family with many problems.

Also, you mentioned

"There is no reason why gay/lesbian/transgendered shouldn't get to marry. It doesn't affect anyone at all, as long as both people are consenting."

However because of this corrupt society, it is affecting them negatively also.

There are also many other arguments that people mention, such as "People should be aloud to love whoever they please". But if you think like that, then it is also aloud to marry a horse, or fall in love with your sister.

I am excited to see more of your interesting arguments
TheInterlang

Con

TheInterlang forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
urapai

Pro

I await my opponent for his next turn...
TheInterlang

Con

"However, because of this corrupt society, it is affecting them negatively also." This is paradoxical logic. The whole point of the LGBT movement is to convince people that being gay is just a variation, not a mental disorder.

At child centers, children are raised in a mass situation. They never experience being in a small home, given the toys and tools that most kids take foor granted. It is a rough life, even if they do get the bare necessities.

There is a difference between being gay and being a pedophile/incest/bestiality. A child may not fully understand the consequences of sex, while two consenting gays do. A horse doesn't even understand the human LANGUAGE, let alone human sex. When you fall in love with your sister, you have the potential to produce biological kids with defects. Since gays can't produce biological children at all, it is no more harmful to society than being forever alone. Besides, gays are a part of society.

In the past, famines, wars, and diseases were much more common than they are today. When it came to reproduction, all hands were on deck, and producing 7 children per mother. Otherwise, society would crumble. Now, with more food, more cures, and less war, populations are increasing at a steep rate. Now only 2 children per mother are needed, and that number is as a whole. That means, if some mothers have more than 2 children, it is okay for other people to not have any at all.

You should really set longer debate times.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 3 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
Axons, Glenn's comment reads a lot like satire...
Posted by TheInterlang 3 years ago
TheInterlang
There are actually very few gay people, and since most people will be straight anyway, there really isn't a problem.
Posted by Axons 3 years ago
Axons
@glennj, your against gay marriage because children in school would be "forced" to learn about homosexuality? "Many more children may want to even become gay", is there something wrong with that? Not to mention your acting like gay marriage would ruin society...... Seriously, gay people should be allowed to marry!!!
Posted by y0y0 3 years ago
y0y0
i believe that gays/lesbians should be able to get married if they want to FREE COUNTRY RIGHT?
Posted by Glennj 3 years ago
Glennj
I believe that gays should not be able to get married. The fact that TheInterLang said that their was no problem with it was shocking. Obviously he doesn't understand the outcome of what would happen if this bill was past. Children in school would be forced to learn about homosexuality the same way they had to learn about different races and different beliefs. Many more children may want to even become gay. I also agree with you urapai when you were talking about the freedom to love who you want phrase. If this law was past for all states... then many more laws would be past later on in the future. In Hawaii this bill was past recently. I already see the difference in the Hawaiian island society... mostly because I live here.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 3 years ago
KingDebater
urapaiTheInterlangTied
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: Con forfeited, but he did have good points
Vote Placed by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
urapaiTheInterlangTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither sides provided a strong argument backed by sources. I gave the Pro the conduct point because Con forfeited a round. This was a poor debate because neither had any facts. I couldn't be convinced by either side due to the lack of evidence. Good luck to you both in your future debates.