The Instigator
Firelife
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points
The Contender
magic123
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Homo-Sexuals should be allowed to marry

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
Firelife
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/1/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 831 times Debate No: 59827
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (2)

 

Firelife

Pro

First round is acceptence and a quick basic outline of your argument second round and third round will be main arguments/rebuttles/whatever fourth will be closing statement

Hello debaters I belive that homo-sexuals have the right to marry if they want and there is no logical reason not to allow them to marry.
magic123

Con

I am accepting this debate as the con but let me set something straight, I do not think negatively towards homosexuals. I am a christian who goes by the bible. I think homosexuals should have something to connect them but I do not believe it should be called marriage. That is a sacred bond between a man and a woman.
Debate Round No. 1
Firelife

Pro

Ok here are my reasons why I think Homo-Sexuals should be allowed to marrry

1 They cannot help being homo-sexuals. If they are in love with the same gender they cannot help it. Its not like a homo sexual can choose to be straight their genes makes them a homo-sexual. If we don't allow these people the basic fair chance to marry then how is this fair or equal to them? You should not leave out homo-sexuals from marriage because they were litteraly speaking born to be homo-sexuals.

2 Studies show that in countries where homo sexuals are banned HIV rates go up and homo sexuals have more stress and anxiety. (Conducted by emory university)

3 Society is changing polls are showing that with each passing year more people want homo sexuals to marry should we ignore their opinions?

4 In the case of people saying homo sexuals have bad families there has been studies that show families arn't affected by the parents sexual orientation.

Sources

http://en.m.wikipedia.org...
magic123

Con

magic123 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
magic123

Con

magic123 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Firelife

Pro

Since con has not spoken for two rounds nor provided any evidence then he has lost.
magic123

Con

magic123 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ZenoCitium 2 years ago
ZenoCitium
What's your point lifemeans?
Posted by lifemeansevolutionisgood 2 years ago
lifemeansevolutionisgood
Lol, marriage is sacred... That is why marriage existed independently from religion for the longest time.
Posted by Sfaulkner 2 years ago
Sfaulkner
I mean to say they should always have the right. Also, I never said anything was complete fact, this is how I think everything should be.
Posted by ZenoCitium 2 years ago
ZenoCitium
I'm not sure that they will always have the right. First, in many states they don't . Secondly, you present the facts as if they are overwhelmingly in your arguments favor. They aren't. Check out Baker v. Nelson.
Posted by Sfaulkner 2 years ago
Sfaulkner
When it comes to faith binding, it is up to the church whether or not it will perform the marriage. Legally, homosexuals always have their right to marriage.
Posted by ZenoCitium 2 years ago
ZenoCitium
The conflict here is that marriage has two identities. People identify marriage as both a legal biding partnership and a faith binding partnership. The equal rights argument applies only to the legal partnership. I'm assuming that Con will enlighten us as to how we could separate the two while preserving equal rights. Previously civil unions were not acceptable because they still lacked rights guaranteed by marriage.
Posted by Sfaulkner 2 years ago
Sfaulkner
Preston, it is unequal. There was a time when you could not marry someone because they were a different race (I think we agree that is inequality), and now, in many states, you can not marry someone because they are the same sex. This is a problem of equal rights.
Posted by Sfaulkner 2 years ago
Sfaulkner
Why does the word "marriage" itself matter more than the actual act being performed? Con's statement was that there should be some way of connecting homosexuals but we just should not call it marriage (even though the process could be exactly the same). Should we invent a new word meaning "a sacred bond between a man and another man or two women"? Why does the word matter more than the act?
Posted by Preston 2 years ago
Preston
Sfaulkner, I cant marry a man, you cant marry someone sharing your gender, how is that inequal?
Posted by kbub 2 years ago
kbub
Con: "...let me set something straight..." XD
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Firelifemagic123Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Firelifemagic123Tied
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: Forfeiture. PS Wikipeadia is not an acceptable source. If you wish to use Wikipeadia then use the links at the bottom of the page.