It is hypocritical to be opposed to same sex marriage but not contraception, divorce, etc.
Debate Rounds (4)
So, these are the rules:
I say that it is hypocritical to hold that things like contraception or divorce and those kinds of things are okay but same sex marraige/acts are bad.
Round 1 is for acceptance
Round 2 I will make my opening argument. You may respond or make yours
Round 3 we will both offer clarification and rebuttals
Round 4 is for the closing statements
Many Evangelical Christians who are very opposed to same-sex marriage, have no problem with birth control and see divorce as not good but not necessarily wrong. There are certainly other groups that have these positions, although I think it is most common among strong-conservative Christians (although certainly not all).
The reason that these are inconsistent is this:
First of all, with regards to birth control, may people oppose same sex unions because they can't have kids. They say that sodomy is unnatural because it cannot lead to new life. However, isn't this the same of many acts heterosexuals do? Isn't this true of sterilized sex or contracepted sex? How can it be any different? Maybe one is "grosser" but fundamentally, they are both very similar. How can one morally object to one but not the other? How can someone be against gay people doing the same things straight people do?
Secondly, with divorce. Many people say that homosexuality is an affront to the dignity of marriage. However, how can one say that divorce isn't but homosexuality is? How can two men or two women who are committed to one another harm the dignity of marriage but not divorce? This seems to not make sense.
I'd like to start off by thanking my adversary for the debate, and I look forward to this disscussion.
I'll begin by saying that I am not against same sex marriage. I however, do not believe being opposed to same sex marriage will automatically makes one a hypocrite. I will begin by breaking down my adversaries arguments, and then provide you with a counter narrative.
My adversary opens his argument by talking about Evangelical Christians. I think it's safe to assume he's implying the Bible is against divorce aswell as gay marriage. While this alone is HIGHLY debatable, I will assume this is a correct assumption for the sake of argument and general concensus. It is hypocritical to be opposed to same sex marriage, but not contraception, divorce, ect. if you are coming at the issue from a textual perspective. However, if I provide an argument that does not use religion, this part of my opponents argument falls apart.
My opponent then points to some of the points made by the anti-gay marriage side that don't involve the Bible. And I agree with him. Yes, saying you oppose same sex marriage because homosexuals can't have kids, but being in favor of infertile couples rights to marry, is fundamentally hypocritical. I would, however, like to point out that this is not related to contraception. People can still have kids if they use contraception. The point of most contraception is that you can be selective of when, and how many children you have. However, if someone isn't a Christian, and they don't use this argument to support their reasoning for being against gay marriage, my opponents argument falls apart some more.
And onto point number three, divorce. The meaning of marriage is a subjective thing. Some people find it to be a religious practice, some people a cultural, some people a deep interpersonal union. Either way, the "sanctaty" of marriage is completely opinion based. For instance, I can say that two same sex partners marrying is not the traditional course of marriage, and therefore I am against it. I can say in the very next sentance, that I have no problem with divorce because it's also been around for thousands of years, and doesn't tarnish the tradition of marriage. I could also say I don't believe divorce is detrimental to the foundation of marriage because marriage isn't about how long it lasts, but how well it worked, how much each party got out of it. This, is not hypocritical in any way.
And onto the main point I would like the readers to consider. What if someone is against gay marriage, simply because they don't like gay people? They are a divorced atheist, and during their vesectamy they think to themselves, "You know, I really don't like gay people. I don't want them to get married." I'm not asking you to think if that's a morally right thing to believe, I'm asking if that automatically makes them a hypocrite.
Dmot forfeited this round.
No problem. Thanks for the debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Enji 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: As Con points out - "if someone isn't a Christian, and they don't use [the arguments Pro puts forth against same sex marriage] to support their reasoning for being against gay marriage" then it is not hypocritical. Pro would have needed to prove that all people against gay marriage oppose it for the reasons he puts forth which isn't the case. Arguments to Con. Pro forfeits losing conduct.
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.