The Instigator
Nely
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Sojourner
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

Legalize gay marriage

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 4 votes the winner is...
Sojourner
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/19/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 637 times Debate No: 49520
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (8)
Votes (4)

 

Nely

Pro

Marriage is a right that everyone SHOULD HAVE, no matter if they are marrying a person of the same sex.
Sojourner

Con

The resolution as stated is, “Legalize gay marriage”.

Pro continues in round one by stating that, “Marriage is a right that everyone SHOULD HAVE no matter if they are marrying a person of the same sex”. As Pro is making a positive assertion against the federally established norm, Pro has the burden of proof.

I accept this challenge, and I will show though rebuttal that although marriage may be construed as a “right”, the notion that an individual should be able to marry a person of the same sex may not fall under the auspices of a legal right.

I look forwad to Pro’s arguments.

Debate Round No. 1
Nely

Pro

I understand that it may not be a legal right yet, but it should be because marriage is something that anybody who wants it should be able to make it happen, it has already been legalized in some states. Most people use religious believes as an argument against gay marriage but having believes does not give anybody the right to hurt other, just like they are not hurting you. I believe marriage should be for anyone who loves each other.
Sojourner

Con

I thank Pro for his comments. As stated in round 1, Pro has the burden of proof. I will attempt to refute his points by breaking them down into three distinct arguments.

Marriage should be legal
Pro argues that marriage is a type of thing that should be available to anyone who wants it, and it is legal in some states. Generally, I am in agreement, and currently marriage is legal in all US states. However, there are some restrictions. In many states you are not allowed to marry a first cousin (1). In ALL US states polygamy is illegal. Just because a “thing” is wanted or desired by some people does not necessarily equate to the notion that it should be legalized. A person may want to have multiple wives, but it may not in the best interest of the state to legalize polygamy.

Religious beliefs
Pro makes the point that, “Most people use religious believes (sic) as an argument against gay marriage”. This may be true, but since I am not (nor intend on) using religious beliefs as part of my argument, this point is merely a straw man (2).

Love
Pro provides us with his opinion that “marriage should be for anyone who loves each other.” In order for Pro to uphold his burden of proof, he must show why the state should be involved in “love” relationships. Should states legislate boyfriend and girlfriend relationships if the parties are in love? How does the state determine if the parties truly are in love. Should states administer some kind of love test? I agree that love is an important part of marriage, but from a legalization perspective, I do not see the relevancy.

Summary
It does not appear that Pro has upheld his burden of proof. The only real agreement he made on the specific topic of gay marriage related to a straw man argument about religious beliefs. The balance of his arguments merely focused on marriage in general , but he offered no compelling evidence that gay marriage should be legal.

Sources
1 http://www.ncsl.org...
2 http://en.wikipedia.org...

Debate Round No. 2
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Juris 2 years ago
Juris
Oh I was not able to vote hahaha. But I have my explanation. It was a mistake. Anyway I think my vote is no longer needed
Posted by Finalfan 2 years ago
Finalfan
Also the "gift" of procreation has become a detriment to society! Basically your beliefs are not reason too ban gay marriage especially since you do not have a shred of evidence to back up your beliefs! Its like believing someone is going to hell... unless you go to hell take a video of said person in the lake of fire and upload it to youtube.. You really have no clue hell exists let alone have the knowledge of who is damned! If you are going to make such a ridiculous claim you need something more than an abstract book to defend your position!
Posted by Finalfan 2 years ago
Finalfan
Nor is homosexuality perverse.. I think you mean yucky!
Posted by Finalfan 2 years ago
Finalfan
Except you do not know God exists. Nor do you know what he truly wishes for us.. nor do we actually get married because of God
Posted by MysticMansion 2 years ago
MysticMansion
What is in question is what marriage really is? Marriage as a legal contract performed by civil authority is not recognized as marriage by the Catholic Church. Unfortunately the two opposing ideologies differ on what marriage really is.

The Sacrament of marriage where God binds two individuals into one being until death. This is what Catholics and some protestants mean when they use the word marriage. If those who promote homosexual marriage are meaning this state of marriage this is beyond any law to grant. Because God would have no part in the mockery of His Sacrament.

The idea that marriage is only about a long term commitment is as pathetic as the idea that God would introduce a sacrament that any government has power over. Marriage as a Sacrament is performed by the man and woman by willing the Sacrament to be and for themselves to be joined by God into one being. God would not do this for any homosexual combination because homosexuality is a mockery of life itself.

Marriage has about a hundred purposes in God's plan and his reason of giving us the gift of participation in procreation. Marriage is not just about bringing forth children but most of marriage is tied directly to its purpose. The husband and wife are to become the building block of the future for humanity which is beyond the capacity of homosexuals to do. They are to examples of Christian virtue and behaviour and establish a foundation of goodness for the children to learn to know love and serve God and for some to offer themselves into religious life. There are many other reasons none of which can be fulfilled by any homosexual union. Perverse lifestyle choices cannot be considered good example of Christian virtue.
Posted by Finalfan 2 years ago
Finalfan
This was the worst gay marriage debate I have ever seen! Pro failed on so many levels. But seriously there is no reason why gay people shouldn't get married! Its over and done!
Posted by Sojourner 2 years ago
Sojourner
Was straw man the incorrect term?
Posted by IwinYoulose333 2 years ago
IwinYoulose333
Lawl. Straw man. Lawl.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Juris 2 years ago
Juris
NelySojournerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has poor arguments and not supported by sources or evidence. While con argued well and discussed what the debate is all about. The status quo is maintained as Pro failed to establish a sufficient reason to shift the leverage
Vote Placed by Finalfan 2 years ago
Finalfan
NelySojournerTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ultra fail!
Vote Placed by IwinYoulose333 2 years ago
IwinYoulose333
NelySojournerTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had badly formed arguments where as con had well formedand well explained ones.
Vote Placed by Geogeer 2 years ago
Geogeer
NelySojournerTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never developed his argument.