The Instigator
BlackHomophobicAtheists
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SnaxAttack
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

People who support gay marriage and homosexuality are delusional.

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 1 vote the winner is...
SnaxAttack
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/12/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,005 times Debate No: 78600
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)

 

BlackHomophobicAtheists

Pro

Marirage "equality" cannot be reached unless ALL TYPES of marriages are legal including incestuous marriage and polygamy. Excluding other types of marriages violates the marriage equality argument. An example is, racial equality cannot be reached unless it applies to ALL races. Therefore, anyone who thinks allowing gays to marry is marriage "equality" is delusional.

2. Gay supporters view gays as if they were a race. People who oppose gay marriage see gays in the category with incest, bestiality and pedophilia. Who's right? Race is not even a behavior.
Like homosexuality, incest, bestiality and pedophilia all involve high health risk sexual desires. Race has nothing to do with sexual desires or behavior. Therefore, gay supporters are delusional for even comparing gays to race.
SnaxAttack

Con

I have accepted this debate because I thought it would be fun, and disprove my opponents point on how supporters of Same Sex Marriage and Homosexuality are not "delusional". To begin, I wish to provide the definition of "delusional" since my opponent has not. The definition is defined as: "Having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions".

First off, I ask my opponent if it is "unrealistic" that Same Sex Marriage was legalized in all 50 states? Its a fact that they did, and is realistic; and not the opposite. So technically if it is a fact that they legalized it, is it still unrealistic? A fact does not fall under the category of being "delusional" because its a truth.

Debate Round No. 1
BlackHomophobicAtheists

Pro

You spewed a straw man fallacy. In other words, you argued against a distorted version of my claim.

I never claimed the legalization of gay marriage is unrealistic. Just because something is legal doesn't mean its supporters can't be delusional. Some countries consider atheism a crime and that law is rooted in the belief in God. As an atheist, I don't believe God exist.
Like the legalization of gay marriage, that law is rooted in a delusion. Many gay supporters also embrace delusions. An example is, if a man thinks he's a woman, gay supporters would embrace that delusion even though he's clearly a man. Living in these modern times does not make humans immune to mass delusions.
SnaxAttack

Con

I ask my opponent how its "delusional" to have the right to have freedom when getting married to the same sex? Because if we still continue to follow the definition of "delusional", it means to have an unrealistic opinion. Is my opponent claiming that an opinion is wrong? An opinion, stated from the article "Fact, Opinion, False Claim, or Untested Claim", it states that an opinion is: "An opinion is a self-report of feelings or personal judgment". In this case, the LGBT Community have an idea that they should have a right to marry someone as the same sex. That is not unrealistic, but is a fact that can happen in society. My opponent is making a claim that all Gay Supporters are "delusional" because of having an opinion that is opposite to his.

Secondly, my opponent gives the following quote: "An example is, if a man thinks he's a woman, gay supporters would embrace that delusion even though he's clearly a man". First off, I wish to state the fact of what the LGBT Community stands for, which is the rights for Same Sex Couples, Bisexuals, and Transgenders. Through research, I found out more information about a Transgender and that its a choice to be the opposite sex. Stated under "Do Transsexuals have a Choice" it states: "The rationality of decisions is very much about the way you view the options. This culture wants to convince us that no rational person would do either, and enforces that decision with stigma". If we define "rational", it is defined as: "Based on or in accordance with reason or logic". Technically being Transgender is a choice, it falls more under the category of a choice in being rational, and rational is the usage of logic. That is not delusional because of the decision being more logical, than "unrealistic".

Sources:
http://www.gendercentre.org.au...
http://www.auburn.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
BlackHomophobicAtheists

Pro

fuels my opponent how its "delusional" to have" freedom when getting married to the same sex?"

This is a loaded question. I didn't say it's a delusion to have freedom to marry the same sex. My point is, gay supporters are delusional for believing that allowing gay marriage is marriage "equality" when other types of marriages aren't legal. By definition, equality means equality for everyone. if it's "equality" for some, then its not "equality". some people would like to marry their sisters or more than one person. those people can't marry who they want so therefore, there is no marriage "equality"

"Because if we still continue to follow the definition of "delusional", it means to have an unrealistic opinion"

Believing that allowing gay marriage is marriage "equality" is clearly a delusion when other types of marriages aren't legal.

"Is my opponent claiming that an opinion is wrong? An opinion, stated from the article "Fact, Opinion, False Claim, or Untested Claim", it states that an opinion is: "An opinion is a self-report of feelings or personal judgment"

A belief is an opinion and an outrageous, false belief is a delusion. Therefore, believing that allowing gay marriage is marriage "equality" is a delusion

"In this case, the LGBT Community have an idea that they should have a right to marry someone as the same sex"

The belief that fuels the idea is a delusion

"That is not unrealistic, but is a fact that can happen in society. My opponent is making a claim that all Gay Supporters are "delusional" because of having an opinion that is opposite to his"

Again, you spewed a straw man fallacy. My point is, the belief that fuels the support is a delusion

"Technically being Transgender is a choice, it falls more under the category of a choice in being rational"

Using my opponents logic, If a man who's darker than Michael Jordan Chooses to be Caucasian even though his DNA clearly shows that he's black, that man's choice is somehow "rational". In reality, That man's "choice is clearly fueled by a delusion

Any man who thinks he's a woman even though the scientific evidence clearly shows that he's a man has to be delusional.

Gay supporters are delusional
SnaxAttack

Con

For the final round, I wish to point out some flaws within my opponents argument. The first being that my opponent is referring to that now that Same Sex Marriage is legalized does not mean we have achieved "true" equality. If we look at my opponents point of view, everyone in the country is technically delusional. We all want to be equal, but we are not truly "equal"; however we make the assumption of being "equal". Technically, nothing in our society will be truly equal; but we just assume everything is equal. If we take a look again at the definition of "delusional" it is defined as: "Having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions". Voters, I ask "Do we have beliefs that can be realistic"? An example is wanting to get something, but not having enough money at the time; but will get some in the future. That is a belief that can be supported by facts, and is not an unrealistic scenario. Have we achieved "true" Marriage Equality, no; but the idea is realistic enough and can be supported by facts, so it technically isn't delusional just possible. Its not like saying "We will achieve the unicorn rainbow government", that statement is unrealistic and has no facts what so ever. By the way, for fun, someone establish the "Unicorn Rainbow Government" in the Comment Section below.

For the Transgender argument, let me refer back to my previous argument. Given my own quote, I stated: "Through research, I found out more information about a Transgender and that its a choice to be the opposite sex". Basically, its a choice to be Transgender or not. My opponent brings up an example about an African American trying to be Caucasian, in which he states: "If a man who's darker than Michael Jordan Chooses to be Caucasian even though his DNA clearly shows that he's black, that man's choice is somehow "rational". In reality, That man's "choice is clearly fueled by a delusion". I will Rebuttal against my opponents statement with some research about the history of race. Stated under the article "We're All Black- According to Genetics", they state: "The jig is up. Thanks to the genetics revolution we now know that there is no such thing as race. The Human Genome Project (HGP) has determined unequivocally that there is the same amount of genetic variation among individuals within a so called racial group as there is between individuals in different racial groups. What that means is that there is no real genetic difference between blacks and whites or between whites and Asians or between any of the so called races". The article goes further to explain that Caucasian individuals are descended by African Americans. The article furthermore states: "But buckle your seat belts folks, because the genetic answer is that we are all really black. And white people are pale adaptations of black people that evolved during the past 140,000 years".

Following my opponents argument, we are technically all African American; so there is no reason to change ones skin color, and if one does, it is more in the form of trying to relive the past. Its similar to going to a Midevil Times Festival, where you choose to dress up as a member from the past; this is no different.

To conclude the argument, as we can see, the true delusional individual in this debate is my opponent. My opponent makes strong claims that anyone who follows the idea of "Homosexuality" is "delusional, yet provides no evidence. Ideas yes, but in a debate; evidence is needed to support both ideas and opinions, which I have successfully done in this debate. I have provided many sources, and counter-argued my opponents statements with logic. Also, my opponent has made a grammar mistake within this round of the deabte with the following quote: "some people would like to marry their sisters or more than one person". He forgot to capitalize the "S" because of being a new sentence, but thats the Voters decision on how picky they want to be with Grammar. Overall, I urge you to vote Con!

Source:
http://www.adversity.net...
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by SnaxAttack 1 year ago
SnaxAttack
Clearly your not a great debater when you failed to define the term "delusional". If you defined the word then you might have had a better shot, but you didn't. Now you know to define your words when you begin a debate.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
You know, all the extreme anti-gay rhetoric is bad enough, but the fact that you can't even accept the possibility that you made a mistake in this debate is just mind boggling. Are you really so conceited? Do you really just believe that your argument was beyond reproach? Is accusing me of bias seriously the only way you can feel like a good debater, or are you actually willing to engage with the substance of my RFD and prove my bias?
Posted by BlackHomophobicAtheists 1 year ago
BlackHomophobicAtheists
A great debater knows bs. My claim is simply true. You're saying only one voter who's possibly gay and biased doesn't know the definition of 'delusion' so he voted against me. A delusion is a delusion. Of course a gay will disagree. Gays are the most deceitful group on earth
Posted by SnaxAttack 1 year ago
SnaxAttack
Also BlackHomophobicAtheists, you showing attitude shows that you will not be a great debater. A great debater must learn of his, or her, mitakes. Just because you lost does not mean anyone "cheated", it just means you just lost a debate. Now you know in the future, to define your words and not give attitude just because you lost a debate. Its not the end of the world.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
...Seriously? You're accusing me of hiding in the closet now? I'm firm enough in my sexuality that I honestly don't care if you believe me to be homosexual, but is this the only way you can feel secure that you won this debate? To think I have some inside bias that precludes your victory? It can't possibly be anything faulty in your arguments?

If you felt that marriage equality was the sole reason why anyone would support gay marriage, then why do so many of Con's arguments avoid the issue entirely? But I think you're getting side-tracked. The issue with this debate was that you failed to define delusional, and when Con did, you let him get away with it without response. I didn't even have to get down to the specific reasons why people might support gay marriage - the debate was done long before I reached those points.

For the record (though Con didn't argue this, so it wouldn't have factored into my decision), adding more people to the list of "those who can be married" does increase equality. Whether it brings about absolute equality or not is really irrelevant; it's not obvious how it's harmful to make some people equal while ignoring others. Why is making some people equal without raising others to that same level of equality bad?
Posted by BlackHomophobicAtheists 1 year ago
BlackHomophobicAtheists
In order for delusional people to recognize their delusion, other examples must be shown.
If a group was crying "racial equality" but refuse to apply the equality to all the other races is clearly delusional. Martin Luther clearly meant all races in regards to racial equality, not blacks only. Gays only want gay marriage for gays and they don't care about any other type of marriage. Therefore, crying "marriage equality" while ignoring any other type of marriage is clearly a delusion
Posted by BlackHomophobicAtheists 1 year ago
BlackHomophobicAtheists
Gays pretend not to be gay all the time. That's nothing new. Marriage equality is the only reason why anyone would vote for gay marriage in the first place. Throughout the whole gay marriage campaign, all I heard was marriage equality, marriage equality, marriage equality. Now during a debate, marriage equality is all of a sudden not the reason why people would vote for gay marriage? Lol
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
...Excuse me? I'm not gay. If you take issue with my decision, then please, elaborate. What is wrong with it?
Posted by BlackHomophobicAtheists 1 year ago
BlackHomophobicAtheists
Equality is all of a sudden not the reason why one would both gay marriage. Lol. Of course a homo will vote against me
Posted by BlackHomophobicAtheists 1 year ago
BlackHomophobicAtheists
I'm willing to bet the only vote was a gay person
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
BlackHomophobicAtheistsSnaxAttackTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The major problem with Pro's case is just that, once again, he's not arguing the resolution. He appears to be more interested in arguing for "People who believe they are supporting equality by supporting gay marriage and homosexuality are delusional." Pro then ascribes equality as the reason people support gay marriage and homosexuality. But he waits until R3 (too late) to explain what his view of delusional is, letting Con define the term. The definition provided has nothing to do with the reasoning behind why one wants gay marriage, but rather whether or not gay marriage is achievable. Much as Pro would have liked a different debate, he takes far too long refocusing, and fails in his basic burden by not showing that all people who support gay marriage and homosexuality do so to support equality, something that his argument requires to be true. Both sides go off on several tangents, but this is where the debate resides, and thus, I must vote Con.