The Instigator
ScarletGhost4396
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points
The Contender
SANTORUM2012
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Resolved: Gay marriage should be legalized in the United States.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
ScarletGhost4396
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,187 times Debate No: 21699
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

ScarletGhost4396

Pro

This round is for acceptance only. The rest will be for argumentation.
SANTORUM2012

Con

yes, I will accept your argument on the topic of gay marriage legalization
Debate Round No. 1
ScarletGhost4396

Pro

Contention 1: The legalization of gay marriage aids to society.
For the following reasons, legalization of gay marriage has been beneficial to society, meaning that it has aided people at some level. The legalization of gay marriage has aided to society in the following ways:


Sub-point 1a: The supplement to tolerance of the homosexual community as a result of legalization of gay marriage has helped to reduce negative statistics in the homosexual community.
The proven evidence shows us that the negative statistics in the homosexual community, ranging from the amounts of sexually-transmitted diseases shared among homosexual patrons to the drug and alcohol abuse and suicide rates, have all been shown to be caused as a result of intolerance against the homosexual community. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention writes on homophobia and AIDS rates: " Stigma and homophobia may have a profound impact on the lives of MSM, especially their mental and sexual health. Internalized homophobia may impact men’s ability to make healthy choices, including decisions around sex and substance use. Stigma and homophobia may limit the willingness of MSM to access HIV prevention and care, isolate them from family and community support, and create cultural barriers that inhibit integration into social networks." In the Emory University study provided, the study confirms that denial of gay marriage is a form of intolerance, and with the passage of legislation denying same-sex marriage, AIDS rates among homosexuals will increase by 4 per 100,000 cases, while legalizing will reduce by 1 per 100,000 cases.


Sub-point 1b: Legalization of same-sex marriage has been beneficial to commerce.
The following evidence of economy after the passage of legalization of same-sex marriage shows us that the legalization is a great supplement to commerce because of the increase of demand for products.


Contention 2: Legalization of gay marriage establishes equality.
Aside from the aids to society, however, gay marriage at some level better establishes equality. This idea is supported by the following points:


Sub-point 2a: Same-sex marriage promotes equality.
The equality within the promotion of same-sex marriage in society lies within the balance of interests of all members of society at a moral level, including the homosexual portions of society. This is a scenario similar to the idea against the legalization of interracial marriage, where two people from two groups of people couldn't acquire a legal marriage based merely on the fact that they were members of that social group and nothing else, which is the pinnacle of what embodies prejudice and discrimination in society. The status against same-sex marriage is similar in this manner.

Sub 2b:
Civil unions are not a good alternative.
Civil unions are not effective at providing parity for homosexuals because they are designed to be less than traditional marriage and does not provide equal benefit to homosexual patrons as would a normal marriage. At that point, we realize that civil unions are not equal to same-sex marriage.


References:
Davidson, Lela. "Gay Marriage Is Good for the Economy | Business Pundit." Business Pundit. 9 July 2008. Web. 20 Dec. 2011. <" target="blank">http://www.businesspundit.com..................;.
Francis, Andrew M., and Hugo M. Mialon. "Tolerance and HIV." (2009). 3 Sept. 2009. Web. <" target="blank">http://userwww.service.emory.edu..................;.
Goldberg, Naomi G., and Michael D. Steinberger. The Williams Institute, May 2009. Web. <" target="blank">http://www.policyarchive.org..................;.
SANTORUM2012

Con

SANTORUM2012 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ScarletGhost4396

Pro

There are no arguments from my opponents. Extend all arguments.
SANTORUM2012

Con

SANTORUM2012 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
ScarletGhost4396

Pro

Extend all arguments.
SANTORUM2012

Con

I am very sorry for the forfeits... I have been out of town without Internet access. If you feel debate wasn't met to your criteria. I will be glad to meet another challenge on this topic.
I will present my reasons same sex marriage should not be legal.

1.Our country has been built a certain way for certain reasons. Strait marriage is one of those things that we take pride in. Changing the criteria for marriage will blow everything out of proportion. Some people will argue it is their right to marry more than one person, their right to marry animals (it's happened before) and their right to marry children. Gay marriage will certainly create more rebellion. We can't lead people to believe they can choose any immoral action they want, complain about it, and let them get what they want. It's a quick path to disaster.

2.Gay marriage is more than twice as likely to end in divorce.

3.A lot of churches in America feel strongly against same sex marriage. Allowing it would run possibility of the children whose parents are strongly against same sex marriage getting biased points taught in school by a gay teacher.

4.Again, a lot of people feel gay marriage is wrong morally. They shouldn't have to fear their tax dollars going to
something they don't believe in.

5.Girls who are raised apart from their fathers are reportedly at higher risk for early sexual activity (827 KB) and teenage pregnancy. Children without a mother are deprived of the emotional security and unique advice that mothers provide. As far as you saying crime rates would go down by allowing same sex marriage, I disagree because studies show that a child growing up without a mother or on the other hand a father are twice as likely, sometimes three times as likely to commit crime in the long run.

6.Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege. You argue it is peoples "right" to marry who they want. This isn't true. Even for strait people.

7.Marriage should not be extended to same-sex couples because homosexual relationships have nothing to do with procreation. Allowing gay marriage would only further shift the purpose of marriage from producing and raising children to adult gratification.

source

http://gaymarriage.procon.org...
Debate Round No. 4
ScarletGhost4396

Pro

Well, before continuing on to addressing my opponent's case, several things must be stated before continuing. First, considering the substantial amount of forfeits on the part of my opponent, it is fair to provide me with the conduct point because I had been punctual 100% of the time and this is the only rebuttal that I'll be able to make against my opponent's case because of the forfeits, and because of my opponent's lack of response to my argument provided, it means I'm already winning the argumentation point. With this being said, we move on to the review over my opponent's points throughout this case.
Point 1: The main to focus on in this point is the fact that my opponent provides absolutely no evidence that this is even slightly likely to occur. 8 of the states in our country have already legalized same-sex marriages, and 10 countries have legalized gay marriage completely. Not a single one of those countries has had any uproars of any sort for the legalization of any other marriages, so it shows to us that this slippery slope that my opponent is trying to make is not verifyable in any way. Further, she doesn't explain why the legalization of these other marriages, under the assumption that they will indeed be legalized, are necessarily wrong or bad for society (except for pedophilic marriages, which would take advantage of a child, which is immoral in my point of view), so even if it does occur, they may or may not have some sort of impact on society.
Point 2: And? Running under the benefit of the doubt that this is a legitimate statistic, my opponent provides no argument of any sort in order to substantiate it. She's just putting out empirics at this point.
Point 3: This scenario, of course, is running under the assumption that a gay teacher wouldn't provide a biased viewpoint in class before gay marriages are legalized, if indeed all gay teachers are going to provide a biased viewpoint in schools as part of their course teaching. My opponent seems to make it seem as if gay teachers or teachers in general won't teach that gay marriage is okay unless it's legal. Further, she doesn't explain why teachers giving a biased viewpoint in class would necessarily be a bad thing. It provides a different viewpoint which serves to provide fruit for knowledge in order to students to make their own decisions when it comes to the issues of society, rather than have only one viewpoint forced down upon them by parents or guardians in general. To close ourselves up to other opinions is ignorance at its worst.
Point 4: "A lot of people" is arbitrary, for one thing, and at the point where I have proven to you that gay marriage will better substantiate the nation, taxes are going for a good use anyways.
Point 5: Judges, if you remember correctly, the main topic of this resolution is the actual legalization of the contract for same-sex couples to get married. My opponent is just running another assumptions that children are somehow going to be entered into this equation when marriages are enacted. Further, if you look at the evidence that she's presenting and the conclusions she's coming to, you'll notice that she's completely disregarding the lurking variables, such as the conditions of the other parent in charge of the child, or how often a father visits, or other variables that could be vital for determining the fate of a child. Just because there's an association doesn't mean there is a direct causation, just as much as it means that just because children are raised apart from a parent or parents doesn't necessarily mean that they're going to end up becoming depraved. That's the missing link between my opponent's conclusion and her evidence: full recognition of the variables.
Point 6: If my opponent is looking in the context of the United States (which she should be, considering that it is iterated within the resolution), then she should know that there have been a number of Supreme Court cases acknowledging marriage as a right under the Constitution, including, but not limited to, Loving v. Virginia. Second, even if marriage is not a fundemental right and only a privilage, the action of denying a privilage to another person because of their sexual orientation is nothing more than prejudiced discrimination, which is not just in any way, shape, or form anyway.
Point 7: My opponent doesn't explain why marriage should only be about procreation. We can go forth with the infertiles argument at this point considering that their marriages are invalidated by the argument of my opponent. She doesn't explain why the shift of focus in marriage from procreation is something that needs to be stopped for the practicality of society. I know that I could go further with the iteration of this point, but because this is the only round I can make a response in, I'm going to have to have no choice but move toward the iteration of my reasonings for winning this debate.

Reasons to vote for me:
I explained to you the conduct point and part of the argumentation point considering my opponent forfeited pretty much the entire debate to me, and at the point where my case has more evidence than hers in order to actually substantiate what I am saying in this case, it's evident that I should get the sources point, and it's also evident that there's no way that you can really vote for my opponent. With my case, I have proven to you that gay marriage will be good for the United States and will be just in giving gay couples their equal rights, meaning that the PRO would be better upholding the United States according to my case. For those reasons, you will vote PRO.
SANTORUM2012

Con

SANTORUM2012 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Skynet 4 years ago
Skynet
FYI, I do not intend to ignore our debate on this, ScarletGhost.
Posted by ScarletGhost4396 4 years ago
ScarletGhost4396
@1dustpelt If this debate doesn't go well with my opponent, will you debate against me on this subject?
Posted by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
The only arguments she puts is "gay marrige is gross" and stuff.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
she wont
Posted by ScarletGhost4396 4 years ago
ScarletGhost4396
Well hopefully, if I'm lucky, my opponent will post an argument.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
I totally gutted my case on SSM recently as I wrote a paper on it.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
Kk
Posted by ScarletGhost4396 4 years ago
ScarletGhost4396
Hey, if you've got an argument you want to try out against me, you know where to find me.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
I want to re match scarlett on the topic as my arguments have changed
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by PeacefulChaos 4 years ago
PeacefulChaos
ScarletGhost4396SANTORUM2012Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did nothing to touch Pro's arguments, which means that his arguments went virtually unchallenged throughout the whole debate. While Pro provided more reliable sources, Con provided one source that was reliable, so I have to make the souces vote tied. Conduct goes to Pro for Con's forfeits.
Vote Placed by Multi_Pyrocytophage 4 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
ScarletGhost4396SANTORUM2012Tied
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: Pro obviously gets conduct for the three forfeits Con had. Pro also made a much more developed case than Con, and Con's rebuttals weren't solid, as Pro showed. Sources go to Pro for using more and better sources.