The Instigator
Amedexyius
Pro (for)
The Contender
mrsirofvibe
Con (against)

Russia is Justified for Not Allowing Gay Marriage and Gay Propaganda

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
mrsirofvibe has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/30/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 419 times Debate No: 93251
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Amedexyius

Pro

Recommended Guide, Not Mandatory

Round 1: Opening Arguments
Round 2: Rebuttals
Round 3: Finishing Statements

Justified

1.) having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason.

Let it be known to Con that it is illegal to marry, it is not illegal to be homosexual or engage in homosexuality (such as a man and man kissing on the street or private matters in residencies) [1].

Much of the Western World had criticized Russia for their laws which bar homosexual couples from being able to marry. The federal government of Russia has dictated that the law came by the reasoning to protect minors and due to the overwhelming majority of the people to ban the marriage [2]. Homosexuality is not officially considered a mental illness in Russia, although it is considered unnatural and a biological controversy. Under the principles of democracy and the controversy concerning discrimination and prejudice, Russia does not condone employment discrimination in many private and federal branches of the nation. The Russian military has a Don't Ask, Don't Tell [1, again] policy in order to prevent discrimination.

As I said before, gay prejudice in Russia is prevalent, yet still illegal. Russia has taken measures in order to maintain peace during attacks on gay communities. There is no international law dictating whether homosexual marriage bans are an affront to human rights, and independent organizations have no basis to claim the Russian federal government is homophobic, they are abiding to democratic values. I will save more of my argument for my opponent, whom I wish good luck.

I should also say that I am not homophobic or against gay marriage, I have no opinion on the topic if a person decides to label me as prejudiced.

Sources
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://www.themoscowtimes.com...
mrsirofvibe

Con

In the Russian Federation, it is illegal to marry OR enter a civil union as a homosexual.[1] Let it be known that marriage accords civil benefits to the couple, including being able to file joint tax returns, inheritances, and other government benefits.

Justified: 1.) having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason.
There may be justifications for the ban, but there is no true legitimate reason the ban exists. Liberty is a natural right of human beings[2]; by denying homosexuals or other LGBT persons the liberty to marry, the government is ridding them of rights entitled to them as humans. The government is not, nor should be, by any means required to recognize gay marriage, or any marriage at all, but banning it is restricting the right to free association.


Sources
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] http://www.crf-usa.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Amedexyius

Pro

Thank you for your argument, Con.

Your opening statement isn't a point against my case. I never said any sort of union relating to gay marriage was legal in Russia. My argument is not proving that marriage is legal, my argument is persuasion that Russia is just in their federal decision to ban gay marriage.

"There may be justifications for the ban, but there is no true legitimate reason the ban exists." is a controversial statement. Without legitimate reason, there isn't justification although you said the ban is justified which is a concession to the entire debate. In Russia, and in many other countries where ideological and socio-political regulations are different, liberties are strained and the public is comfortable with the form of life in their homelands. This means that homosexuality is not considered as a form of sexual expression (According to the private organization of the American Psychiatric Association) as the common definition of it's practice is [1] in Russia. It's considered unnatural and a threat to the well-being of their children's minds.

"The government is not, nor should be, by any means required to recognize gay marriage, or any marriage at all, but banning it is restricting the right to free association." is another controversial statement. There is no gray area in two sided decisions. There is either a recognition of homosexual marriage or union or there isn't, and 80% of Russia says there shouldn't be. 'The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few' and due to socio-political perspective on whether homosexuality is a liberty and the lack of factual statements to dictate that homosexual marriage is a right can not be proven. Therefore, the foundation of your argument is assumed to be subjective as there are too many variables to properly influence the argument into the side of 'Yes, it is a right'.

Social contracts in other nations differ. Russia does not share the American constitution. There are serious restrictions on freedom of speech, association, petition, etc. This doesn't mean those restrictions are bad, it means that in Russia liberties are few and far between moderated by the government which is what the Russian people are used to and comfortable with concerning their trust to the government. This means the argument of freedoms and liberties becomes another matter of perspective and factual arguments are virtually minimal.


Sources
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org...

This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Megatronimus_prime 1 year ago
Megatronimus_prime
Well we can't change the government in Russia. We really don't have the right to argue agents there laws. That is the Job of the Russian people. If the people are ok with this in Russia than this law is justified, also as long as the government says its illegal than it is a law that must be obeyed regardless of what the outside world thinks.
Posted by Amedexyius 1 year ago
Amedexyius
No, Wikipedia also uses their own links to back up their statements. People believe anyone can write anything but they go through a long screening time to fact check any editing.
Posted by TheSideSpectator 1 year ago
TheSideSpectator
Dont you think wikipedia is a unreliable source?
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.