The Instigator
AnnaBelle1798
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Bennett91
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Same Sex Couples Should Be Able To Marry

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 4 votes the winner is...
Bennett91
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/14/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,099 times Debate No: 58956
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (4)

 

AnnaBelle1798

Pro

I will not accept any irrational arguments such as "gays already have enough rights" to be a valid response.
Pro will have to respond with logical reasons as to why "gay" people should not be able to marry.

Same sex marriage is becoming a growing issue. Even though this has been legalized in some states, I say it needs to become that way in all states.

Allowing the marriage of same sex couples would not hurt anyone. It may offend some people but those people can choose to ignore it rather than having a fit about it.
If two human beings love each other, they should be allowed to be married and carry on life just as everyone else is allowed to. Saying that gay couples cannot get married to their significant other is depriving them of their rights.

To allow same sex marriage would not mean you have to accept their ways. It simply means that you are treating them as if they are normal human beings, which they are. Being gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual, transgender etc. does not mean that these people are any less of human beings than you yourself.

Same sex couples areal lowed to ride in the car, go out to eat and live in a house together, so why not let them be married?
Many gays and lesbians do not feel safe or secure in the world. However, a few "gay" married couples said they felt more protected.

Marriage is marriage. Love is love.
Bennett91

Con

I will be playing God's Advocate on this one, but I won't be using Religion in my argument.

The basis for argument is marriage as a value to the State. Marriage, although originally a religious institution, has been co-opted by the government and given privileges/benefits above single and unmarried couples. Why does the Government choose to bestow benefits upon the married? Because it makes it easier to raise children. If children are our future then the State has a vested interest in their creation and upbringing. Heterosexual Marriage represents reproduction, therefore it is a self sustaining continuation of the State. Motivation behind marriage is irrelevant, the government needs people to have a "fruitful" marriage for its own survival, to aid this endeavor benefits are given.

But what about the heterosexual but infertile you ask? It would be burdensome on the State to have to monitor the fertility of all newlyweds. However the symbolism of reproduction, man and woman, supports the aims of reproduction in a way Homosexuality does not.
Debate Round No. 1
AnnaBelle1798

Pro

This world is already Becoming overpopulated.
There are so many children in need of adoption. I agree with the point that reproduction is a big thing. However, allowing gay people to be married to one another will not change that. Gay people, whether married or not, will not have children. Seeing as that is true, if all states legalizes the marriage between two people of the same gender it will not change that. Therefore, your argument about sexual reproduction is invalid.

Men who like men but are not married will not have children unless they adopt.
Women who like women will not have children unless they adopt

You are stating that if gays are allowed to be married then there won't be as many children?

-Debate Strong. -
Bennett91

Con

I think you've misinterpreted my argument and in fact bolstered it. My argument simply states that the reason the Government could be able to deny marriage to gays is because they can not meet the need the Government has placed upon married heterosexual couples; which is to say, having children. My position encourages increased populations because a country with no people can"t exist, therefore the State uses marriage as a mechanism of self-perpetuation. I could expound as to why a country needs to continually replace its citizens but I think it's self evident.

By acknowledging that gays can't reproduce (which is false, but you're the Pro, not me) they fail to meet the reason why the State would recognize a couple as married. You acknowledge that if we let gay people get married the desired effect of increased population will not occur. Ergo there is no reason to perform an action (granting marriage) which does not produce desired results.

As far as adoptions go, anyone can adopt, regardless of marital status. So if we're concerned about those in need of adoption granting marriage to gays does not affect the plight of orphans because gays are already capable of adoption.

If you want homosexual couples to have the same rights (hospital visitation, inheritance, shared insurance policies etc.) as heterosexual couples we could play semantics and agree on "Civil Unions", it's all the rights as marriage but none of implication of a contract between couple and State to reproduce. But we are debating Marriage, not Civil Unions.
Debate Round No. 2
AnnaBelle1798

Pro

I'm too tired to go on debating today 😥 .
I leave it up to the voters .

Thank you for debating with me on this.
Bennett91

Con

Being the Devil's advocate isn't fun if you just give up. But you're welcome. Maybe we'll debate again some day.
Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by cwt002 2 years ago
cwt002
@Bennett91 I understand they want the recognition of marriage but I am opposing homosexuality as a whole not just marriage.
Posted by cwt002 2 years ago
cwt002
Well that is a good point that @XionChan mentioned, except that everyone nowadays have HIV/AIDS (hopefully that is just sarcasm). But you have to agree that homosexual activity is classified as high risk meaning there is a greater chance to get a disease of some sort and even shorten life spans.

This increase of diseases does affect everyone including health insurance rates. But there are many other things that come along with homosexual activity as well this is just a little.
Posted by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
There are over 1000 rights and benefits that Marriage entitles, gay couple want that recognition and want to be treated equally under the law. @cwt002 If you're referring to high rates of suicide and mental illness in the LGBT community this is common misconception and a case of putting the cart before the horse. Have you considered that the stigma, along with the associated stress from harassment and constant belittling, is the catalyst for mental illness rather than homosexuality itself?
Posted by Natsu_Dragneel 2 years ago
Natsu_Dragneel
Isn't being with the person you "love" enough?
or do you have to prove it with a status?
Posted by XionChan 2 years ago
XionChan
I haven't a right to jump in here, but I wonder if he/she means illnesses? He/she probably doesn't mean that solely, but I have a feeling that may be. Stuff like HIV/AIDS/Hepatitis, etc., etc. I could be wrong, too, since nowadays, everyone has HIV and AIDS.
Posted by AnnaBelle1798 2 years ago
AnnaBelle1798
Issues with other homosexual behavior ?
In what do you mean ?
Posted by cwt002 2 years ago
cwt002
I am just saying that they have the same rights as everyone else. They are asking for additional privileges and you cannot grant homosexuals marriage rights without opening a door to all other sexual preferences. Not to mention other issues that go with homosexual behavior.
Posted by AnnaBelle1798 2 years ago
AnnaBelle1798
@cwt002
However, why would a homosexual marry someone of the opposite gender that they do not love?
Posted by cwt002 2 years ago
cwt002
@AnnaBelle1798 I am not so sure. Homosexuals do have the same right as everyone else, marry someone of the opposite sex. This is a right that we all share equally. Homosexuals are wanting extra or special privileges outside of this.
Posted by AnnaBelle1798 2 years ago
AnnaBelle1798
XionChan
Yes, I was ^-^
Gays have the same rights as everyone else.
Except Marriage.
So , in reality, they don't "have enough rights already". A right is actually being taken away from them.
We are all human.^"^ Why are we treated differently?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
AnnaBelle1798Bennett91Tied
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: even not counting the last round, con simply had better rebuttals and arguments
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
AnnaBelle1798Bennett91Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Basically FF.
Vote Placed by Splenic_Warrior 2 years ago
Splenic_Warrior
AnnaBelle1798Bennett91Tied
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: Even though Con is wrong about marriage being originally religious, Pro failed to counter his arguments, so, points to Con.
Vote Placed by 2Sense 2 years ago
2Sense
AnnaBelle1798Bennett91Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm getting tired of people fabricating their own idea as to what marriage is, why it's recognized, what is (or isn't) required of it, and so on and so forth. Con has done this without any evidence at all for his arguments. That being said, Pro simply gave up, and that's unacceptable. Conduct to Con but that's all.