The Instigator
kbrown96
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Sleezehead
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Same-sex 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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/29/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 640 times Debate No: 31865
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

kbrown96

Con

As a proponent of traditional marriage, debate is open to anyone supporting same-sex marriage with valuable, logical arguments. I have nothing against homosexuals- live your life how you want- I am only opposed to same-sex marriage.

Argument: Marriage is a civil institution, not a right. Marriage was established (for a man and a woman) by society not only for personal morale, but for finances, stability of household, raising children, etc. If marriage is not a right, then, petitioning for "equal rights" for homosexuals is, in itself, illogical. America is not denying homosexuals "rights."

Argument: A household with a mother and father is the most stable environment for a child to grow up in. This is shown in countless studies; a fatherless child is much more likely to become a criminal than one with a father (as goes for motherless as well.)
Traditional marriages last much longer than same-sex unions:
Claim: about 58% of traditional marriages last longer than 20 years.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2001)
Claim: about 5% of same-sex unions last longer than 20 years.
Source: 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census
The unstated premise is obviously that longer-lasting marriage are generally better for the development of a child than are shorter marriages.
Sleezehead

Pro

I'll be accepting your challenge on this worldly problem. The epidemic has spontaneously grown hasn't it? Should the homo-sexual community have the right to indulge in marriage? First off I do plan on taking this argument very seriously but I'd also like to reference some squandered words of Ricky Gervais.

He not to long ago had a comedy show, I believe it was entitled "Science," and it pointed out a rather humorous irony towards the laws of homosexuals concerning marriage institutions. I won't tell the joke but I'll start on his meaning behind it. In the face of all of our laws and all of our courts, why is it that homosexuals can perform intercourse with one another? Why are they aloud to live together and become labeled as "partners?" Why dont we religiously treat this as an evil-riddon curse that must be burned away? Why are we not killing them and stringing them away from natural society like we used to? Why is it that they can indulge in oral, anel, et cetera, but not walk down the isle? (If I can be so blunt to ask such rhetorical questions.)

Any normal and moral man would be flabbergasted by these words? Why even ask them? Exactly my point. We aren't barberrik as our history has treated this minority. Why let them have every other right but civil institution? Apposite if you will, sir.

I believe this will be analogous with your first argument. We can by one by one.
Debate Round No. 1
kbrown96

Con

kbrown96 forfeited this round.
Sleezehead

Pro

Sleezehead forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
kbrown96

Con

kbrown96 forfeited this round.
Sleezehead

Pro

Sleezehead forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.