The Instigator
Stupidape
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Scmiedforge
Con (against)
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: 1/11/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 650 times Debate No: 98866
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Pro

Burden of proof will be upon Con, my opponent 51%. This is due to the nature of morals, actions are considered moral until proven otherwise. Just as a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Structure
Round one Acceptance and definitions
Round two arguments, don't respond to opponent's argument yet.
Round three rebuttals respond directly to opponent's round two.
Round four defense respond directly to opponent's round three.

Definitions, use common definitions unless otherwise agreed upon.

Sex
"2.
a. Either of the two divisions, designated female and male, by which most organisms are classified on the basis of their reproductive organs and functions: How do you determine the sex of a lobster?" [0]

Gay "1. Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex." [1]

Marriage "1.
a. A legal union between two persons that confers certain privileges and entails certain obligations of each person to the other, formerly restricted in the United States to a union between a woman and a man." [2]

Thanks in advance for accepting the debate. Previous debate for reference. [3]

Sources.
0. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
1. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
2. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
3. http://www.debate.org...
Scmiedforge

Con

I accept the debate and the structure/rules you have put forth.

(I will use https://www.merriam-webster.com... for definitions not already agreed upon definitions in the first round)
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Pro

Outline
I. Benefits of marriage
II. Being Gay is not a choice
III. Financial gain to government
IV. Separation of church and state
V. Sources


I. Benefits of marriage

The first question, is why would someone want to get married? The answer is there are 1,138 benefits, rights, and protections available for married couples by federal law. Therefore, there are many logical reasons why people would seek to reap these benefits.

"There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections available to married couples in federal law alone" [4]


II. Being gay is not a choice

This might sound silly, but you can't just will yourself to be straight or gay.

"Most scientists would disagree. Years of research suggest that people can't change their sexual orientation because they want to, and that trying can cause mental anguish. What's more, some studies suggest that being gay may have a genetic or biological basis. " [5]

"Gay conversion therapy, as it is known, supposedly helps gay people overcome same-sex attractions. But mainstream psychologists say the therapy is ineffective, unethical and often harmful, exacerbating anxiety and self-hatred among those treated for what is not a mental disorder." [6]

That means by denying gays marriage we are practicing discrimination. Discrimination is unjust.


III. Financial gain to government

Marriages licenses are a source of revenue. This relieves tax burdens off of straights. Therefore, straight people gain a financial advantage from gay marriages.


IV. Separation of church and state

Almost all arguments against gays seem to originate from religion. Yet, the separation of church and state disallows religion to interfere with government affairs. Banning gay marriages on religious grounds would be a violation of the first amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" [7]

By banning gay marriages based upon a religion, congress would be respecting an establishment of religion.

V. Sources
4. http://gaymarriage.procon.org...
5. http://www.livescience.com...
6. http://www.livescience.com...
7. https://www.law.cornell.edu...
Scmiedforge

Con

POINT #1: HOMOSEXUALITY IS A MENTAL ILLNESS.

Purely by definition you can tell it fits the description.

"any of a broad range of medical conditions (such as major depression, schizophrenia, obsessive compulsive disorder, or panic disorder) that are marked primarily by sufficient disorganization of personality, mind, or emotions to impair normal psychological functioning and cause marked distress or disability and that are typically associated with a disruption in normal thinking, feeling, mood, behavior, interpersonal interactions, or daily functioning"

However I'll gladly go into further detail. Homosexual teens are 5 times more likely to attempt committing suicide than their heterosexual peers, and apparently that's in a supportive or at least not unsupportive environments.

"Teens who self-identify as homosexual are five times more likely than their heterosexual counterparts to attempt suicide, according to a study released last week.

The study, published in the journal Pediatrics online on April 18, was conducted in order to determine whether living in a gay friendly social environment affected the risk of a teen identifying as homosexual committing suicide. It found that teens in unsupportive social environments were 20 percent more at risk of attempting suicide than those in supportive environments. "

Supposedly they're more likely to commit crime.

"concluding that homosexuals are far more likely to engage in illegal and socially dangerous behavior than heterosexuals. In fact, according to the study, homosexuals are over 107% more likely to have been booked for illegal activity than heterosexuals."

Homosexuals, when taken into consideration that they make up a small percentage of the population, are more likely to engage in child molestation.

"The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation."

You can come to your own conclusions, but a spike in crime/suicide attempts are very rarely seen in groups that are not mentally ill.

POINT #2: MARRIAGE IS A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION.

Judaism talked about marriage long before government was involved in it, (1550-1200 B.C) then Christianity, then Islam...so since the major Religions of today all believe marriage is between a Man and a Woman and religion is the core of marriage, the government should stop trying to change the original meaning of marriage by incentivizing being married or being single. Instead they should accept someone's "significant other" of a certain amount of years if they need to know for financial reasons, etc. At most they should allow non-religious civil unions to homosexuals that allow the same rights of being married.

POINT #3: MAIN PURPOSES OF MARRIAGE/NATURE AND NURTURE.

I think outside of a debate setting most-everyone can agree that the two main purposes of marriage is, symbolic way of showing the world around you that you love this person so much you want to spend the rest of your life with them, (keep in mind what love means, I'll come back to that in a second.) and to raise a family, whether that's from the process of procreation or adoption.

so on to the "love" statement, most homosexuals say they just want to be left alone and be able to "love" who they want to, that's simply not so. The definition of love is "affection and tenderness felt by lovers" the definition of "lover" is "a person in love", "in love" means "inspired by affection" and "affection" means "a feeling of liking and caring for someone or something".

So that means you can be "in love" with just about anyone you like/care about. What homosexuals want is the sexual attraction, I don't blame them...we see gays are more likely to sexually molest kids, that certainly can't get better with celibacy. However if you follow the "Kinsey scale" (I'll put a link to info about that in my sources) it shows virtually everyone is somewhat Bisexual. Following that, that means there's a large chance homosexuals could find someone of the opposite sex they both love and are sexual attracted to.

Now we come to the raising a family/nature and nurture part of this section, I'll even completely ignore the fact homosexuals are more likely to sexually abuse children. Homosexuals should not raise a family for multiple reasons, homosexuality is NOT purely biological, that's absurd (this is the only source I'll post both here as opposed to sources http://www.breitbart.com... ) which means that living in a household with homosexual parents will most likely give you a higher chance of being homosexual, and this is what Milo Yiannopoulos (a gay conservative british journalist) said "Rogan asked who Kohn was, and Milo replied that Kohn is "a Jewish lesbian feminist on CNN" who said famously " well not famously because she"s not famous, she"s just a sort of amusement on Twitter " that she would like a gay kid! She specifically wants a gay kid which I thought was just weird."

"Why not just want a healthy kid?" Rogan interjected.

"Well why not just want a child or want a smart, athletic, beautiful popular kid?" replied Milo. "No, she wants a gay one. Why? Because she"s a narcissist and she doesn"t care about anything that"s going to happen to that child in its lifetime, any of the unhappy things that might happen to that child."

"I"m not talking about bigotry or whatever; let"s say we cure homophobia. Great, but I"m having sex with somebody and cannot create a child with the person I love in the act of intercourse, like that"s kinda rough.. and a lot of people don"t go through their lives thinking about that, but that has occurred to me in the past."

and because children who are not raised with a mother and father (how they should be, because there's no other completely natural way to have a kid otherwise) are worse off
"Had I been formally studied by same-sex parenting "experts" in 1985, I would have confirmed their rosiest estimations of LGBT family life," Lopez wrote, but then went on to argue against same-sex marriage saying that, "behind these facades of a happy "outcome" lay many problems."

He describes experiencing a great deal of sexual confusion due to the lack of a father figure in his life. He turned to a life of prostitution with older men as a teenager."
There's also the studies showing kids need both
"Fathers tend to play with, and mothers tend to care for, children".Fathers encourage competition; mothers encourage equity. One style encourages independence while the other encourages security".Both provide security and confidence in their own ways by communicating love and physical intimacy."
I would continue but I don't have the amount of characters left to quote anything else and provide a source. So this is my opening argument.

SOURCES.

https://www.merriam-webster.com...
https://www.lifesitenews.com...
https://www.lifesitenews.com...
https://www.frc.org...
https://www.blueletterbible.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.breitbart.com...
http://www.cnsnews.com...
http://www.cfcidaho.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Stupidape

Pro

Round three rebuttals


"POINT #1: HOMOSEXUALITY IS A MENTAL ILLNESS.

Purely by definition you can tell it fits the description.

"any of a broad range of medical conditions (such as major depression, schizophrenia, obsessive compulsive disorder, or panic disorder) that are marked primarily by sufficient disorganization of personality, mind, or emotions to impair normal psychological functioning and cause marked distress or disability and that are typically associated with a disruption in normal thinking, feeling, mood, behavior, interpersonal interactions, or daily functioning"" Scmiedforge

I fail to perceive how you have sufficiently backed up your claim. Second, you fail to address how this impacts the resolution and thus is both a bare assertion fallacy and red herring thus far.

"Description A premise in an argument is assumed to be true merely because it says that it is true." [8]

"The red herring is as much a debate tactic as it is a logical fallacy. It is a fallacy of distraction, and is committed when a listener attempts to divert an arguer from his argument by introducing another topic." [9]


"However I'll gladly go into further detail. Homosexual teens are 5 times more likely to attempt committing suicide than their heterosexual peers, and apparently that's in a supportive or at least not unsupportive environments." Scmiedforge

This is circular reasoning. Gays are mentally ill because theyattempt to commit suicide more often therefore they are mentally ill.

"Mental Illness and Violent Crimes
"The assumption that people with mental health issues are violent is deeply entrenched (cleaver-wielding 'lunatic' costumes, anyone?). It often leads to circular reasoning. How often have you heard people claim that committing a violent crime is proof of mental illness? 'Only a mentally ill person would kill someone, so anyone who kills someone is automatically mentally ill.' Leaving aside the vast majority of homicides which aren’t committed by people with mental problems, this isn’t evidence based."" [10]

My opponent assumes the premise of gays being mentally ill by showing that gays are more likely to commit violent crimes against them selves. A more reasonable explanation would be anti-gay sentiment and stigma often from religious groups. Think of the WestBoro Baptist Church. [11]


"The study, published in the journal Pediatrics online on April 18, was conducted in order to determine whether living in a gay friendly social environment affected the risk of a teen identifying as homosexual committing suicide. It found that teens in unsupportive social environments were 20 percent more at risk of attempting suicide than those in supportive environments. "" Scmiforge

My opponent has provided evidence that the reason gays are more likely to attempt to commit suicide is due at least in part to non-supportive social environments and not mental illness.


""concluding that homosexuals are far more likely to engage in illegal and socially dangerous behavior than heterosexuals. In fact, according to the study, homosexuals are over 107% more likely to have been booked for illegal activity than heterosexuals."" Schmiforge

My opponent has engaged in circular reasoning again. That only crazy people commit crimes and therefore gays are crazy.


""The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation."" Schmiforge

My opponent has not proved that the men committing the acts were homosexual. Most rapes are committed for reasons of control and not sexual drive. Most likely the vast majority of men committing those sex abuse crimes against boys are straight.


"You can come to your own conclusions, but a spike in crime/suicide attempts are very rarely seen in groups that are not mentally ill." Schmiforge

Circular reasoning, there is a lot of anti-gay sentiment and stigma.


"POINT #2: MARRIAGE IS A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION.

Judaism talked about marriage long before government was involved in it, (1550-1200 B.C) then Christianity, then Islam...so since the major Religions of today all believe marriage is between a Man and a Woman and religion is the core of marriage"
Schmiforge


This is effectively an argument for might makes right. That the Abraham religions genocide and otherwise beat into submission the other religions, thus their voice should be heard and not others. Many religions have vastly different points of view than the Abraham religions, some even think homosexuality is a boon and not a bane.


"POINT #3: MAIN PURPOSES OF MARRIAGE/NATURE AND NURTURE." Schmiforge

Schmiforge tries to make some point about love and gays and straight, but I can't make heads out of tails out of the argument.

My opponent then takes a source from the infamous breitbart.

"RIGHT BIAS

These media sources are highly biased toward conservative causes. They utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED"[12]

Due to the mixed factual reporting, I think it is safe to say my opponent's claim is unsubstantiated and need a reliable source to be taken seriously. Second, there is a difference between a secret or closet gay and open gay. Most likely the study shows that the children are more likely to be openly gay as opposed to secretly gay.


"Children of same-sex couples fare better when it comes to physical health and social well-being than children in the general population, according to researchers at the University of Melbourne in Australia." [13]

My opponent then claims that children brought up in gay families fare worse. The above quote shows that in some ways those children fare better.



Sources
8. http://www.toolkitforthinking.com...
9. http://www.logicalfallacies.info...
10. http://grammar.about.com...
13. https://www.washingtonpost.com...
11. http://godhatesfags.com...
12. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com...
13. https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Scmiedforge

Con



"I. Benefits of marriage

The first question, is why would someone want to get married? The answer is there are 1,138 benefits, rights, and protections available for married couples by federal law. Therefore, there are many logical reasons why people would seek to reap these benefits.

"There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections available to married couples in federal law alone" [4]"

Yes, there's benefits to marriage, There's benefits to robbing a bank too, as long as you don't get caught and you aren't the owner/employee of the bank, just like there's benefits to the person getting married...but not the religious organization that had to give up it's religious rights because it now has to marry gay couples even though it's against their beliefs. Once again, a civil union that gives someone the same benefits as marriage is a better option than legalizing gay marriage.


"II. Being gay is not a choice

This might sound silly, but you can't just will yourself to be straight or gay.

"Most scientists would disagree. Years of research suggest that people can't change their sexual orientation because they want to, and that trying can cause mental anguish. What's more, some studies suggest that being gay may have a genetic or biological basis. " [5]

"Gay conversion therapy, as it is known, supposedly helps gay people overcome same-sex attractions. But mainstream psychologists say the therapy is ineffective, unethical and often harmful, exacerbating anxiety and self-hatred among those treated for what is not a mental disorder." [6]

That means by denying gays marriage we are practicing discrimination. Discrimination is unjust."


Firstly, your source number 5 contradicts itself.

"Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon and presidential hopeful, recently apologized for a statement in which he said being gay is "absolutely" a choice."

"Since then, he has apologized for the divisiveness of his comments, but hasn't backed down from the notion that being gay is something people choose."

One of these quotes claim that Ben Carson apologized for the "divisiveness" of his comment, and one claims he apologized for the comment itself, both of them are from the same source (5) you provided.

Secondly, what mainstream psychologists say means nothing. At one point mainstream scientists thought the earth was flat, mainstream psychologists used to practice trepanning because it would allow evil entities to escape. If we relied only on mainstream techniques or beliefs we would probably still be throwing people in the water tied up to test if they are witches.
Also, please check the definition of a word before you claim what it is or is not. The definition of "discrimination" is "the act of making or perceiving a difference" is not unjust.

I'll also provide you with these quotes from a previously homosexual man
"Lastly, I am left with my own life story. I can't change it. I went from being in the gay lifestyle to marrying a woman, having a daughter, and living a happy heterosexual life"
"You couldn't pay me to have sex with a man at this point in my life. I don't feel the urge"


"III. Financial gain to government

Marriages licenses are a source of revenue. This relieves tax burdens off of straights. Therefore, straight people gain a financial advantage from gay marriages."

Yes it provides some revenue, but at what cost? Also at 1 - 5 percent of the population (I'll provide links with those statistics) and even less considering not all of them would like to get married, is not a very high rate of marriage licenses. I doubt we're going to see a decrease in taxes paid anytime soon because of the revenue from marriage licenses of gay marriages.



"IV. Separation of church and state

Almost all arguments against gays seem to originate from religion. Yet, the separation of church and state disallows religion to interfere with government affairs. Banning gay marriages on religious grounds would be a violation of the first amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" [7]

By banning gay marriages based upon a religion, congress would be respecting an establishment of religion."


Let's read all of the first amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
allowing gay marriage prohibits the free exercise of religion. It requires them to marry gay couples. Respecting an establishment of religion would be instituting Sharia law, requiring Americans attend mass every week, or making it illegal to participate in gay sex.

Sources.

https://www.merriam-webster.com...
http://www.americanthinker.com...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.usnews.com...
https://www.law.cornell.edu...
Debate Round No. 3
Stupidape

Pro

Round four defense

"Yes, there's benefits to marriage, There's benefits to robbing a bank too, as long as you don't get caught and you aren't the owner/employee of the bank, just like there's benefits to the person getting married...but not the religious organization that had to give up it's religious rights because it now has to marry gay couples even though it's against their beliefs. Once again, a civil union that gives someone the same benefits as marriage is a better option than legalizing gay marriage." Scmiedforge

There is many differences between a civil union and marriage.

"Immigration:

A United States citizen who is married can sponsor his or her non-American opposite-sex spouse for immigration into this country. Those with Civil Unions have no such privilege.

Taxes:

Civil Unions are not recognized by the federal government, so couples would not be able to file joint-tax returns or be eligible for tax breaks or protections the government affords to married couples."[14]

"What is a civil union? A civil union is a legal relationship between two people that provides legal protections to the couple only at the state level." [15]

Mainly, the federal government and other countries don't recognize civil unions, but do recognize marriages. Furthermore, justice of the peace, also know as a judicial member can perform marriage ceremonies.

"a judicial officer of the state can perform weddings." [16]

I fail to perceive how this impedes upon freedom of religion at all. My opponent has not met his/her share of the burden of proof by showing how this affects religious freedom.


"Firstly, your source number 5 contradicts itself.

"Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon and presidential hopeful, recently apologized for a statement in which he said being gay is "absolutely" a choice."

"Since then, he has apologized for the divisiveness of his comments, but hasn't backed down from the notion that being gay is something people choose."

One of these quotes claim that Ben Carson apologized for the "divisiveness" of his comment, and one claims he apologized for the comment itself, both of them are from the same source (5) you provided. " Scmiedforge

All this proves is that Ben Carson contradicted himself. Considering Ben Carson is one of the most devout believers in gay is a choice, my opponent has made an argument that aids my side of the debate.


"Secondly, what mainstream psychologists say means nothing. At one point mainstream scientists thought the earth was flat, mainstream psychologists used to practice trepanning because it would allow evil entities to escape. If we relied only on mainstream techniques or beliefs we would probably still be throwing people in the water tied up to test if they are witches.
Also, please check the definition of a word before you claim what it is or is not. The definition of "discrimination" is "the act of making or perceiving a difference" is not unjust." Scmiedforge

You provide no evidence to back up your claim that mainstream scientists thought the Earth was flat. At least one religious sources claim the world is flat, the Old Testament. Second, science builds upon itself. Often, we have to find 99 ways not to make a light bulb. Each successive failure brings scientists closer to the truth. I find your anti-science statements unsettling and irrational.

As for the definition of discrimination, I meant this definition. I contend this is how the word discrimination was meant to be used by the context of my round two argument.

Discrimination "1. (Sociology) unfair treatment of a person, racial group, minority, etc; action based on prejudice" [17]


I'll also provide you with these quotes from a previously homosexual man
"Lastly, I am left with my own life story. I can't change it. I went from being in the gay lifestyle to marrying a woman, having a daughter, and living a happy heterosexual life"
"You couldn't pay me to have sex with a man at this point in my life. I don't feel the urge"" Scmiedforge

This is anecdotal evidence and thus has little weight on the argument. Somebody could have simply paid the person to write that story. Maybe, the person was never gay to begin with. This is why science is an effective method, because the scientific method accounts for such variables.

"Where anecdotal evidence gets very problematic, though, is when people make decisions that may affect their health or well-being based solely on it. For instance, there are many herbal medications and alternative medical theories and treatments that people decide to use largely based on anecdote. Now sometimes a preponderance of this evidence may suggest that there’s a good reason to try different things, but unfortunately many of these alternative treatments and therapies are not just there for the health and happiness of humans. People who offer them are profit motivated too. " [18]

My counter evidence that gay conversion therapy doesn't work and is dangerous from a scientific stand point defeats my opponent's anecdotal evidence. Gay conversion therapy centers are most likely profit motivated and/or wishful thinking.


"Yes it provides some revenue, but at what cost? Also at 1 - 5 percent of the population (I'll provide links with those statistics) and even less considering not all of them would like to get married, is not a very high rate of marriage licenses. I doubt we're going to see a decrease in taxes paid anytime soon because of the revenue from marriage licenses of gay marriages." Scmiedforge

We would more likely see taxes increase at a slower rate, the results would be the same, less tax burden on the poor. My opponent poses the question at what cost? This an argument from ambiguity, since my opponent offers no reason or evidence of a cost imposed by gay marriage licenses. [19]


"Let's read all of the first amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
allowing gay marriage prohibits the free exercise of religion. It requires them to marry gay couples. Respecting an establishment of religion would be instituting Sharia law, requiring Americans attend mass every week, or making it illegal to participate in gay sex." Scmiedforge

Where do you get the idea that churches will be forced to marry gay couples? Most people have the common sense to only go where they are wanted. Besides, some people interpret the Bible to allow gay marriages. Gay couples would most likely seek out gay friendly churches and justices of the peace.


Sources.
14. http://lesbianlife.about.com...
15. http://family.findlaw.com...
16. http://marriage.about.com...
17. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
18. http://www.wisegeek.org...
19. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...
Scmiedforge

Con

"Discrimination "1. (Sociology) unfair treatment of a person, racial group, minority, etc; action based on prejudice" [17]"

Pro broke the rules of the debate

"Definitions, use common definitions unless otherwise agreed upon."

The sociological definition is not a common definition, I will not be continuing from this point on because of this.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by John_C_1812 1 year ago
John_C_1812
By the way evidence of an impartiality to a separation process begins with the burden of Proof being described as 51%. The Burden of Proof in any impartial non-biased judicial separation is 50-50.
Posted by John_C_1812 1 year ago
John_C_1812
The point of the debate is to find what laws have in fact been broken. Same Sex Marriage and Gay Marriage are both conflicts of interest as they both represent a double standard in the Court system. A Private Contract between only two men does not need to plagiarize marriage in any way to establish itself or any civil liberties.

Marriage civil liberties are obtained by all who can provide the savings a man and woman couples can provide, at a greatly reduced price regarding public statistics for the United States Constitutional separation. This is has always been a legal issue and not a moral issue at all. As the unknown fact ignored, millions of Gay men married to Lesbian woman. Gay and Lesbian are accusation which can be proved harmful, and an arm brought to bear by use of the Second Amendment.

Really any debate should be made on how Gay or Lesbian couples would be providing information to the gathering of population consensus data, Data on any future burdens place on the Non-biased impartial judicial separation, and finally immigration issues as people migrate through marriage into other Countries are have children.

A Constitutional Separation of Church and State has begun. The separation brought to the attention of all witnesses Binivir and Unosmulier. A private contract between two people, be it men or woman simple does not need to create civil injustice.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
I believe this debate is about whether same-sex marriage should be permitted and recognized legally as a form of marriage.
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
If you do not want it..Do not do it...If you want it...Do it...
Posted by RonPaulConservative 1 year ago
RonPaulConservative
Do you mean gay people getting married or the govt acknowledging those marriages?
No votes have been placed for this debate.