The Instigator
DocPenguin
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
bman7720
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points

Should Gay Marriage Be Allowed in Each U.S State

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 1 vote the winner is...
bman7720
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/16/2015 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,024 times Debate No: 73602
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (29)
Votes (1)

 

DocPenguin

Con

If you accept this debate you, the 1st round is the acceptance round.
bman7720

Pro

I accept this debate and will argue that gay marriage should be allowed in the U.S.A.
Debate Round No. 1
DocPenguin

Con

DocPenguin forfeited this round.
bman7720

Pro

I'll start this argument by clearly stating my definitions.

[1]. Marriage: The legal binding of two individuals that results in recognition of their unity.
[2.] Relationship: Two people who agree to be bound in legal marriage, for whatever their purpose.

Marriage, in this respect, has nothing to do with any concept of family or love. The purpose of legal marriage is to enable certain rights to two people who bind into a relationship. Legal marriage also allows for insurance of property and finances if said relationship fails. You can argue for days about family-values and God, but the fact is that legal marriage is merely a legal affair. There is nothing to do with what family-values or religion the couple identifies with.

The argument of God's plan for man and a woman would imply that atheists, or any person who does not believe in God, should not be allowed to get married either. Marriage cannot b held in the same view-point of values in the legal form as it is in the religious form.
Debate Round No. 2
DocPenguin

Con

First I would ask you to pardon my loss of time to post my argument, I was busy.

First and foremost, gay marriage is not marriage. Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman that they will take ownership of raising a child to a well being. Gay marriage takes the part of making a child apart. Homosexuals must adopt a child to raise one. Imagine if the world was all homosexuals, there would be no children to continue raise.

Gay marriage also goes against Christianity and over 2 billion people in the world believe in this religion. Most would think that these homosexuals are going against God. Homosexuals would,according to Christians, be going against the way God wanted the world.

In conclusion, gay marriage goes against Christianity and even other religions and gay marriage isn't actual marriage.

Sources:
http://www.frc.org...
http://www.tfpstudentaction.org...
bman7720

Pro

I would like to point out that this is an argument over legal marriage, and not spiritual or religious views. If homosexuals cannot be legally married, then revoke that right for every couple. The church cannot influence the legal process, although some argue that it does.

Homosexuals can now choose surrogacy to produce a biological child, and does my opponent mean to say that a child of adopted parents is not as valued as a child of birth parents? Marriage is not about family, it is about legal affairs. Should infertile females be restricted from marriage because they cannot reproduce? My opponent fails to use any evidence that can be defended by anything except faith.
Debate Round No. 3
DocPenguin

Con

DocPenguin forfeited this round.
bman7720

Pro

bman7720 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
DocPenguin

Con

DocPenguin forfeited this round.
bman7720

Pro

My opponent has done nothing but state that homosexuality goes against the religious institute of marriage, however two people can be married by religion without the government involved. This debate is over the legalization of secular marriage as a dignifying institute of the government.

The legal institute has no relation to religion. The very proving fact is that atheists can marry. Legalizing homosexual marriage would not force priests to conduct said marriages if they so disagreed with them. This right is exercised between Jew and Non-Jew couples fairly often.
Debate Round No. 5
29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by bman7720 2 years ago
bman7720
The government exists as a tool of the population. It exists to protect its citizens. Saying that government is my deity is implying that I believe government is a higher and omniscient being. The government is merely a tool of the population. Your statement about atheists is frankly absurd. Atheists form their morals and beliefs based upon evidence and collected data. Theists base theirs on faith. A belief in a higher power. A man's philosophy is not determined by his belief system. That would imply that every Christian follows Westboro's example. Simply because the government has power, that does not make the government a god or deity. I've never seen anyone bow to their teachers, but rather show a form of respect to that individual person, not who they represent.
Posted by hegiliansdialect 2 years ago
hegiliansdialect
4 "Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. 8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. ..." (1 Corinthians 13:4-8 NIV). If you place one person or item high above others do you not give that item or thing power? The bible also says the power of life and death is in the tongue. (Proverbs 18:21). If you give government the power to define marriage are you not lifting Government high, if you reject God and therefore believe there is no so such thing as divinity, is Government not your God? See, the difference between that of an atheist and one who believes in God, is that the man who believes in God bases his individual philosophy on ten thousands of years of history. An atheist will base his philosophy on that of nearly a hundred years of government funding and conservatively two hundred years of human history. Essentially it comes down to individual perception; where should the power be placed. People who believe in God will place all the power in him, those who reject God will place such power elsewhere and in your specific situation as you being a homosexual would place such power in your God, Government. Do you not worship government when you bow to your teachers and school administrators, when you cower to the police officer are you not worshiping him, giving him power. These people are government entities, their power is bestowed upon them by the government. My last stamens is in grievance to your self. How is it that one might be so disconnected from love as to place power in the hands of those which would destroy it.
Posted by bman7720 2 years ago
bman7720
I do not belong to a religion. It is also political fact that the legal binding of marriage has nothing to do with love. It is a dignifying institute that binds two people in a union. Marriage does not imply sexual relationships, marriage does not imply physical affection. Marriage is not about loving a person. The gay marriage ban is sexual discrimination. If Sally and Greg both love Hank, only Sally can marry Hank simply because she's female.
Posted by hegiliansdialect 2 years ago
hegiliansdialect
No kid, what Im talking about is science. It is scientific fact that we "humans" are energy beings. It is scientific fact that men and women resonate in two different frequencies. It is scientific fact that when one entity penetrates another these two energy beings are bonded, welded together. As for God, don't think just because you call yours government you're not of a religion.
Posted by bman7720 2 years ago
bman7720
Religion is your theistic and spiritual belief. God is religion. The institute of marriage is a legal matter, that is undeniable. Marriage is a legal binding of two people in union. Your implication about marriage being spiritual implies that atheists are not to marry. And if, like you say, marriage has nothing to do with law or government then why is there legal marriage at all? Why is there legal recognition of anyone in a civil union or binding? Marriage has evolved into a matter of the law and government with Next of Kin and joint property.
Posted by hegiliansdialect 2 years ago
hegiliansdialect
Marriage has nothing to do with law or government, it is a metaphysical principle that binds a man and wife lest they be less than married and fornicate. Marriage has nothing to do with religion, but has everything to do with bonding man and wife in spiritual union. Spirit is not merely a word and shouldn't even need to be defined, because to have to define it would greave my soul. To define spirit to you would be to admit to my spirit that people like yourself are too far gone to admit to yourself how evil and corrupt you are. All their is, is Jesus, it is either you cry out to Jesus for forgiveness sinsierly or stand In judgment to give your testimony before God. Do not relegate this to religion, religion is not of God.
Posted by bman7720 2 years ago
bman7720
I personally disagree with marriage entirely. Legally, it's just a scam to get benefits from your spouse.
Posted by bman7720 2 years ago
bman7720
Yes, because masculinity and femininity are not determined upon biological sex. Marriage is a legal bonding of two spouses. I ask that you leave the religious and biased viewpoints out of it and stick to an intellectual point.
Posted by hegiliansdialect 2 years ago
hegiliansdialect
Marriage is In no way simply about love as your clueless parents explained their relationship to you. Marriage is a spiritual bond with to energy based beings and is natural both spiritually and metaphysically. Thus in the sense that these two beings, one feminine (yin) and one masculine (yang) create the infant. Now I asked you, could two energy beings both of the same masculine or feminine attributed genders provide for the same natural affection as a natural man and wife relationship?
Posted by bman7720 2 years ago
bman7720
Yes, in fact possibly even more. Nurture is not determined upon biological sex or gender. I am not claiming that every homosexual couple is fit for parenthood, nor is every heterosexual couple. It is just basic fact that not every person is a loving parent or spouse. These people are present in every form of romantic relationships, monogamous, polygamous, heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual. If marriage is about love, then why do we allow gold diggers to get married? Or perverted old men to marry those young enough to be their daughters?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
DocPenguinbman7720Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF