The Instigator
racedogg2
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
LibertyCampbell
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Should Gay Marriage Be Federally Legalized?

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...
LibertyCampbell
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/2/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,023 times Debate No: 23359
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

racedogg2

Pro

I personally believe that gay marriage should be legalized. Since marriage offers couples benefits given by the federal government, it makes no sense to deny the right to marry to same-sex couples. Religion should not be brought into the argument at all, because I am not claiming that homosexuals should necessarily be allowed to get married in a church. But they should certainly be allowed to walk into their local court and buy a marriage license, just like every other loving couple in America, and then each individual church can decide if they're going to allow the couple to get a religious wedding or not. I see absolutely no reason why this fundamental right should be denied. From the Supreme Court case of Loving v. Virginia: "Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man, fundamental to our very existence and survival..." So to deny this fundamental right to two consenting adults who love each other is absurd, and goes completely against the values that this country is founded upon.
LibertyCampbell

Con

Who is being denied rights? Not homosexuals, thats for sure.

You see, chapp, SSM is not a gay rights issue. It is a human rights issue. By legislating in favor of gay marriage, you are saying that all men have the intrinsic capability and right to marry another man, the same going for women. But this simply isn't the case. Men and women, while being equal in the eyes of their natural rights, do have different postive rights (or fundamental rights) Girls are not allowed to be in boyscouts, and boys are not allowed to be in girlscouts, and only the most radical of femenists--or humanists as they have now taken to be called--would call this an injustice. It is simply gender roles based around biological function, as opposed to tradition.

Now lets look at marriage. I was having too good of a day and thought I should ruin it.

There are two options here: Either marriage has a connection to children or it does not. If it doesn't, then why does the government recognize it in the first place? If it does, then how would the government be justified in allowing SSM, as the connection to children is broken.

My basic case: That will likely get more complex as the debate goes on.

Marriage has a special link to children.
By legalizing SSM, you are breaking the special link to children.
Marriage is not a purposeless subsidy.
All men have the right to marry a women. Women don't have rights.

Challenges to my opponent. That pro will crush, I'm sure!

1. What makes a marriage a marriage?
2. Why does the government recognize marriage?
3. Do you know the population of Hong Kong?
4. How exactly does not legalizing SSM contradict the intentions of the founding fathers?

If you would like, you can ignore all of this, as it was mostly subtle trolling anyways. I will present a better represented case next round. I accept this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
racedogg2

Pro

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
LibertyCampbell

Con

I am abstaining from this website, as it has caused a bit of depression in me of late. I'm just posting this to postpone the time before a forfeit. If my opponent forfeits R3, it wouldn't be too much to ask for an all 7 point vote to me, as this was a big waste of time anyways, and I see no point in producing an argument if my opponent will not even be here to try and refute it.

Anyways, The Dhali Llama says VOTE CON.
Debate Round No. 2
racedogg2

Pro

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
racedogg2

Pro

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
racedogg2

Pro

racedogg2 forfeited this round.
LibertyCampbell

Con

Every debate I have won was because of FF's. FTW. VOTE CON.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 5 years ago
InVinoVeritas
Contradiction, what is up with the significance to put on "reproductive in type"? Two completely infertile or abstinent married adults have as much potential to reproduce as two married people of the same sex.
Posted by Contradiction 5 years ago
Contradiction
I might take it if 16k doesn't.... 16k learned most of his stuff from me. ;)
Posted by phantom 5 years ago
phantom
http://www.debate.org... 16kadams, but I think you'll find his arguments less unrational than the majority of those who argue against gay marriage.
Posted by racedogg2 5 years ago
racedogg2
Who's 16k? Some prominent anti-gay debater on this site or something?
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
90 bucks that 16k finds this first
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
racedogg2LibertyCampbellTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ff