The Instigator
brad1999
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
pipster229
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should Gay Marriage be legal?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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 2 votes the winner is...
brad1999
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/12/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 503 times Debate No: 74642
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

brad1999

Pro

R1 Acceptance
pipster229

Con

Gay marriage is wrong because what the heck is the point.
Debate Round No. 1
brad1999

Pro


C1. Marriage is about more than procreation, therefore gay couples should not be denied the right to marry due to their biology.

It is inaccurate to perceive marriage merely as an institution for child-raising purposes. There are many married couples in society today who do not have children of their own, often by choice, and infertile couples, who cannot conceive children, are still permitted to marry. They marry because marriage symbolizes a long-term commitment to one another, not a pledge to reproduce for the state or humanity as a whole. In any case, gay couples may adopt children in countries where they are permitted to do so, revealing society's view at large that homosexual couples can readily act as capable parents and provide loving home environments. Furthermore, the advance of medical science has also enabled same-sex couples to have children of their own through surrogate mothers and sperm donors. It can no longer be said that homosexual couples should not be granted the right to marriage because, either, they cannot have children, or that they cannot raise children adequately. Both claims are evidently false.

C2. Gay marriage is good for society

Gay marriage has clear and tangible positive effects on societies where it is permitted. There are now ten countries that allow gay marriage, with no obvious or noticeable detriment to society at large. As Chris Ott reports from Massachusetts, one of few US states to grant gay marriage rights, ‘predictably, the sky hasn’t fallen…ensuring equality doesn’t mean there’s less to go around for everyone else’ 1. Further to that, gay marriage encourages gay adoption, granting a home and a loving environment for an increasing number of orphaned or unwanted children worldwide. The evidence also suggests that gay parenting is ‘at least as favourable’ as those in heterosexual families, eroding fears that the adopted children will be worse with gay parents 2 . The economist Thomas Kostigen also argues gay marriage is a boost for the economy, ‘weddings create revenue of all sorts…even if a marriage doesn’t work out that helps the economy too. Divorces cost money’ 3. Finally, and most simply, societies benefit from the net utility of their citizens, to allow and even encourage gay marriage ensures that those gay citizens wishing to celebrate their love are able to do so, in an environment conducive to their mutual happiness.

C3. It is discriminatory to refuse gay couples the right to marry

One of the last bastions of discrimination against gays lies in the fact that gay couples in many countries are at present not allowed to marry. Such discrimination should be eradicated by permitting gay couples to marry as a means of professing their love to each other. The contemporary views of society ought to change with the times; as recently as 1967, blacks and whites in some Americans could not marry, no-one would defend such a law now 1. Gay marriage is possibly, as Theodore Olson, a former Bush administration Republican suggests, ‘the last major civil-rights milestone yet to be surpassed 2’. To permit heterosexual couples to profess their love through the bonds of marriage, but deny that same right to homosexual couples ultimately devalues their love, a love that is no weaker or less valid than that of straight couples. As New York State Senator Mark Grisanti admitted when voting in favour of a 2011 bill, ‘I cannot deny a person…the same rights that I have with my wife’ 3. It is clearly discriminatory and reflects an out-dated view of homosexuality.

Therefore thats why gay marriage should be legal thank you
pipster229

Con

pipster229 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
brad1999

Pro

My opponent has forfeited this debate so I wanna make it clear if he makes new arguments round 3 it wouldn't be far because I cant rebuttal them.

but anyway you have the right to Pursuit of happiness in which if gays wanna get married let them we have more important things to deal with like ISIS the economy and etc. Then worrying about someone's love life.
pipster229

Con

The only people that are gay are freaks with no life like you. I forfeited because i have a life and i went to mass. This is a stupid argument. Gays were never supposed to happen. You cant love the same gender it is a scientific fact. Gays are just trying to get attention and it is wrong.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
lol101
You are welcome my friend.
Posted by brad1999 1 year ago
brad1999
Thanks lol
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
lol101
brad1999 is actually my friend. I was checking out his debates, and I found this. I actually think (know) that he won the debate. He provided an argument, and in return, you insult him. Quit being a jerk to people who want to convincingly argue; it's not like they're insulting you or anything. Telling him that only freaks like him are gay people, huh? You interfered with my debate, so don't tell me to stop voting on yours because I think you lost a debate. You judge people for what they think and provide weak arguments, and then you act like it's some sort of good point of yours or something. No one cares about this "right or wrong" belief, you need reasoning and sources for debate.org. Wait, so you get flustered about me arguing with you about Spongebob, which you state is an opinion-based debate, but you judge someone else for THEIR opinion? And you call me a hypocrite? Look, I'm past talking about grammar. I simply made a few mistakes on my first debate and you made a lot of mistakes, whatever. But to judge people for getting serious about opinions, and then getting furious about someone else's opinion in a different debate, REALLY?!?!?

I won't interfere with your debates anymore, but please do not go around insulting people for stereotypes like being a nerd or being gay. Also, you can't even prove we are gay or nerdy. You think I am a nerd? Welcome to debate.org, where tons of nerds propose arguments.

Ok. I'm not talking to you ever again... goodbye.
Posted by pipster229 1 year ago
pipster229
lol101 i am so sick off you ruining my debates. The only reason that you vote is so you can hurt me. You are acting like a four year old. Cut it out and get the heck out of my life.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
lol101
Brad has already got this in the bag.
Posted by larsfox1997 1 year ago
larsfox1997
gays
should die
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lol101 1 year ago
lol101
brad1999pipster229Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con has insulted Pro. Pipster229 has insulted me in one of my debates, and now he resorts to it again. Pro also made convincing argument and included reliable sources. Con also forfeited Round 2 and refused to come up with a good argument throughout the debate. And to top it all off, he has no rebuttal in this debate to be found. He never explained why brad1999's argument is "stupid."
Vote Placed by CentristX 1 year ago
CentristX
brad1999pipster229Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con resulted in personal attacks after forfeiting a round, and made no attempt whatsoever to rebut the Pro's arguments. Pro had better Grammar and more convincing arguments, because he is the only one that provided them.