The Instigator
EmmaAlexx
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
debatability
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Should Gay Marrige Be Legal?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 3 votes the winner is...
debatability
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/5/2014 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 691 times Debate No: 54109
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

EmmaAlexx

Pro

Gay marriage should be legal because true love is not illegal and if a guy and a guy really love each other they should be together and for all those people who think its wrong look through the eyes of some one gay. if you are married and you were the same gender would you still love them want to stay with them? If so then why its it so wrong?

Heart knows now gender knows no color it only knows of love.
debatability

Con

Note: Firstly, I would like to point out that I have nothing against homosexual individuals. I agree that if two men or two women love each other, they should be able to stay together. In fact my side on this debate really does not reflect my actual opinion. In this debate I am simply arguing that a union between two homosexual couples should not be referred to as marriage.

Religious reasons.
Now, I myself am not religious. However, gay marriage is not compatible with most religions. Just taking a look at Christianity, we can see that The Catholic Church, Presbyterian Church, Islam, United Methodist Church, Southern Baptist Convention, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, National Association of Evangelicals, and American Baptist Churches USA all oppose same-sex marriage. Now this opposition is a problem for two reasons. Firstly, churches who are against marriage between homosexuals are often pressured into, or even forced to marry gay individuals when same-sex marriage is legal. This is exactly what happened in Danbury, U.K. Two gay men who were already millionairs sued their church in attempt to force their church to preform a wedding ceremony. They wanted to challegenge the laws that allowed religious organizations to opt out of marrying homosexuals (The Libretarian Republic). My second reason has to do with tax dollars. The congressional budget office notes that "the cost to the federal government of extending employment benefits to same-sex domestic partners of certain federal employees (making no mention of additional costs such as Social Security and inheritance taxes) would be $596 million in mandatory spending and $302 million in discretionary spending between 2010 and 2019." If these benifits are in the name of marriage rather than civil unions religious individual's taxes will be going to a cause that they do not necessarily believe in.

Gay marriage has actually been referred to as the detriment of homosexual culture.
This argument is an interesting one. Dr. Lee Badget emphasizes that "marriage means adopting heterosexual forms of family and giving up distinctively gay family forms and perhaps even gay and lesbian culture." Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual pride is a big deal. By removing the gap between homosexuals and heterosexuals, some may claim that LGBT culture will come to an end. With this argument, I am advocating for civil unions. I do believe that gay individuals should get the same oppurtunities as straight individuals. These oppurtunities just shouldn't come with the name of marriage. Really if you think about it, gay marriage can do the same thing to heterosexual culture. Badget goes on to say that, "In particular, they worry that opening up marriage poses a threat to children by diminishing heterosexual couples’ desire to marry, thereby reducing parents’ commitment and attention to childrearing." Here it is shown that making gay marriage legal could actually harm homosexual/heterosexual culture, which is something that ought to be preserved.

Marriage itself is becoming outdated. Many consider it sexist/oppressive.
Legalizing gay marriage brings more types of marriages to the plate. In July 1969, the Gay Liberation Front in New York said, "We expose the institution of marriage as one of the most insidious and basic sustainers of the system. The family is the microcosm of oppression." This is a belief shared by many heterosexuals as well. Looking at my argument above, we can also see that the quality of marriage and the culture of both gay and straight individuals will be negatively impacted by the legalization of same sex-marriage. Psycology Today published an article that showed how married individuals actually become increasingly less happy after they make the decision to get married. The article also showed that married people feel isolated or alone more often. The legalization of gay marriage will result in more couples getting married, which may not actually be a good thing.

Vote con for the reasons above. Gay Marriage is unnecessary when homosexuals can obtain the same rights through domestic partnerships and civil unions.
Debate Round No. 1
EmmaAlexx

Pro

EmmaAlexx forfeited this round.
debatability

Con

extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
EmmaAlexx

Pro

EmmaAlexx forfeited this round.
debatability

Con

extend again.
ahh please post your argument i really wanted to debate this.
Debate Round No. 3
EmmaAlexx

Pro

EmmaAlexx forfeited this round.
debatability

Con

aww extend again i guess
Debate Round No. 4
EmmaAlexx

Pro

EmmaAlexx forfeited this round.
debatability

Con

Extend. Vote con.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by EmmaAlexx 3 years ago
EmmaAlexx
yes it should be legal its only fair if you love some one wouldn't you want to be with that person forever no matter what gender is together.
Posted by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
This debate reminds me of an SNL sketch.

http://www.veoh.com...+(SNL)+Awkward+Love+Sketch
Posted by DauntlessWarrior 3 years ago
DauntlessWarrior
yes, yes they should be
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by MysticEgg 3 years ago
MysticEgg
EmmaAlexxdebatabilityTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: A pity Pro let this debate down. conduct for the forfeit. Spelling and grammar were better from Con, in general, and she had a better layout of her arguments. Arguments are obvious: She was the only person who made any. No sources were used, ergo, no points awarded.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
EmmaAlexxdebatabilityTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.
Vote Placed by ArcTImes 3 years ago
ArcTImes
EmmaAlexxdebatabilityTied
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