The Instigator
gulnura0112
Pro (for)
Tied
1 Points
The Contender
clarie
Con (against)
Tied
1 Points

Should Gay marriage be legalized

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/14/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,083 times Debate No: 27198
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

gulnura0112

Pro

As this debate will discuss the reasons for legalizing same-sex marriage compared to the reasons not to do so, in this round I will discuss some of the most important reasons to recognize the practice.
A primary question that must be asked in this debate is what does it mean for a society to have marriages that are recognized legally?
Marriage is not only the formal union of a man and a woman which recognized by law, and by which they get status as husband and wife but also the essential part where people can express their love and became a family. From the past until now traditional family includes a wife, a husband and their children. However, not everyone is legally able to get married. A love shared by two people of the same sex cannot get such status as married because same- sex marriage is prohibited and our society cannot understand gay's position.
The first argument for legalizing gay marriages is that gay marriages do not hurt or affect any society neither physically nor emotionally. It is well- known fact that marriage is a relationship between two people and it cannot influence on the others. Legalizing gay marriage will not harm heterosexual marriages or "family values." According to study published on April 13, 2009 in Social Science Quarterly "laws permitting same-sex marriage or civil unions have no adverse effect on marriage , divorce, and abortion rates, or the percent of children born out of wedlock...". Indeed gay people choose their partner amongst people with their point of view that is gays.
This statistics shows that heterosexual marriage is positively effect on homosexual marriage. Moreover, the adoption rates will be increased. Because gay people have not got an ability of reproduction they resort to adoption. As every family gay people also want to form a family with their own children so they go to orphanage and receive the child which they are not able to have. This adoption helps not only homosexual men but also help children who left in orphanage to fulfill their lives.
The second reason for permitting gay marriages is that people all over the world have the same rights. Gay people are not "second class citizens" and they should have the same freedom, opportunities that heterosexual people have. Moreover homosexual people's right should be written into Constitution of every country. Our society prohibit gay people's right to marry, to make decision about their relations and do not let them establish their own family. On the contrary, heterosexual people have the right to get married or not and they do not have any restriction from government's side.
Everyone despite his color of their skin, nation of origin, marital status, income level or sexual orientation should ensured with personal immunity, right to vote, enjoyment of his civil, social and economic rights. Furthermore, gay marriage can bring financial gain to state and local governments. If gay marriage will legalize it can bring in an income from marriage licenses, rent, utilities and high income taxes.
I await my opponent"s response.
clarie

Con

Gay marriage is the relation between two same-sex people and for every child it is necessary to rise with father and mother. For instance, William Rees-Mogg, author of "Extending the right to marry only weakens an institution that society needs to be strong" published in Times magazine, cites : "Ian Duncan Smith, one of the most effective members of the coalition, published a strategy on social justice that takes the view that children are indeed best reared in a stable marriage". It is very strong argument about how gay marriage influence on children. From the past until now fathers considered to be strict but mothers are considered to be soft and by the help of this nature parents can support children's emotional needs and every child needs this softness and at the same time father's strictness. Girls who are raised without their mothers are at higher risk for early sexual activities, they have low academic performance and became bad-tempered. An Apr. 2001 study published in American Sociological Review put forward for consideration that children with gay parents are more likely to attract on homosexual behavior, pedophilia or even pornography. In addition, gay marriage could destroy the real sense of the family. Children will not be able to understand the meaning of this word. It will be difficult to teach children the family importance and traditions when such uncertainty exists. Furthermore, gay marriage increases the chance of getting diseases. As you know, biologically gay's sexual contact is the major cause of venereal diseases such as HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus), AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome), HPV(Human Papillomavirus Infection) gonorrhea, syphilis, trichomoniasis, herpes, hepatitis types B and C which are sexually transmitted. The main reasons of occurring such infection are that homosexual men have great number of sex partners, in addition during coitus (sexual act) they do not use a condom which is used as a protection against infection during their sexual contact. Study which done in 1998 by The Center for Disease Control in America reports that 54 percent of people who suffer from AIDS are homosexual men and 90 percent of people suffering from HIV are gay people.
On to the issue of "equality." Based on the opponent's representation of "equality," all members within a group should be allowed to marry, regardless of their individual nature. Going by that theory, the government should legally enable me to marry my car, and I should receive benefits for it, for the sake of "happiness," as my opponent simplistically poses it. This is absurd, of course, and this is because the nature of an individual certainly affects what rights he is eligable for. (Example: If someone developed a chronic bone condition that disallowed him to work, there is a good chance that the government would provide him with disability benefits. Do I also deserve these benefits, even though I am perfectly healthy and capable of working?) "Equality," in our society, means that everyone receives the rights that they are eligable for, based on compatibility of individuals' traits. Moreover, I have shown in my previous argument that homosexual partnership, by its inherent nature, does not meet the "procreation/child-rearing type" format that would make it eligable for marriage. The issue is not a matter of "inequality," as the opponent's argument suggests.

In conclusion gay marriage should not be legalized.
Now I will turn it over to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 1
gulnura0112

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for his response.
It is obvious that Con"s purpose does not fit very well at all within the current structure of marriage, while mine fits perfectly.
Regarding my happiness argument: Con has addressed this argument as if it were independent of my previously stated purpose of marriage. It is not. The reason he cannot marry his car for happiness is because a person and an intimate object cannot engage in the institution of marriage. My argument is that gay marriages can fulfill the purpose of marriage, therefore gay people should not be denied this happiness.
In conclusion, I have clearly shown that there are numerous positives to legalizing gay marriage. Con has not provided any reasons why it should not be legalized.
Same-sex marriage should be legalized.
I would like to thank my opponent for this lively debate, as well as the astute readers and voters of DDO.
I rest my case.
VOTE PRO!
clarie

Con

In order to find out if someone has a right to do something, we need to define what the "something" is that we are discussing. In this debate, we are debating the topic of "marriage." Indeed, my opponent and I seem to have very different interpretations of marriage.
my point is that the legal aspect of marriage was established for the purpose of procreation and child-rearing. Although the purpose is not necessarily met in all cases, the laws of marriage should uphold the purpose to fulfill the purpose in as many cases as possible. The opponent's point does not address the matter at hand
My arguments have been indirectly replied to and have ultimately remained unrefuted. Therefore, we can conclude that gay marriage should remain illegal, because homosexual partnership is not compatible for the institution of marriage or its legal significance in contemporary society.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 1 year ago
16kadams
gulnura0112clarieTied
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: Bobby you need more of a reason then that, counter.
Vote Placed by BobbyYaz 1 year ago
BobbyYaz
gulnura0112clarieTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: both good arguments, but win does to Pro
Vote Placed by wiploc 1 year ago
wiploc
gulnura0112clarieTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I liked Pro's first post. Substantive reasons gay marriages should be legally recognized. Con's first post also had lots of reasons---made up reasons---that it shouldn't be recognized. Pro should have responded to Con's bogus claims. As it is, I as a voter, have to assume that children of gay people would be sexually active too early, etcetera. Both sides are hard to read because of grammar problems and nonsense sentences.