The Instigator
bubbles2464
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
kingcripple
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Should Texas legalize gay marriage?

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 3 votes the winner is...
kingcripple
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 826 times Debate No: 48155
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

bubbles2464

Pro

Gays are just regular people. Not all gays or lesbians are Christian, so not all believe that it is wrong to like the same sex. I personally believe that it isnt. Its none of your buisness as to who one person likes. Worry about yourself and yourself only.
kingcripple

Con

If it weren't for DDO's bias in favor of same sex marriage, I'd say I would win this just on your opening statements alone.

Let's start off with a few definitions. Since you provided none, I will do so.

Legal- Permitted by law; lawful

Marriage- The relationship that exists between a husband and wife.

Now, while my opponent seems angry and forthright in his opening statements, I have to admit, he has some points. It left me scratching my head as to why he left it as just that and I can already tell he will only make emotional appeals. I will cover what he said briefly:

Gays are just regular people.

Yes we know that. They have no special powers (that I am aware of)

Not all gays or lesbians are Christian, so not all believe that it is wrong to like the same sex.

Right and wrong. Right that not all homosexuals (term herein used to describe gays and lesbians) are not Christians. But then again, not all heterosexuals are Christian either. However my opponent is somewhat wrong in saying that not all believe it is wrong to like the same sex. There ARE a very select few who try to turn away from the lifestyle, and that is their right. There are some who try to turn away from the lifestyle and decide to embrace that. That, too is fine.

I personally believe that it isn't. (correct spelling of "isn't" is mine as opposed to my opponent's "isnt")

Good for you. I do not doubt that you believe it isn't wrong. Though my opponent should have delved a little deeper as to why he does not think it is wrong, and I doubt he will in his next round.

Its none of your buisness as to who one person likes. Worry about yourself and yourself only. (misspelling of the word "business" is my opponent's)

I guess we are in agreement there.

Now let's deconstruct one of my opponent's claims. "Not all gays or lesbians are Christian, so not all believe that it is wrong to like the same sex." My opponent is insinuating that marriage is a Christian thing. That only Christians do. Is it? No. Jews marry. Muslims marry. Hindus marry. Buddhists marry. Even atheists marry. But one thing that most of these groups agree on (maybe atheists do not, or maybe they have no opinion on it) is, that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Marriage is NOT a secular institution. By my opponent's claim that not all homosexuals are Christian, he basically admits that marriage is not a secular institution.

There are several things that the Bible says about marriage in both the Old and New Testament. The first is that it says is that marriage should first and foremost glorify God.[1]

Another is for completeness. From the beginning of time, woman and man complete and complement each other. [2] Man was not meant to lie with man and woman was not meant to lie with woman as a man lies with another man.[3] This is further illustrated in the 3rd part of marriage:

Fruitfulness. You could also call this procreation. For those unaware of the term "procreation", it means to make offspring or children. Through a man's sperm and a woman's egg, is the only way to make a baby. Even with artificial, you would need sperm from a man and an egg from a woman. A man, being 100% male, cannot produce an egg and a woman, being 100% female cannot produce sperm. [4]

A fourth purpose of marriage is companionship. Can a man find companionship with another man? Sure. But without the complementary roles and the childbearing part, this is null.

The fifth and sixth purposes of marriage are very similar in nature to the fourth. Protection and enjoyment. I do not doubt that homosexuals could find protection and enjoyment in one another, and I do not doubt that they do. But again without complementary roles and childbearing, this is null.

Now the naysayers to my position will ask about heterosexual couples who can not bear children. And they may have a point. But ask yourself this. Do they still complement each other in their perspective roles? Yes. Is it still pleasing in God's
sight? Most likely, yes.

If a marriage at least has the CAPACITY to carry all of these traits, then it is a marriage. Since a gay marriage has the CAPACITY to carry only three of these traits, and not all, it is not a marriage. Therefore, gay marriage is an oxymoron

My opponent will almost assuredly reiterate his claim that not everyone is Christian, and we agree on that as I have said. However, it will be his duty to DISPROVE my definition of marriage. He will claim that if two people love each other, they should get married. So I have a few questions for my opponent:

1. If marriage is all about love, how do you feel about a young woman marrying an old 80 year old millionaire for the sole purpose of inheriting the old man's millions when he inevitably dies?

2. If marriage is all about love, how do you feel about two closely related people, like cousins or siblings or nephews and aunts or nieces and uncles marrying each other if they love each other?

3. If marriage is all about love, how do you feel about a man marrying his dog or cat or horse or cow or hamster if he loves that animal?

4. If marriage is all about love, how do you feel about someone who is underage (under the age of 18), marrying someone who is let's say in their 30's or 40's

I want my opponent to ANSWER AND DEFEND HIS ANSWERS to each of these questions. If he cannot do that, then he has no argument to lean on.

As for whether it should be legal in Texas. The problem is this: gay marriage was banned in Texas by the people of Texas. A federal judge CANNOT step in and change the will of the people. This is stated in the Federalist Papers No 45 written by James Madison:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce[5] & [6]

Since gay marriage is NOT an external object as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce, the federal government has ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to step in and change the will of the people. If Texas wants place a ban on gay marriage, let the people of Texas decide that.

If my opponent hopes to win this debate he would have to do ALL of the following

1. Unequivocally disprove my definition of marriage
2. Answer the four questions I posed to him AND DEFEND his answers
3. Show that the Federal judge was right in reversing the will of the people of Texas by proving that gay marriage is a matter of war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce

If he cannot do even ONE of the things above, he cannot win the debate

1. http://www.biblegateway.com...
2. http://www.biblegateway.com...
3. http://www.biblegateway.com...
4. http://www.biblegateway.com...
5. http://filmmakersvillage.com...
6. http://avalon.law.yale.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
bubbles2464

Pro

bubbles2464 forfeited this round.
kingcripple

Con

My opponent forfeited his round
Debate Round No. 2
bubbles2464

Pro

bubbles2464 forfeited this round.
kingcripple

Con

Again my opponent forfeits. I really hate to win on a forfeit, but a win is a win I guess. I will give my opponent enough credit to say that he made a few points in his one and only round, but those points are empty, invalid and without merit or defense. Perhaps he thought he could win a debate by simply making the same old tired emotional appeals. This just isn't true, while the points he made are nice to think about in theory, they are just fantasy. And nothing but.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by liberal17 3 years ago
liberal17
I agree with the pro side, p.s. use the first amendment, for Religious freedom, and use the amendment about the separation of church and state.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
bubbles2464kingcrippleTied
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
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
bubbles2464kingcrippleTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con addressed Pro's argument, and made a very strong rebuttal that needed to be addressed. Conduct to Con for the forfeit. Sources to Con, because they were relevant and helped make Con's arguments.
Vote Placed by EndarkenedRationalist 3 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
bubbles2464kingcrippleTied
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: (Sigh) FF