The Instigator
jgardner
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Complicated_Mind
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Should gay marriage be llegal?

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 5 votes the winner is...
Complicated_Mind
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 760 times Debate No: 68525
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

jgardner

Pro

Love is love no matter the gender, if a man loves another man or a woman loves another woman they should be allowed to get married just like when a man and a woman love each other
Complicated_Mind

Con

I would like to thank Pro for instigating this debate. I haven't debated in a long time. This should be interesting...

Firstly, I accept this challenge. Pro has BOP. Pro has to affirm gay marriage should be legalized, I have to negate her case. Given that I am all for gay marriage in actuality, I decided to play Devil's advocate for fun. I thought it would be interesting to argue for another POV.

Legal - to be permitted by law.
Gay Marriage - two people of the same sex getting lawfully married.

You may state your case.
Debate Round No. 1
jgardner

Pro

There are still states that do not allow same sex marriage, there are no reasons that people of the same sex should not be married. Are you able to present any reasons it should not be legal?
Complicated_Mind

Con

I would like to inform my opponent that debates on here generally have the first round as the acceptance round, where the instigator and contender simply agree to the terms of the debate. That is what I did. Now let's get down to business.

========My Case=======

Firstly, I would like to discuss the sanctity of marriage. Marriage started as a religious institution and by allowing gay marriage, that would contradict the ideals of the origins of marriage itself. Marriage is based not only on a religion that is anti-gay [1] but it is also contradicting one of the key roles of marriage: procreation and the upbringing of children. Clearly, two people of the same biological sex cannot procreate, which is a key characteristic for marriage. To add on to that point, it should be noted, that, in the case of adoption or where a gay couple somehow is able to parent a child or children, they, on balance, do not make nearly as good parents as heterosexuals do.

To build on my point of homosexuals being, on average, inferior parents to their 'straight' counterparts, I shall point out that children of homosexuals are more likely to molest children [2] and are MUCH more likely to have gay children [3]. This clearly reassures us all that homosexuals, on balance, do not make good parents.

Gay relationships are also usually much more violent [4] than other relationships. We should not encourage such behavior. Endorsing this is contradicting the basis of marriage and any sanctity left would be destroyed considering the violence and anger of homosexual couples.

Lastly, if two homosexuals want to have legal rights together, then they can get civil unions. This conveys ALL rights guaranteed by marriage, but not use of the word 'marriage.' Why change the meaning of a religious institution of marriage when they can be together without disturbing the sanctity of marriage?

=========To Summarize my Case=========

I. Marriage is a religious institution. Allowing gay marriage would ruin the sanctity of marriage, and would redefine a holy word. They cannot provide some basic key elements of marriage: they cannot procreate, nor are they fit for parenting.

II. Gays are much more likely, proportionally, to molest children. This should not be condoned by law. This likely leads to molestation to their own children, too.

III. Gays, on balance, are very violent towards each other. This would ruin any sanctity left of marriage. Endorsing this has no benefits.

IIII. Gays can get civil unions, which gives them all rights of marriage, but, with civil unions around, the sanctity of marriage is maintained.

========Rebutting my Opponent's Contentions=======

My opponent's sole argument is easily refutable. I have never stated homosexual individuals are not capable of love; on the contrary, they are just as able as anyone else to experience love. But they can express this through other means (e.g civil unions) without disturbing the sanctity of marriage. Love does not always equal marriage.

My opponent does not offer any other substantial arguments.

The case is beyond negated.

Just as a side note, I am all for gay marriage AND gay parenting as stated above. (I think gays make as good of parents as straights). However arguing for the side you disagree withe makes for good debating experience. My arguments still stand, however.

=======Sources======

[1]: http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...
[2]: http://www.frc.org...
[3]: http://www.wnd.com...
[4]: http://www.northwestern.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
jgardner

Pro

jgardner forfeited this round.
Complicated_Mind

Con

My opponent has forfeited the final round of this debate. As such, my points go unrefuted. I have successfully rebutted all contentions put forward by Pro, and, as a result, I have undoubtedly won this debate.

Extend my points, obviously.

And, with that, I say my final goodbye to this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by platoscaveman 2 years ago
platoscaveman
Gender is not synonymous with sex. Male and female are sexes. Masculine and Feminine are genders.
Posted by Lordgrae 2 years ago
Lordgrae
Might want to clarify legal vs illegal. Cause if you don't look to long at your title, the percieved typo could go either way.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Paleophyte 2 years ago
Paleophyte
jgardnerComplicated_MindTied
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: Pro forfeits
Vote Placed by bsh1 2 years ago
bsh1
jgardnerComplicated_MindTied
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: While I strongly sympathize with Pro, Con clearly did the better job.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
jgardnerComplicated_MindTied
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: Pro ff a round, so conduct to Con. Only Con made an argument, so arguments to Con. Only Con had sources, so sources to Con.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
jgardnerComplicated_MindTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's bare assertions were obliterated by Con's referenced, systematic arguments. Arguments and sources go to Con. Conduct to Con for Pro's round forfeit.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
jgardnerComplicated_MindTied
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: Forfeit and no contest... Utter BoP failure by pro, etc etc. (too one sided to make me read the sources to determine their value)