The Instigator
mubaracus
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Oromagi
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Should the Gay Rights movement be compared to the Civil Rights Movement?

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 2 votes the winner is...
Oromagi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/22/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,801 times Debate No: 36944
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

mubaracus

Con

I am against the idea that the Gay Rights movement be compared to the Civil Rights movement. 1st round for agreement! :)
Oromagi

Pro

Wikipedia defines the Civil Rights Movement as " a series of worldwide political movements for equality before the law....The main aim of the civil rights movement included, and include, ensuring that the rights of all people are equally protected by the law, including the rights of minorities. Civil rights movements ranging from the global LGBT rights movement to the global Women's rights movement to various racial minority rights movements around the world continue."

The pursuit of LGBT rights are commonly considered a chapter in the history of the Civil Rights Movement. As such, that movement may be reasonably compared and contrasted against the histories of other chapters in that struggle.

https://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
mubaracus

Con

This debate is not to hear what Wikipedia has to say about aligning the LGBT movements as a civil rights movement. If anything whether a person on Wikipedia supports the belief that civil rights movement should be compared to the LGBT movement they would still put it on to avoid offending anybody. It is simply then expressing small parallels.

To keep things concise, most civil rights movements were advocating for inalienable rights which should not be denied by any human being i.g. freedom of speech, job opportunities, ect.

LGBT movements generally preach for one specific right which is the right to marry.

Your turn :)
Oromagi

Pro


We should note that, strictly speaking, Pro just blew up his own argument. Pro argued in the first round that the LGBT rights movement is not comparable to other civil rights movements. Pro's second argument compared LGBT rights movement to other civil rights movement (I.e. job rights vs. marriage rights) and admitted there were "small parallels." Pro seems to have exempted himself from the rule he promotes: these movements should not be compare
d.

I suspect that the spirit of Pro's argument is that the LGBT rights movement is by one measure inferior to other civil rights movements. Pro's measure is that most civil rights movements are concerned with inalienable rights, while LGBT rights movements are generally concerned with marriage equality.

I would argue that marriage equality is an inalienable right, in as much that it really doesn't matter what church or state tells you. When two people decide to share their lives, they generally disregard those institutions that tell them otherwise. Neither Capulets nor Montagues could tell Romeo and Juliet they weren't married. Neither Blacks nor Whites could tell Richard and Mildred Loving they weren't married. Neither France nor the U.S could tell Gertrude Stein and Alice B. Toklas they weren't married. Marriage is a state of mind, a promise kept by two people irregardless of doctrine, or law, or pain of death. Inalienable.

But we should also note that LGBT rights movements are concerned with far more the question of marriage equality. In fact, popular movements for marriage equality are a relatively new political phenomenon, built on the foundation of generations of struggle. Many of the issues addressed by LGBT movements address rights that Pro would recognize as inalienable.

Let us agree that three inalienable rights are those noted in the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

LIFE-
There are several LGBT movements devoted to preserving the lives of LGBT around the globe. In Iran, for example, the Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees helps Gays escape from a country that still retains the death penalty for homosexuality. There are 7 nations that still retain capital punishment for homosexuals and 2 countries considering adopting the death penalty for gays. All of these nations maintain activist organizations that oppose these laws and many other civil rights organizations frequently condemn these laws and work to change them. In Uganda, where a death penalty for homosexuals has overwhelming popular support, only activist appeals to global organizations and leaders has prevented the implementation of a proposed death penalty.

LIBERTY-
There are 76 countries where homosexuality is illegal and punishable by anything from fines, to whipping, to life imprisonment. There are hundreds of organization working to change these laws and/or free gay people serving time. Russia is a good example. Although rights for homosexuals were granted in 1917 after the Russian Revolution, discrimination against LGBT peoples has been on the rise for years and recent waves of murders, mass arrests, and anti-gay legislation has ignited a strong international backlash from LGBT activists and human rights advocates. As a result, multiple celebrities have recently cancelled tours or visits to Russia. Actor Stephen Fry initiated a movement calling for a relocation or boycott of the 2014 Winter Olympics unless Russia can guarentee improved freedoms for LGBT peoples.

PURSUIT of HAPPINESS-
Well, this all over the place, but let's look at employment discrimination in the US, since Pro brought this up as an example of an inalienable right. Only 21 states have laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Although employment discrimination has become far less popular in the last decade, there are still employers who actively seek to screen out LGBT people and fire LGBT upon discovery. Chick-fil-a is one employer who works hard to screen out LGBT people from management and ownership opportunities. The US Military is the largest employer in the world and only changed its policy of firing LGBT employees 13 months ago.

I think I have successfully shown that LGBT rights movements have concerned themselves primarily with inalienable rights in the past and continue to do so today on a global scale, irrespective of whether PRO considers marriage equality an inalienable right.



Debate Round No. 2
mubaracus

Con

To close my arguments, I do feel as though I didn't pose the question I directly intended on imposing. So I am just gonna accept defeat cause this is an argument that I am bound to lose.
:/
Oromagi

Pro

Thanks, Con. We are in agreement that the argument as stated is not supportable. LGBT rights movements are comparable to other civil rights movements.

Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by neurotic1 3 years ago
neurotic1
i worked in LGBT rights for 2 years in an organisation with contacts as big as Sir Ian McKellan (Gandalf from lord of the rings). Have to say the majority of difficulty was with our own social group; a lot of infighting went on, but, what doesn't kill us makes us stronger? I think its important to remember though that we are not all like that, many of us can be classed alongside humanity. Therefore LGBT groups should be compared with civil rights groups as they are campaigning for the rights of all human beings... whether that is regardless of their behaviour towards each other is a debate of the criminal justice system. I believe the world would be at a loss if LGBT people remained repressed.
Posted by Oromagi 3 years ago
Oromagi
Well, my first round switch was following yours. You stated you were against the idea that gay rights be compared. You will note that I covered both options in the 2nd round - a brief arg against the language can and then a long arg against the should
Posted by mubaracus 3 years ago
mubaracus
IT is clear from his last argument.
Posted by mubaracus 3 years ago
mubaracus
Woah I actually shouldn't have conceded because Pro switched the argument on me without my knowledge. He tricked me into having the mindset that the argument was about "Can the gay rights movement be compared to the civil rights movement" where as I asked "should the gay rights movement be compared to the civil rights movement".

Where as the first argument simply poses similarities to the definition of a civil rights movement, the other expresses the magnitude of the issue.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
mubaracusOromagiTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession. Conduct to con for admitting that he had lost in such a polite manor. Where as I still think this could have been argued. You conceded because it "could" be compared, not that it "should" be which was the topic of the debate. I do not agree with the resolution by any means, but just stating, it still could have been argued.
Vote Placed by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
mubaracusOromagiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: con conceded in the final round, and pro had already had the debate won when he gave the definition of the rights movements and easily showed how they are similar and therefore can be compared.