The Instigator
faye_seventeen17
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
nevergiveup
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points

THIS HOUSE WOULD ALLOW HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/24/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,046 times Debate No: 4182
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (9)

 

faye_seventeen17

Con

okay. basically homosexuals are those we call as "gays, lesbians, etc"
in the other hand, marriage is a sacred sacrament that needs to be respected.

if we would allow this homosexuals to marry, we would actually deprive the culture of the society with which, they are used to men-women marriages.

with the given explanations. i believe that it's best set in the Philippines since homosexual marriages here are not yet allowed
nevergiveup

Pro

one of the main reasons why we should allow homosexual marriages is to get rid of discrimination among gay people, and to let them profess their love to each other in the eyes of the law and of the people.

you have pointed that marriage is a sacred sacrament and therefore should be reapected. for that reason we should allow homosexuals to marry through CIVIL marriages. this wouldn't include any religious ceremonies so it would be agreeable to people who are against homosexual marriages because of their religious principles.
Debate Round No. 1
faye_seventeen17

Con

being married is not only the end-all-be-all way to actually show to your loved one that you are committed.

they could just be live-in partners.

they would not be discriminated if they won't get marry mainly becasue they are already aware that they are GAYS and LESBIANS, thus i tell you that, with their decisions, they already accepted that they would be discriminated in the long run.

i tell you also that even civil marriages are costly and could just legalize your marriage on paper.

if you are already married either in civil or church, you are already tied up on a pure commitment that you'll be staying until death do u part. i believe that if they wont marry, it wont be costly and they would have the freedom to choose whom they wanted to love even if the former relationship would be over.

they would have more options to change their partners right away if they're unmarried.

since your point was about being discriminated, i believe that my rebuttal would be enough.
nevergiveup

Pro

yes, it's not the end-all-be-all way to show they're committed, but that's what they want. that's the way they want to show their committed. it's a choice. THEIR choice. not allowing them to do what they want hinders them to achieve their freedom, and thus bring about discrimination and inequality.

there can be alternatives for marriage, like what you said, but still they don't achieve the rights that married couples get. yet again, this brings about discrimination among them.

citing what u said:
1) they would not be discriminated if they won't get marry mainly becasue they are already aware that they are GAYS and LESBIANS
2) with their decisions, they already accepted that they would be discriminated in the long run.
--dont you thing these are two contrasting ideas, saying that they would not be discriminated but then saying that they already accepted that they would be discriminated?

i say that it is a big assumption to tell that gays already accepted that they would be discriminated. if there is a something you want and a right you don't achieve, would you just sit and accept the things as they are?
and even if gays accept this discrimination, it doesn't mean it's right to discriminate them.

if these people really want to marry, they are ready for the price to pay. also, legalizing it (on paper) means having to achieve the rights married people have (i.e. if one becomes ill, the partner has the right to be with him/her in the hospital. if one dies, his/her distant nieces and nephews have more of a claim to hm/her belongings than the partner does. they file "single" on their tax returns and are not allowed to be on each other's health plans).

people marry because they choose to live and be commmitted with each other forever. it is unacceptable to say that we shouldn't allow homosexual marriges just because they just might break up in the end', and it would be easier for them if they do.
Debate Round No. 2
faye_seventeen17

Con

But even so, why would a new social trend of gays marrying have negative effects? We believe there are compelling reasons why the institutionalization of gay marriage would be:
1) bad for marriage,
2) bad for children,
3) bad for society.

1. The first casualty of the acceptance of gay marriage would be the very definition of marriage itself. For thousands of years and in every Western society marriage has meant the life-long union of a man and a woman. Such a statement about marriage is what philosophers call an analytic proposition. The concept of marriage necessarily includes the idea of a man and woman committing themselves to each other. Any other arrangement contradicts the basic definition. Advocates of gay marriage recognize this contradiction by proposing "gay unions" instead, but this distinction is, we believe, a strategic one. The ultimate goal for them is the societal acceptance of gay marriage.

2. Gay marriage would be bad for children. According to a recent article in Child Trends, "Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage." While gay marriage would encourage adoption of children by homosexual couples, which may be preferable to foster care, some lesbian couples want to have children through anonymous sperm donations, which means some children will be created purposely without knowledge of one of their biological parents. Research has also shown that children raised by homosexuals were more dissatisfied with their own gender, suffer a greater rate of molestation within the family, and have homosexual experiences more often.

Gay marriage will also encourage teens who are unsure of their sexuality to embrace a lifestyle that suffers high rates of suicide, depression, HIV, drug abuse, STDs, and other pathogens.

3. Gay marriage would be bad for society. The effects we have described above will have strong repercussions on a society that is already having trouble maintaining wholesome stability in marriage and family life. If marriage and families are the foundation for a healthy society, introducing more uncertainty and instability in them will be bad for society.

In addition, we believe that gay marriage can only be imposed by activist judges, not by the democratic will of the people. The vast majority of people define marriage as the life-long union of a man and a woman. They will strongly resist redefinition.

It would exacerbate social conflict and division in our nation, a division that is already bitter and possibly dangerous.

In short, gay marriage will change marriage more than it will change gays.
nevergiveup

Pro

copy-paste.

http://www.virtueonline.org...

and

http://www.christianitytoday.com...

ayoko na. punta na kme MOA. labyu faye. =))
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by nevergiveup 8 years ago
nevergiveup
shame faye, shame. :))
Posted by nevergiveup 9 years ago
nevergiveup
copy-paste sucks daw oh faye..
hahaha.
bati tayooooo. :D
Posted by imjustme 9 years ago
imjustme
Christian views are not appreciated because we are submitting in to a "Civil marriage" something given by the law.
Christian views as well cannot affect the law because the law is higher on all countries and "Christianity" only exists because the government allows it to, as long as it doesn't harm a certain group/minority.
We are not depriving a culture, rather we are giving a new face for this culture. Something that is applicable to all sectors of the society.
Because the law must always be fair and it must always change if we are "depriving" a group or minority a certain right to express their love "IN PAPER"

Peace :)
Posted by Derek.Gunn 9 years ago
Derek.Gunn
How would you feel about allowing "Civil Unions"?

This gives homosexuals all the rights of marriage, only without calling it "marriage".

A rose by any other name... ;-)
Posted by faye_seventeen17 9 years ago
faye_seventeen17
IT"S NOT ALSO GOOD IF WE ALLOW HOMOSEXUALS TO MARRY MAINLY BECAUSE THEY ARE DEPRIVING THE CULTURE OF MARRIAGE. I BELIEVE THAT IF WE ARE ACTUALLY CHANGING/ DEPRIVING A CULTURE, IT SHOULD BE WORTH TAKING RISKS.
Posted by faye_seventeen17 9 years ago
faye_seventeen17
thanks for the comment :)

it's highly appreciated.

i agree with you ms. augista1457... :)
Posted by augista1457 9 years ago
augista1457
I am for and against homosexual uniting. I am Christian so I do belive that it should be only between a male and a female. Also it says in Revalations 22 that homosexual marriage is not right.

But on the other hand I belive that you cant help who people are and what people do.
Posted by faye_seventeen17 9 years ago
faye_seventeen17
i refer to my ROUND 3 arguments. DANG!
Posted by faye_seventeen17 9 years ago
faye_seventeen17
hahah

even though it's copy-pasting, it indeed proved that i won ;)
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by paul_tigger 9 years ago
paul_tigger
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by nevergiveup 9 years ago
nevergiveup
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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 
Vote Placed by Korezaan 9 years ago
Korezaan
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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 
Vote Placed by imjustme 9 years ago
imjustme
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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 
Vote Placed by LakevilleNorthJT 9 years ago
LakevilleNorthJT
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by libertarian 9 years ago
libertarian
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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 
Vote Placed by augista1457 9 years ago
augista1457
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 9 years ago
Vi_Veri
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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 
Vote Placed by Spiral 9 years ago
Spiral
faye_seventeen17nevergiveupTied
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