The Instigator
Luggs
Pro (for)
Winning
29 Points
The Contender
RationalMadman
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The reproductive argument against gay marriage fails.

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 5 votes the winner is...
Luggs
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/28/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,633 times Debate No: 28724
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (5)

 

Luggs

Pro

-=Debate Parameters=-
4 Rounds
Voting lasts 3 days
3 days to argue
8,000-Character rounds, maximum
All votes require comments

-=Debate Rules=- *Failure to meet a rule results in a loss of 7 points, per rule*
1st round is acceptance only
If using sources, do not plagiarize, use quotation marks.
No semantics
No trolling

-=Definitions=-
Reproductive argument: refers to the argument that homosexuals can't reproduce, therefore gay marriage should not exist.
Gay marriage: a formal union of two members of the same sex, by which they become two husbands or two wives.

-=Burden of Proof=-
The burden of proof lies on I, Pro, and the job of Con is to refute my arguments.

Arguments will begin in Round 2. I await a response.
RationalMadman

Con

OMG GAYS ARE SO DUMB OMG THAT IS SO TRUE OMG!!!

YOu ARE SO GONNA LOSE DEWDDDDDD... xoxo
Debate Round No. 1
Luggs

Pro

I would like to thank RationalMadman, who will be taking the position of Con. This will be our second debate together. Now, let us begin the arguments.

The reproductive argument is as follows: homosexuals can't reproduce naturally, therefore they should not be allowed to the person whom they love.

The issue that makes this argument fail is as follows: if reproduction is a requirement for marriage, then infertile couples should not be allowed to marry. Those who oppose same-sex marriage have never had any issue with heterosexual couples who are infertile to get married. There is, however, a solution to this argument. When a homosexual couple want to have a child, they can and must plan for it. When saying this, I refer to surrogate mothers. The surrogate mother can be impregnated, and her child is adopted by the homosexual couple.

Off to Con for rebuttals (and possibly counter-arguments).
RationalMadman

Con

Why do people marry? Why not just remain BF and GF for life xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo HMM???????????

OOOOOOOH YEAH! LET ME THINK YOU HOMO MOFO FO SHO IT IS BECAUSE.................


They marry so the man gives the woman his family name so they can have children and be identified as the "Addams family" or something like that. You know?! IT SHOWS THE MEN ARE SUPERIOR TO THE INFERIOR WOMAN HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

ANYWAY... If you aren't going to have kids of your own and if there are two inferior women or two superior men WHO GIVES WHOT HE SURNAME?? WHOSE SECOND NAME BECOMES THE FAMILY NAME?! EXACTLY! I WIN!


MARRIAGE IS NOT ABOUT LOVE... Just ask your parents bro... OOOOH BUUUURN (if they genuinely divorced you have my condolences).
Debate Round No. 2
Luggs

Pro

I hate trolls... Sigh... I guess I might as well keep going...

Con argues the purpose of marriage is so the man gives the woman his family name, however this is irrelevant. The resolution of this debate is "The reproductive argument against gay marriage fails". It is not about the purpose of marriage. We are debating whether the reproductive argument succeeds in being a valid argument against gay marriage.

Con continues to go off-topic by asking who gets the surname. next, Con makes an ad hominem saying that my parents don't love each other.

Overall, I have deduced that Con will likely remain a troll throughout the entire debate. Looks like I will be receiving some points for him breaking the rules. He has not made a single on-topic assertion, nor has he refuted any of my claims.

Back to the Con.
RationalMadman

Con

The sole purpose of marriage is to have an official event that legally beinds two parents to raise children with ONE FAMILY NAME! There is simply no other objective purpose.

The only reason gays would get married is, despite being unable to decide who surrenders the name and who keeps it, is to declare themselves ready to have children, which is physically unfeasible.

Thus I conclude, the resolution is most truthful.

Mu opponent completely failed to address my points, terming me a troll.

LOSS OF CONDUCT FOOL! BOOYA!
Debate Round No. 3
Luggs

Pro

Con has conceded that the resolution is true. Looks like the debate is over, with me the victor. Con has overall not addressed the resolution, and has completely gone off-topic. Moreover, he has conceded 7 points to me, as he has trolled this debate. Next time, I hope I don't get stuck with another troll.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Luggs 4 years ago
Luggs
You're right RMM. My victory was flawless ;)
Posted by Luggs 4 years ago
Luggs
I plan on redoing this debate. Anyone willing to accept? Same rules.
Posted by GarretKadeDupre 4 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
Because he isn't that rational. And he's a madman. Lol.
Posted by Luggs 4 years ago
Luggs
*sigh* Why does Rational have to start this with a troll-like round?
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
LuggsRationalMadmanTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: lol
Vote Placed by tmar19652 4 years ago
tmar19652
LuggsRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: RM was clearly trolling
Vote Placed by morgan2252 4 years ago
morgan2252
LuggsRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had better conduct because con did not even acknowledge the debate topic and puts too much emotion into his arguments. This is also the reason his arguments weren't very convincing. Con also had some grammar issues.
Vote Placed by GarretKadeDupre 4 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
LuggsRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: This was the most entertaining debate I've ever witnessed. Not-so-RationalMadman had be laughing at every round, but Pro obviously won.
Vote Placed by Jarhyn 4 years ago
Jarhyn
LuggsRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: RationalMadman fails at life. RM clearly violated the "no trolling" stipulation.