The Instigator
angelbug315
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Grape
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

To end Discrimination by converting marriages to civil unions

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
Pro Tied Con
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: 7/24/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,637 times Debate No: 12617
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

angelbug315

Pro

Marriage is the only religious rite to enjoy legal status; and whereas religious objectives have led many states to pass laws that violate the separation of church and state in order to discriminate against gay and lesbian couples; and whereas civil unions can protect all legal custody, and inheritance rights in a secular manner; and whereas churches can continue to choose who receives the sacrament of marriage under their beliefs.
Grape

Con

Introduction: My opponent proposes that my converted marriages to civil unions, it would be possible to end discrimination. I propose that this would not end or reduce discrimination. I will also argue that converting all marriages to civil unions is not a wise idea for other reasons.

Converting all marriages to civil unions would not end discrimination. I assume my opponent is referring to discrimination against gays and lesbians and not discrimination in general. In any case, I fail to see a connection between the use of the term marriage and this type of discrimination. My opponent is no doubt thinking of the line of reasoning which defines a marriage as the civil union of one man and one woman, thereby preventing homosexual marriages. It is this line of reasoning, and not simply the word marriage, that is flawed. If a marriage is to be defined as a religious rite that joins one man and one woman, this would also mean that an atheist man and an atheist woman could not be "married."

The issue at hand is not the use of the term "marriage" but the fact that people are artificially defining it to enforce their standards. It is true that the state has no right not to allow homosexual "marriage" but the solution to this is to adopt a more broad definition of marriage. The use of the term "civil union" simply counters one artificial definition with another. What is more important than the strict definition of a term is what is meant by it. Gays and lesbians should be allowed to be "married." The use of the word "marriage" is not the barrier that needs to be overcome.

Discrimination against gays and lesbians is not the result of phony definitions of legal terms. It is the result of some combination of close-minded bigotry, moral deficiency, ignorance, and often pure stupidity. Hatred toward those who are different or do not conform is a common symptom of moral and intellectual weakness that is all to common in America today. Changing the word "marriage" to "civil union" will not stop this problem. The correct course of action is to universally allow state-recognized marriages to all individuals under a broader definition of marriage. I do not have a counter-proposal to end discrimination, but I suspect it's roots are cultural and cannot easily be corrected. In any case, my opponent's proposal of converting all marriages to civil unions is ill-advised and will not achieve the desired goal.

I am sorry if my argument is jumbled or disorganized. I do not feel well today but I did not want to put off writing my response to long to avoid missing the deadline.
Debate Round No. 1
angelbug315

Pro

angelbug315 forfeited this round.
Grape

Con

All arguments extended.
Debate Round No. 2
angelbug315

Pro

angelbug315 forfeited this round.
Grape

Con

All arguments extended. Pro has not made any rebuttals in the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Mac 6 years ago
Mac
angelbug315GrapeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:07 
Vote Placed by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
angelbug315GrapeTied
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