The Instigator
zezima
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
LotusNG
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

gay marriage is not the same as marriage equality

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...
LotusNG
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/6/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,703 times Debate No: 33340
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

zezima

Pro

marriage equality is not the same as gay marriage.
LotusNG

Con

Assuming the first round is acceptance/definitions...


Marriage equality is defined as: Same-sex marriage (also called gay marriage) is a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same biological sex... (it cuts off)

That is the definition, not my actual argument.

Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
zezima

Pro

marriage equality- marriage between any 2 humans who want to get married at least 18 years of age.

so if you are for marriage equality, what do you think marriage is about? is it love? is it something else? please provide me a reason or reasons why and how marriage should be defined. give some reasons why gay marriage should be allowed.

I don't feel like getting into specifics just yet so you start it off
LotusNG

Con

The topic is "gay marriage is not the same as marriage equality."

We are meant to be debating that. I am con, you are pro.

Gay marriage being legal has nothing to do with this, unless you meant to debate a different topic which I would gladly accept.

Proof that they are the same:

http://www.marriageequality.org... - a site about gay marriage, also known as marriage equality.

http://en.wikipedia.org... - A source I trust less, this being Wikipedia, but proof nonetheless.

www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality - More evidence.

*****

With all of that out of the way, here are a few reasons why gay marriage should be allowed (note that this has nothing to do with the topic, and any arguments following my 5 stars in this debate can be dismissed):

1. Government benefits from metting married. (http://www.nolo.com... )

2. Their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which people bring up all the time. (http://en.wikipedia.org... )

3. Personal reasons, me being a lesbian and all :P
Debate Round No. 2
zezima

Pro

ok so let me ask you a few questions.

1.) do you believe a brother and a sister at least the age of 18 should be allowed to get married?

2.) do you think more then 2 people should be allowed to get married?

3.) do you think a father/mother should be allowed to get married to their son/daughter?

as you can see if you are for marriage equality, you have to be for more than just gay marriage. homosexuals have changed words around to fit their benefits. i dont feel this part is really part of the debate, but if you want me to give examples in the next round, i will.
LotusNG

Con

"1.) do you believe a brother and a sister at least the age of 18 should be allowed to get married?"

If they are in love and both consent, yes. Now due to the problem of deformities from having children they should only adopt, should they want a child. If they do want to have a child together it is up to them, I wouldn't stop them. They would simply need to live with the consequences and difficulties of a child with severe deformities.

"2.) do you think more then 2 people should be allowed to get married?"

Marriage is defined as:
1a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> (http://www.merriam-webster.com...)

More than two people is not mentioned in that.


"3.) do you think a father/mother should be allowed to get married to their son/daughter?"

See answer to #1.


You have yet to challenge the definition of marriage equality itself, all you are doing is asking questions. Marriage is defined in the answer to #2, and if family members in love wish to be married, they should. Multiple spouses is not brought up in either definition of marriage, or the definition of marriage equality. This isn't mentioning that, unlike the others, having multiple spouses makes whatever sex the multiple spouses are seem worth less than the sex of the one spouse, thus pushing back full equality of the sexes.


Debate Round No. 3
zezima

Pro

well as you can see gay marriage is not the same as marriage equality. you would have to agree with statement 1 and 3. marriage equality involves more than just gay marriage. this being said, there are more factor to marriage equality than just gay marriage. if you disagree with statement 1 or 3, which many gay rights activist do, than you are not fully for marriage equality.

check out this citation I posted and you will see exactly what I mean
LotusNG

Con

1. I am unable to see that video link due to problems with my laptop.

2. You have yet to challenge the definition of marriage equality that I posted in round 1 with a definition of your own (Unless a new definition is in the video that I cannot see).

3. If relatives of the opposite sex are in love and wish to be married, so be it. They still fall under the definition of marriage (used in round 3, definition 1a:1 ). The problem is that incest leads to severe problems with the child, so of course people are going to be against it.

Debate Round No. 4
zezima

Pro

yes but my point is that gay marriage isn't the only thing that decides if you are for marriage equality. there are other factors that have to be included.
LotusNG

Con

Well the problem with multiple spouses is that it devalues the sex that has more spouses in that relationship, generally women.

The problem with incest is that the offspring is more likely be severely damaged in some way, hurting society as we use money to help the child after birth. But, again, this is still a man and a woman, it is still the definition of marriage.

The problem with homosexual marriage is that...? Sex will happen before or after marriage, so not diseases. Government benefits for the married couple would also apply to other marriages, like a brother and sister marriage.

Them wanting to get married hurts no one more than a straight couple getting married (we're talking about a couple that is completely loyal, we aren't involving the idea of cheating on their spouse and spreading a disease, if they even have one.), so marriage equality only applies to them, as their marriage hurts no one but themselves (and the themselves part is a maybe).

Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by PonyGirl 4 years ago
PonyGirl
Um it's not the same cause if They adopt a child and they're both male there won't be a mom like a regular family. :(
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
RFD:

Pro had the burden of proof, but he refused to disclose his argument, didn't try to meet his burden.

Eventually, late in the debate, he finally introduced an argument, a semantic argument, that can be summed up as, "gay marriage is not what I meant by marriage equality back when I wrote the title of this debate." But, by then, he had dropped all issues repeatedly, effectively conceding them, even this slimy semantic issue.

Victory: Con.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Legitdebater 4 years ago
Legitdebater
zezimaLotusNGTied
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: Sources because Pro didn't use any. Arguments to Con because Con proved that it was the same and backed it up by reliable sources. Conduct to Con because of an irrelevant video posted by Pro and a lack of debate structure.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
zezimaLotusNGTied
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: RFD in comments.