The Instigator
darkprincess
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
elgeibo
Con (against)
Winning
38 Points

gay marriage

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: 11/2/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,751 times Debate No: 5869
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (6)

 

darkprincess

Pro

Gay marriage, to some this may be blasphemy, to others though this is a wonderful thing that can happen between two same sexes... I know that it can happen.

First standing point being that love was never based on what they had in the pants, but whether the person made you happy and they were there for you through thick and thin. Some think that gay marriage is just a joke, why would it be when they say they feel that way for each other.

Second standing point is when was it anyone else's right to say who they could enter a relationship with, My value in this argument is freedom of choice. Because honestly if you were gay and you wanted to marry someone, you can't because so many people are biased about it. NOT FAIR!

Third standing point being yes some gay/lesbian do it for a fad but we cannot base our opinions on them because they are a disgrace to gay/lesbian people only having sexual relations to get a boyfriend for your girl/friend.

Fourth standing point would be the gay parade, :) it makes me so happy i mean people who have been very proud of who they are walk down the town and tell people basically we are who we are you don't like go away...

thank you!
elgeibo

Con

My opponent has started a debate that is a twisty maze for logic. But, I hope to do both of us justice for our sides, and de-vilify the traditional heterosexual relationship.

I assume my opponents position to be that a Homosexual relationship is just as valid a relationship as the traditional Heterosexual relationship. My position will be that the Homosexual relationship is not as valid a relationship as the Heterosexual relationship.

My opponent begins with the very valid point that your sex has no baring on who you feel close to and who you will be faithful to. The normal counterargument is that homosexual relationships do not last as long as heterosexual ones.

http://www.caringfriends.hk...- this is an obviously anti-homosexual group
http://www.physiciansforlife.org...- more of pro-homosexual website

However, I would prefer to ask why my opponent speaks love as being a feeling. Love is a feeling yes, but it is also choice, a choice of putting the other person's needs, wants, and desires before your own. And a person who is in a homosexual relationship is thinking about themselves. Reading through my opponents debate shows her need for validation of her feelings, not her worry for her partners.

My opponent's second point is that no one should say with whom you may being a relationship. I agree with my opponent, a relationship is only the business of the two in the relationship. In the United States of America however, it is required to have a majority of the people agree that two homosexuals can be married. Homosexual marriage is what this debate is about, not if people should be in a homosexual relationship. Since we are in a country that prides itself on democracy of a majority rule, it does matter what others think.

My opponent's next point is that just because there are those that participate in homosexuality for the sake of it being a fad should not detract from the legitimacy of those who are in a long term homosexual relationship. I would think that a relationship that people participate in simply because it is the current "in thing" shows why homosexual marriage should not be legalized. The "fad" nature of homosexuality shows that it is not love, as shown by my first point.

The final point my opponent makes is that a gay parade shows why homosexual marriage should be legalized. Once again, my opponent speaks on her feelings in her relationship. I would just be repeating my previous rebuttal about a fad here again if I chose to.

To put my opponent on the defensive; why is it that homosexual pride lobbyists can tell the heterosexuals that homosexual feelings matter and no one can tell them what to feel, when they are telling the heterosexuals what to feel, and that their feelings do not matter?

Secondly, what will the adopted children, or children brought in from a previous heterosexual relationship, have to go through being the child of two mommies or two daddies? When they are asked about a question that they are developmentally unable to answer because it takes abstract reasoning, yet they are still in the concrete stage of life. Is this fair to that child, or will you ingrain in your child the answer?

http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk...- brief explanation of concrete vs abstract thinking.

To sum up my view, homosexual relationships are counter-productive culturally, are required to be sanctioned legally, and are denied legitimacy from within their own ranks.

The questions I ask about denying me my right to disagree with homosexuality, and what will happen to children of the homosexual couple deserve answers as well.

I look forward to my opponents rebuttal and wish her good luck and happy debating!
Debate Round No. 1
darkprincess

Pro

but my opponent fails to realize love or marriage was not based to be bias against anyone or
be based on what they had in there pants or did they and if so proof?
elgeibo

Con

My opponent continues to keep me on my toes. I always think that I am being clear, but my second round always seems to be clarifying my first round's argument.

Perhaps I do not understand my opponent, but I believe my opponent argues that love and marriage are biased against the homosexual couple.

I don't understand how ideals (love) and social arrangements (marriage) can be biased against anyone. However, I believe my opponent is attempting to communicate her belief that homosexuals are being persecuted by not being allowed to be in love and marry.

I don't agree. Here on "the internet" you can look up homosexual websites and find many many many many many videos applauding homosexual female copulation. There are even quite a few for male homosexual copulation.

That non-withstanding, nothing is against the law for homosexuals to fall in love. However, the general population does not agree that homosexuals should be allowed to marry (as seen by Californians overturning the California courts judgment on homosexual marriage).

I do not believe that my opponent will agree with my previous point, or the point that socio-historically homosexuality has been seen in the negative light. Many countries that have a liberal viewpoint do not condone gay marriage, but again, I take it my opponent will disagree/ devalidate that proof as well.

One could even point out how Aristolian theory plays into the question of homosexuality(http://www.fordham.edu...). Once again, this proof will be more than likely discounted.

I look forward to reading my opponent's own proofs in the matter.
Debate Round No. 2
darkprincess

Pro

Marriage should not be biased at all because then its just bull plucky! there is no proof needed only because any gay or straight person would believe that no one can decide who they date or who they want to be with!

People if you really understood what i am saying and that would be that god did not create us to hate some for liking the same sex yes it is not looked upon as the bible would state...

but gay/lesbian people were not born to think different there not dumb there not any less then us heterosexual couples they love each other. They need each other!

Thank you!
vote pro!
elgeibo

Con

My opponent is fast! I had literally not yet even logged out of debate.org before the final rebuttal was posted!

I am interested that my opponent brings God into this debate, as all major religions will say that God hates homosexuality. To clarify, God hates the sin of homosexuality, the same as God hates the sin of murdering, the same as God hates the sin of anger, the same as the sin of lying, the exact same hate as he hates pride. I say the last three, because I am as guilty as the best of them on those three! But, in God's eyes, every single sin is equal.

9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals. (by the way, effeminate in that statement means effeminate for perversion, not a natural inclination towards traditionally female roles by a man)

1st Corinthians 6:9 New American Standard version- just one example.

Often times, versus about how John was the disciple Jesus loved, or how John laid his head on Jesus breast, etc to show that Jesus was gay. This shows a modern translation of ancient text and ancient tradition. "Love" in this case is not "eros" or "thelema" nor was it even "stroge". This love was a "agapeo" love.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

http://bible.crosswalk.com... -click the word for love in John 13:23

I agree, homosexuals are not dumb, they do not matter less, and they are not unloved. What they are is unfortunately fallen, just like all the rest of us. These people simply have a sin that they are more apt to. As I said earlier, I am apt to lie, get angry, and be prideful. Do I just say, "to hell with it, I might as well lie, be angry, and be prideful because that's who 'I am'!" Or do I work on it and try to change the very nature of who I am?

Sadly, I often times let it be, but, I do try, normally when I'm called out on it by my wife, to change. As such, that is all that is asked of a homosexual, to attempt to change your natural self to a higher calling.

That "little" rant is my slightly smaller soapbox to which I get off of to stand on my usual soap box.

Homosexual couples "needing" each other goes back to my very first argument that in homosexual relationships, the two individuals often look out for themselves instead of the other. By the very nature of a homosexual coupling, it is a lecherous "fix me" relationship. And they fail the same reason as heterosexual relationships built on the same principle fail.

Marriage is a civil bond between two people. As it is civil, it is based on public consent. As it is based on public consent, it IS people telling you whom you can and cannot marry. As such, homosexual marriage currently can not exist.

I urge both my opponent and readers to carefully read and consider both points of view. I have many friends who were greatly saddened by the Section 8 vote in California over the weekend, they were hoping for validation of their feelings and beliefs. They did not receive either. Were I God and were it up to me, things would be different. Thankfully for everyone though, I am not God.

I hope you enjoyed your reading of our convoluted debate, and encourage you to not vote blindly on the belief that you came in with, but possibly have been swayed by debates from the heart and from the head.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mr.Alex 8 years ago
Mr.Alex
I voted con all accounts...Con had a very good arguement and was very articulate. He implemented good resources and had excellent spelling.
Pro did not post more than a paragraph for each round + no evidence...and pro did not thank con for his debate.
Posted by elgeibo 8 years ago
elgeibo
I wish people would explain their votes :( I want to know what they think, I'm more worried about that than any win :(
Posted by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
Quite simply, my vote for convincing argument went hands down to Con. Pro simply restated the same argument, never addressing Con's rebuttals or leading arguments. I also gave Con the vote for better spelling and grammar. Con also supported his position with interesting sources, so I gave him that vote as well. Conduct was a tie.
Posted by beem0r 8 years ago
beem0r
slayer - why do you care whether or not we think you're gay?
Posted by slayer54321 8 years ago
slayer54321
i agree with pro

although i'm not gay
Posted by I-am-a-panda 8 years ago
I-am-a-panda
Is this regarding a civil union where 2 people get the some of the same priveleges as marriedm couple (like the ability to give everything to their partner upon death) or are w etalking full on m,arriage with the wedding and all.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Yes there is... it impedes the streets :D... If you wish to have a half-naked makeout session, or for all I care a full orgy, do please feel free, but get out of the way.
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
"Men walking the streets in clothes that would make a stripper blush and publically announcing their sexuality with make-out sessions. YAY."

--> Nothing wrong with that :)
Posted by my.matryoshka 8 years ago
my.matryoshka
Men walking the streets in clothes that would make a stripper blush and publically announcing their sexuality with make-out sessions. YAY.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
I wasn't using incorrect grammar.... primarily because I was not using grammar.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Larkin 8 years ago
Larkin
darkprincesselgeiboTied
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:34 
Vote Placed by Mr.Alex 8 years ago
Mr.Alex
darkprincesselgeiboTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by SolaGratia 8 years ago
SolaGratia
darkprincesselgeiboTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by jjmd280 8 years ago
jjmd280
darkprincesselgeiboTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
darkprincesselgeiboTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:06 
Vote Placed by josh_42 8 years ago
josh_42
darkprincesselgeiboTied
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:07