The Instigator
cbass28
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
Cody_Franklin
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points

should openly gay people be allowed in the military

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: 6/29/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,923 times Debate No: 8833
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (8)

 

cbass28

Pro

why wouldn't we let someone who wants to serve our county in war.
Cody_Franklin

Con

In the interests of fairness, I'll allow my opponent to make the first actual argumentation; allow me to simply provide a couple of opening clarifications.

First, keep in mind that we're using the word should, implying some kind of moral imperative to allow openly gay people the privilege of military service. This means that, we're not talking about whether or not allowing gays into the military would be practical; I don't have to discuss the practicality of such a plan, whether it would save time, or money, or anything like that; my only burden today is to prove that we do not have a binding moral imperative to allow gays into military service.

Second of all, keep in mind that this particular topic is discussing how things ought to be right now; that's the question of the resolution; so what my opponent must prove is that, right now, we have a moral obligation to overturn all existing laws and allow openly gay people into American Military Service.

I will stand down for now, and wait for the PRO to build his position. Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
cbass28

Pro

Thanks for taking this debate and good luck to you

i probally should have named this debate is dont ask dont tell a good rule but oh well i still will debate.

should also means duty or obligation is it not the duty of our government to provide equal rights to everybody no matter religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation. If the government runs are military then shouldn't the military keep those same rules.
Cody_Franklin

Con

The military is far different from civilian life; there are rules, discipline, and the military is definitely not a democracy. What I'm saying is not that gays can't be disciplined, but rather that the military follows a far more rigid structure, far more... socialistic, I would say. Just because a group of people want equal privileges doesn't mean that they have to be given them in the Armed Forces; equality is great, but think about it this way; a lot of people still aren't ready to accept gays into military service; think of the progression with blacks; it didn't happen in a matter of years; it took decades, centuries for things to be the way they are now; you can see that this historically set precedent shows us that we have to ease into equality; sure, maybe a few decades down the road or so, gays will be fully integrable; but, without a consensus among the population, and such a rigid military, unwilling to change, this is one social goal that must be put on the back burner, for now.

I'd like to clear that up; our government is not morally obligated to provide equal rights, I'm sorry to say. I'm not saying we have to live in a dictatorship, but people need to understand that rights and privileges can't be given away like candy; We need to balance these rights with certain social responsibilities; the 'right' to military service can only be delegated once society accepts the responsibility of respecting gays and treating them as equals; obviously, the public at large has not entirely done this; therefore, it would be foolish and unsafe for the government to distribute these rights to gays at this point in time; as many parades and demonstrations there were for gay rights, actually distributing these kinds of rights, especially military service, will lead to even larger, possibly violent demonstrations against those rights by right-wing extremists; think about it like this: with abortion, a lot of right-wingers are prone to attack and even kill the doctors at the abortion clinics; in the same way, it's very likely that, once liberalizing or erasing laws banning gays from the military, there will be equivalent violence against homosexuals in and out of the military.

So, because society is not yet ready to accept and perform on the responsibility of acceptance and tolerance, we cannot allow the government, at least at the present time and near future, to distribute the privilege of entering military service to the homosexual community; in the future, when the society is almost unanimously ready to accept homosexuality as a way of life, only then will it be safe for gays to have these kinds of rights.

For the sake of safety, and true progress, vote CON.
Debate Round No. 2
cbass28

Pro

First off don't say that society is against homosexuals in the military 56% of voters said don't ask don't tell should not exist. and 50% of people with family in the military agreed while only 43% disagreed http://news.yahoo.com...
(those numbers are in the last 2 paragraphs)

To your argument that allowing gays to serve in the military could lead to violent protests from right wing extremists.
The majority of the country thinks gay marriage should not be legal, but when it became legal in 4 states there were peaceful protests but no major violent ones and right wing people are way more passionate about same sex marriage than they are about don't ask don't tell so if their weren't violent protests about gay marriage why would there be about getting rid of don't ask don't tell.

Gay people did not choose to be gay, straight people don't choose to be straight. It's not right to ban 4 million people from joining the military just because of the way they are. We try to encourage people to join the military but when someone is gay we turn them away.

Their are very few Arabic speaking solders in the military Dan Choi was one of them because of don't ask don't tell he was kicked out.

One of the problems with this country is that we try to shame homosexuals that's what don't ask don't tell is doing gay people shouldn't have to lie theirs nothing wrong with being gay the military is making it seem like it is wrong by making gay solders stay in the closet
Cody_Franklin

Con

Even if we assume those numbers to be entirely true, and truly representative of the ENTIRE United States, look at the division there; that's a slim majority, at best; it's like drawing one giant line down the center of the United States; what this means is, for as many people as would be happy to allow gays in the military, there would be nearly as many jumping up in protest over the sudden jump from a few states allowing gay marriage to completely lifting the ban on homosexuals in military service. From that article you gave us from yahoo, even Tony Perkins, Marine Veteran, declares that military service is "a privilege, not a right." So really, in our quest for equality, we have to look back to what I've said before, that our government can't hand out rights and privileges like candy; our entire society (not just a slim majority) has to be ready to accept and perform on the responsibility of accepting homosexuality. And it's an interesting statistic, because it says that only 2,046 were interviewed; while this may seem like a big number, the U.S. has a population of around 300 million; 2,000 voters is hardly a real representation.

And, in the few states that have legalized gay marriage, those were true blue, liberal states; if you try to legalize gay marriage in places like the deep south, the really conservative states, you're going to see far more violent protesting; and you still have yet to touch on the example that I have made about how, with abortion clinics, right-wing extremists have attacked, and even killed the doctors in several well-documented cases, like George Tiller, in Kansas (a southern state, and definitely a red state, I might add).

Sorry to say, but Daniel Choi and the other 4 million gays (if that's even a legitimate statistic) are simply out of luck. I'm not going to make some rhetorically pleasing 'stepping-stone' argument like I have in the past, I'm just going to tell you straight - people are not ready for this yet; from the statistic that you yourself provided, I've already shown that it's essentially half in favor, half opposed; until we have a legitimate consensus, then the safety and sanctity of the lives and rights of the homosexual community would be endangered by delving straight into equality now; in the real world, honestly, it's better to be removed from service than to be physically harmed, or even killed.

While you say there's nothing wrong with being gay, obviously a good portion of people believe otherwise; and, until this conflict between the left and right is resolved, until gays are accepted by all levels of society, and until society is ready to shoulder the responsibility of tolerance and understanding, you're not only going to have to hold off on dishing out this privilege, but you'll most certainly have to vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
cbass28

Pro

cbass28 forfeited this round.
Cody_Franklin

Con

Sadly, my opponent has forfeitted this last round; thus, once you flow through the arguments that I have made in the previous round (and, unfortunately, by default), you'll be left with no other choice than a CON vote.
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MTGandP 8 years ago
MTGandP
Defaulted to CON due to forfeits.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 8 years ago
Cody_Franklin
I really hope that PRO stays in this thing; I had a really good debate with untitled_entity about gays in the military; I lost that one, but I think that really helped me to fine-tune my strategy; and heck, it definitely opened my mind a bit to the more practical problems surrounding DADT.
Posted by Volkov 8 years ago
Volkov
< until this conflict between the left and right is resolved, until gays are accepted by all levels of society, and until society is ready to shoulder the responsibility of tolerance and understanding, you're not only going to have to hold off on dishing out this privilege, but you'll most certainly have to vote CON. >

I've never heard of 'waiting for progress' before. I think the entire point of progress is to, you know, progress against and in the face of oppressive, ignorant views. I don't see how you can really use this 'waiting for progress' excuse as justification, when it goes against what progress is and should be.

But otherwise, interesting debate. PRO better not forfeit.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 8 years ago
Cody_Franklin
Yeah, that was actually part of my original argument. Fun stuff, I suppose. I really hope he doesn't forfeit, though.
Posted by untitled_entity 8 years ago
untitled_entity
*million, my bad.
Either way, there is no way 4 million gay men would want to join the military.... trust me, I know. lol.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 8 years ago
Cody_Franklin
I think he said 4 million; even so, I doubt all 4 million of them want to join the military :P
Posted by untitled_entity 8 years ago
untitled_entity
I think cbass might be/ is probably incorrect about 4 billion people.....
Posted by Cody_Franklin 8 years ago
Cody_Franklin
Well, Tarzan, if you want to try to poke holes in my position, you should have debated me on this, first of all; I don't like when people try to give arguments to one side or the other.

Second of all, sexual preference doesn't change one bit one's ability with a gun; but you assume that I'm going to be arguing some paradigm like that to begin with. In fact, I don't recall having said anything like "gay people are worse shots than straight people".

My argument is going to be going in an entirely different direction than that question. Just wait and see.
Posted by untitled_entity 8 years ago
untitled_entity
thanks, Tarzan.

favorited, Cody.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 8 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
Question for CON:

Please explain to me what sexual preference has to do with how well you can pull a trigger?
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by mongeese 8 years ago
mongeese
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by MTGandP 8 years ago
MTGandP
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Agnostic 8 years ago
Agnostic
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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 
Vote Placed by Youngblood 8 years ago
Youngblood
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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 
Vote Placed by tribefan011 8 years ago
tribefan011
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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 
Vote Placed by KeithKroeger91 8 years ago
KeithKroeger91
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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 RoyLatham 8 years ago
RoyLatham
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Cody_Franklin 8 years ago
Cody_Franklin
cbass28Cody_FranklinTied
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