using the SCOTUS logic, a marriage with multiple people should be allowed everywhere
Debate Rounds (3)
they say gays should be allowed to marry, cause others are allowed to marry. equal protection and liberty clause of the constitution. if we allow that, why shoujldn't it be allowed for a marriage with multiple people?
after all, humans according to their body types are polygamous, with a bend towards limited partners, granted. this would be the most natural state of marriage, even moreso between on woman and one man, and obviusly more natural than gays.
I am a gay man. Being that it as it may, the whole "GRAINS" of marriage is" NOT" a man and woman who love each other very much
to live together and make a baby. If your a Christian extremist you may argue to differ, however its quite comical because I'm
guessing you had no idea. Actually same sex couples have already been "Married" and living with each other for years in secrecy. Just now they can get it on paper. The LGBT has been fighting for this for years, facing DEATH, IMPRISONMENT,DISCRIMINATION,ABANDONMENT even SUICIDE. And yet people still can't let them do what they want.
Let me tell you friend at the end of the day there going to live there lives weather you except it or not. As for the multiple partners you just out counted your self "humans according to their body types are polygamous, with a bend towards limited partners, granted." According to there body types so how could this be natural for everyone? Unless your of a different countries religion preferably third-world-ish or poverty stricken. To me and many others that seems of a way of whoring around for lack of a better word. And that my friend I think is worse then LGBT marriage
a gay man is withholding rights to others, who'da thunk it?
But Multiple partners would just seem...not as official to me. Marriage, also called matrimony or wedlock, is a socially or ritually recognized union or legal contract between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws. It just doesn't seem hmmm let me think (Because seems you get offended easily) ...fair to everyone in the marriage.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Rayze 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: Both Pro and con lack a cohesive argument with con opting to use his/her personal experience and opinion, while pro relies solely on his/her opinion. Despite the lack of outside sources to back up their assertions, con did have more spelling and grammar errors in comparison to pro, so con will be awarded the spelling and grammar point. conduct is tied as both debaters let their conduct slip during the debate. convincing arguments are also tied as both failed to argue their points effectively opting to use pathos while ignoring ethos and logos. sources is also tied as they both lacked sources to back up their claims.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.