The Instigator
nerosmoke
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JacobG
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

why do gay want christan marrige

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
JacobG
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/10/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 749 times Debate No: 52153
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

nerosmoke

Con

why are thay not happy just being gay why do thay what christan mariage i cant spell i mean i could but i am not
JacobG

Pro

I accept this challenge.
Gay: merry: full of light-heartedness and merriment

C-A 1:"why are they not happy just being gay "

They are in fact happy being gay because the definition of gay is to be cheerful

C-A 2: "why do they want Christian marriage"

Every couple has different reasons to get married that apply to their unique relationship, and many couples share similar reasons for planning the long walk down the aisle. Whether a couple's reasons are purely emotional, legal, financial, or some combination of these or other reasons, recognizing why marriage is important can help them understand the commitment they have to their long term relationship.

http://www.merriam-webster.com...
http://weddings.lovetoknow.com...
Debate Round No. 1
nerosmoke

Con

i mean the word marrage in the issue could the the us there are alot of christans and i think alot less would have issues if thay had a differnt meaning the leagal would thay get the same from a partenship or some other word for it? and less poeple would be upset over the news like i am not gay and i like lesibans alot but it seems like the christan mariage is a religice thing am thats why people are upset i mean if it was hindu marrage vivaah than hindo people would get up set marrage is based of old religice meanings could thay have a differnt word? that could be leagle and would that solve issues people agian sorry for am-typeing-
JacobG

Pro

I believe con is confused as to what the resolution of this debate is.
"why are they not happy just being gay why do they want Christian marriage"
and the definition of gay is as stated earlier to be cheerful/happy. I feel con is very confused and I would like to remind him of the fact that I proved that they are in fact happy being gay considering to be gay is to be happy and has yet to provide a valid counter-argument.
Debate Round No. 2
nerosmoke

Con

i never said thay wer un happy more like with each outher why would thay need marrage and like why do people get up set my bad i am goan stop this ok like why would thay need it me bad
JacobG

Pro

I would like to remind con that in fact did state they were happy. I would also like to remind con that he can not stop the current debate until said debate is finished and I still await a proper counter-argument.
Debate Round No. 3
nerosmoke

Con

nerosmoke forfeited this round.
JacobG

Pro

Con has obviously forfeited his turn as a way of saying "if you are going to beat me you are going to have to wait" as a child would act. con has not been able to give any sort of counter argument relevant to the resolution.
Debate Round No. 4
nerosmoke

Con

nerosmoke forfeited this round.
JacobG

Pro

Con forfeited twice and had a horrible argument along with bad grammer. Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by aburk903 3 years ago
aburk903
nerosmokeJacobGTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Pro was the only party who offered sources. Pro was the only party who logically presented a case. Pro was the only party who presented a round that contained anything resembling proper grammar.