The Instigator
lasota
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Grape
Con (against)
Winning
50 Points

you cannot ban gay marriage without...

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 8 votes the winner is...
Grape
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/27/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,594 times Debate No: 10990
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (7)
Votes (8)

 

lasota

Pro

You cannot ban gay marriage without violating vertain rights of a citizen of america. One of these rights would be the right to practice ones own religion. The other one is the pursuit of happiness. By banning gay mrriage you violate both of these. In order for my opponent to win or she must refute both of these as well as any other rights i may bring up.
Grape

Con

I would like to start of this argument by saying that as a matter of personal belief I fully support the rights of homosexuals to be married. However, the arguments my opponent offers are so weak that they mar this cause. Specifically, the contentions are that it violates the rights of freedom of religion and the pursuit of happiness hold no water.

C1: The right to the pursuit of happiness is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence (1), which is not an official government document and does not affect the rights of US citizens. Furthermore, not allowing homosexuals to marry one does not completely prevent them from pursuing happiness just because this is one thing that causes happiness. I may become happy by injecting large amounts of heroin into my bloodstream, but that does not mean the government is not allowed to ban this.

C2: I fail to see how freedom of religion has anything to do with this. This is no officially recognized religion I can think of that encourages its followers to marry people of the same sex. There have been major religions in history that encouraged their followers to cut out the hearts if innocent victims to keep the sun from burning out. The government would still be allowed to prevent this despite there being freedom of religion.

C3: The resolution explicitly states that, "You cannot ban gay marriage with violating [c]ertain rights of a citizen of [A]merica." The two rights listed are the pursuit of happiness and freedom of religion. Though my opponent claims that I must refute any rights she may later bring up, her resolution specifically refers only to 'certain' rights which are listed in her opening argument. Bringing up additional rights in following rounds would not support the resolution.

Conclusion: My opponent claims that banning gay marriage would result in the violation of 'certain' rights and lists these rights as being the pursuit of happiness and freedom of religion. I have demonstrated that these two rights do not very well support gay marriage. Thus her resolution that these certain rights would be violated is false.
Debate Round No. 1
lasota

Pro

Ok, it is as simple as this. The declaration and constitution are official documents. In terms of he pursuit of happiness everyone is entitled to do so that is why guys can play video games for fun.

In terms of freedom of religion. Marriage started off religiously. By denying someone the right to marry you are denying them freedom of religion.
Grape

Con

Thanks to my opponent for a my opponent for a good debate. However it is really not all that simple.

1. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are on drastically different levels in US law. Namely, the Declaration of Independence is not part of the law at all and the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. (1) The pursuit of happiness, as I already said, therefore does not matter all all. My opponent did not dispute the point that this is no different then saying the government should not be allowed to ban anything that makes people happy. Therefore that point has been conceded.

2. My opponent has offered no evidence that marriage originated in religion. I would argue that it did not. Many animals mate for life and they obviously have no knowledge of religion. (2) Denying someone the right to marry does not interfere with their religious practices. Also, polygamous sects are forbidden to taken multiple spouses so this does not apply. Also, none of the points I made about this issue have been disputed, so therefore they have been conceded.

Conclusion:

Though I feel banning gay marriage is wrong, banning it does not violate either of the two rights my opponent offered. The pursuit of happiness is not part of the law and even if it were, that interpretation would not make any sense. It also clearly does not violate freedom on religion. Thus the resolution that it violates these certain rights has been negated.

Sources:

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org...

An astute reader will notice that I stupidly neglected to actually cite the Declaration of Independence in round one. However, I think we can all agree that the pursuit of happiness is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence without that being cited.
Debate Round No. 2
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Luistpuig 7 years ago
Luistpuig
Homosexuality is just one of the many dysfunctions humans can have, but still not "ok."

It is not genetic as proven by the large "Twin" studies in Sweden and Finland which show that Homosexuality is not due to genetics, since in the cases where one twin is gay only about 10% of the time the other twin is gay too, which shows it NOT genetic since twins SHARE 100% of the genes, and therefore they BOTH would have to be gay 100% of the time, but that is not the case!

Also, another wrong theory is that homosexuality is the result of something that happens in the womb, a chemical incident that perhaps happens in the womb, but if that is the case then what is the explination in the twins cases, as explained before where one is gay and the other one is not?

Mistreatments were done along the way during upbringing to homosexuals by their caretakers, something (various kinds of mistreatment) from about less than a year old to up to early childhood that their mind have chosen to forget and/or bury deep inside of them. And since the abuse is done so early in their lives most do not remember being anything else, hence the homosexuals always saying that they have being homosexuals "as long as I can remember…"

Simple facts, how many people remember in detail what a typical day was for them at one and a half year old, or what life was like for them for example at two or three years old? Not most people! Memories are retained, especially early childhood memories, depending on how a child is being treated. The studies found that children with good upbringing are more likely to have more memories of their childhood than children that were mistreated and/or abused. But overall, most people do not remember early childhood well, a critical time in their lives when the foundations of who they will be as adults are being laid.

Complete analysis can be found in my book "What Nature Intended, Six Factors Demonstrating Homosexuality to be a Dysfunction" Whatnatureintended.com
Posted by drkcloud123 7 years ago
drkcloud123
lasota you had suuuuch a good side of the arguement, if only you threw the first amendment and the fourteenth amendment
Posted by lasota 7 years ago
lasota
I AM A FEMALE!! people need to stop using he!
Posted by SexyLatina 7 years ago
SexyLatina
lasota deserves his perfect losing record on this debate website.
Posted by Grape 7 years ago
Grape
I also agree with Pro but not for the reasons stated in the debate.
Posted by Illumination 7 years ago
Illumination
I agree with pro. It is our right as a citizen of the United States to choose who we marry, whether it be of the same or opposite sex.
Pro ftw.
Posted by Ore_Ele 7 years ago
Ore_Ele
Pro and Con, I wish you both the best of luck.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Cloudburst2000 7 years ago
Cloudburst2000
lasotaGrapeTied
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 vthokie 7 years ago
vthokie
lasotaGrapeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
lasotaGrapeTied
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 tochter_aus_elysium 7 years ago
tochter_aus_elysium
lasotaGrapeTied
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 SexyLatina 7 years ago
SexyLatina
lasotaGrapeTied
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 
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 7 years ago
Ore_Ele
lasotaGrapeTied
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 
Vote Placed by belle 7 years ago
belle
lasotaGrapeTied
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 Grape 7 years ago
Grape
lasotaGrapeTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05