The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

Gay Marriage?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/8/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,766 times Debate No: 56243
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




Thank you in advance to whoever accepts this debate.

Same-sex couples should be allowed to publicly celebrate their commitment in the same way as heterosexual couples. The Human Rights Campaign Foundation states that many same-sex couples "want the right to legally marry and honor their relationship in the greatest way our society has to offer..."

Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. Many benefits are only available to married couples, such as hospital visitation during an illness, taxation and inheritance rights, access to family health coverage, and protection in the event of the relationship ending. An Oct. 2, 2009 analysis by the New York Times estimates that a same-sex couple denied marriage benefits will incur an additional $41,196 to $467,562 in expenses over their lifetime compared to a married heterosexual couple.

The concept of "traditional marriage" being defined as one man and one woman is historically inaccurate. Given the prevalence of modern and ancient examples of family arrangements based on polygamy, communal child-rearing, the use of concubines and mistresses and the commonality of prostitution, heterosexual monogamy can be considered "unnatural" in evolutionary terms.

Marriage is redefined as society's attitudes evolve, and the majority of Americans now support gay marriage. Interracial marriage was illegal in many US states until a 1967 Supreme Court decision. Coverture, where a woman's legal rights and economic identity were subsumed by her husband upon marriage, was commonplace in 19th century America. No-fault divorce has changed the institution of marriage since its introduction in California on Jan. 1, 1970. With a May 2013 Gallup poll showing 53% of Americans supporting gay marriage, it is time for the definition of marriage to evolve once again.



Judges: The instigator of the debate did not state the rules; therefore I will take the freedom to do so, if acceptable by Pro.

Gay is a term for homosexual men, and lesbian for homosexual women, for that reason the resolution should have been LGBT Marriage, rather than gay marriage.

Round 1 Opening Arguments

Round 2 Arguments + Rebuttal

Round 3 Rebuttal + Closing statements

ALSO NOTE: And if I may say so, having debated the topic very many times, and having scrutinized my opponents’ argument I believe he has not cited his sources properly, he has just named the site where he got his information from i.e., however the site too has compiled the information from many sources and I will come to the point, when we do citation after using someone’s work we cite from the exact source.

I have provided my opponent’s sources in the paragraph below.


[1] "Answers to Questions About Marriage Equality" (357 KB) ,,

[2] Freedom to Marry, "Marriage 101,"

[3] Tara Siegel Bernard and Ron Lieber, "The High Price of Being a Gay Couple

[4] Ross Douthat, "The Marriage Ideal,"

[5] Jeffrey M. Jones, "Same-Sex Marriage Support Solidifies Above 50% in U.S.,",

With this I shall begin, I would keep my opening arguments brief as there are two more round to further extend them.

It Is Not Marriage

Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.

The promoters of same-sex “marriage” propose something entirely different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.

Two entirely different things cannot be considered the same thing.

1. Children hunger for their biological parents.

Homosexual couples using in vitro fertilization (IVF) or surrogate mothers deliberately create a class of children who will live apart from their mother or father. Yale Child Study Center psychiatrist Kyle Pruett reports that children of IVF often ask their single or lesbian mothers about their fathers, asking their mothers questions like the following:"Mommy, what did you do with my daddy?" "Can I write him a letter?" "Has he ever seen me?" "Didn't you like him? Didn't he like me?" Elizabeth Marquardt reports that children of divorce often report similar feelings about their non-custodial parent, usually the father.

SOURCE: Kyle Pruett, Fatherneed (Broadway Books, 2001) 204.

SOURCE: Elizabeth Marquardt, The Moral and Spiritual Lives of Children of Divorce.

2. Children need fathers.

If same-sex civil marriage becomes common, most same-sex couples with children would be lesbian couples. This would mean that we would have yet more children being raised apart from fathers. Among other things, we know that fathers excel in reducing antisocial behavior and delinquency in boys and sexual activity in girls.

What is fascinating is that fathers exercise a unique social and biological influence on their children. For instance, a recent study of father absence on girls found that girls who grew up apart from their biological father were much more likely to experience early puberty and a teen pregnancy than girls who spent their entire childhood in an intact family. This study, along with David Popenoe's work, suggests that a father's pheromones influence the biological development of his daughter, that a strong marriage provides a model for girls of what to look for in a man, and gives them the confidence to resist the sexual entreaties of their boyfriends.

SOURCE: Ellis, Bruce J., et al., "Does Father Absence Place Daughters at Special Risk for Early Sexual Activity and Teenage Pregnancy?" Child Development, 74:801-821.

SOURCE: David Popenoe, Life Without Father (Boston: Harvard University Press, 1999).

3. Children need mothers.

Although homosexual men are less likely to have children than lesbians, homosexual men are and will be raising children. There will be even more if homosexual civil marriage is legalized. These households deny children a mother. Among other things, mothers excel in providing children with emotional security and in reading the physical and emotional cues of infants. Obviously, they also give their daughters unique counsel as they confront the physical, emotional, and social challenges associated with puberty and adolescence. Stanford psychologist Eleanor MacCoby summarizes much of this literature in her book, The Two Sexes. See also Steven Rhoads' book,Taking Sex Differences Seriously.

SOURCE: Eleanor MacCoby, The Two Sexes: Growing Up Apart, Coming Together (Boston: Harvard, 1998).

SOURCE: Steven Rhoads, Taking Sex Differences Seriously (Encounter Books, 2004).

The conclusion is it always denies a child either a father or a mother. Look at the difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.

4. It Offends God

This is the most important reason. Whenever one violates the natural moral order established by God, one sins and offends God. Same-sex “marriage” does just this. Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it.

Marriage is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established by God in Paradise for our first parents, Adam and Eve. As we read in the Book of Genesis: “God created man in His image; in the Divine image he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them, saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.’” (Gen. 1:28-29)

The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: “From the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife.” (Mark 10:6-7).

Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin of homosexuality: “The Lord rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah. He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil.” (Gen. 19:24-25)

Well, to end my argument I would say, there is a reason why god created Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve.

I thank pro for instigating the debate on the said resolution and look forward to his argument.

Debate Round No. 1


"It is not Marriage": Well in my opinion (and in many other people's opinions) marriage is not just between man and woman, but actually a bonding of two people that love each other enough to live with each other, etc.

"Children Need Fathers": I currently have a friend who has two mothers and no fathers. He is very intellctual and social. He is also not a delinquent in any way, shape, or form.

"It Offends God": "My brothers and sisters, you are believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ. So treat everyone the same." -James II. Everyone (even gays) deserve to be treated with respect and equality. Also, the current pope, Pope Francis, supports gay marriage.

And then there"s the whole issue of the children. Some argue that children are better off raised in a male-female headed household. Many couples will marry and not have children: gay and straight. Gay and lesbian couples are having children already without the benefit of marriage. So are single moms, teenagers and drug addicts. Preventing a loving same sex couple from making a legal commitment to each other can only hurt their children. It can send a message, like it did in the case of one Massachusetts couple, that mommy and mommy don"t really love each other, because if they did, they would get married. How do you explain the legal system to a five year old? Children do well in homes where they are nutured and loved, regardless of the parents' genders. Many heterosexual couples choose not to or are unable to have children. Yet, their marriages are considered valid.
Marriage provides a legal safety net protecting couples emotional bonds and economic security.

Sources: Bible


The institution of marriage has traditionally been defined as between a man and a woman. In the Oct. 15, 1971 decision Baker v. Nelson, the Supreme Court of Minnesota found that "The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.
Bruce Peterson, JD, Majority Opinion, Baker v. Nelson (186 KB) ,, Oct. 15, 1971

Gay marriage could potentially lead down a "slippery slope" giving people in polygamous, incestuous, bestial, and other nontraditional relationships the right to marry. [10] Glen Lavy, JD, senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, argued in a May 21, 2008 Los Angeles Times Op-Ed, "The movement for polygamy and polyamory is poised to use the successes of same-sex couples as a springboard for further de-institutionalizing marriage."
"Do We Really Want to Redefine Marriage,", Aug. 11, 2010

In April 2013, Slate published a plea for legal polygamy by writer Jillian Keenan: "Just like heterosexual marriage is no better or worse than homosexual marriage, marriage between two consenting adults is not inherently more or less 'correct' than marriage among three (or four, or six) consenting adults."
Jillian Keenan, "Legalize Polygamy!,", Apr. 15, 2013

Marriage should not be extended to same-sex couples because they cannot produce children together. Allowing gay marriage would only further shift the purpose of marriage from producing and raising children to adult gratification.
Dana Mack, "Now What for Marriage?,", Aug. 6, 2010

And it's not just USA, we are looking at a global purview, in Islam homosexuality is punishable by death and in India section 377 is applicable which states a life term for gay sex. These are just two examples. We need to explore more options as to how we should deal with the topic of gay marriage, legalization haste will do more harm than good.
Debate Round No. 2


MattAllen forfeited this round.


That would be all then, I thank my opponent for posting his argument and instigating the debate. I believe I have successfully defended the resolution that Gay Marriage should be legal and acceptable. Vote for con, cheers!
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Sashil 7 years ago
I think this is an easy CON win...PRO's arguments were largely from his own opinion and he fails to back it up properly.And I don't think the Bible applies as a reliable source.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wolf24 7 years ago
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:16 
Reasons for voting decision: I definitely disagree with Gay Marriage. After the debate I still and will always disagree with Gay Marriage.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.