The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Gay marriage

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
NDECD1441 has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/2/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 634 times Debate No: 102863
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Gay marriage is a really big topic nowadays. I want to see the advantages of it and I will present the cons. First found is acceptance, second round are arguments and the third and fourth round will be rebuttals. Good luck.


I accept this debate.
Debate Round No. 1


(Side note: My points are actually rebuttals in advance so if you say anything that goes against my points I will have already destroyed them.)

My point is based on rights. So despite what most people supporting gay marriage say, the point of a gay person having rights isn't as good as it seems. The fact that gays are already considered an insult to their religion and even their existence cannot be denied as the majority has already demonstrated that by refusing to associate or mix with anyone connected to the gay including the gay himself. If the government gives them more rights the majority will take this as an attack to their religion and they will do the natural thing. Retaliate. There will be more attacks on the streets and the gays will be shamed for a really long time. Maybe forever. The only reason why gays haven't been wiped out from thee face of the earth (that was a joke for the record) is that they have been living in hiding and security and no one has any idea whether they are gay or not. However, marriage is public. The moment you hear that a guy married another guy, bam. He gets attacked. Soon gays will be too scared and once again will go into hiding and the right to marry will soon be useless. You don't need to be a fortune teller to figure out this will happen. So in conclusion, a right requires a platform and this right doesn't have one. Just to clairify my stance, I am not saying I am against gays, I am saying THIS right will do more harm than good to them.


So let me get this straight...

Gay marriage is a bad idea because other people will attack them? Somehow giving in to the bigots makes this situation better? In the 1950's, interracial marriage was illegal. My fiance is not white, while I am. We do face some situations living in the South that are scary because we're a mixed race couple.

Does that mean we shouldn't get married?

No. It doesn't.

The only way to normalize is to normalize. That means equal rights. Marriage. Having a family. The whole nine yards. I'm a Christian myself, and I fight tooth and nail for LGBT equality in my communities. If people took your approach in the 50's when normalizing mixed race relations, my fiance and I would still be living in the darkness. In time, resistance to this will fade. For now, it's hard. But sometimes fighting for the good is.

Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by John_C_1812 2 years ago
The issue"s connected to gay marriage.
First and foremost it the plagiarism of Marriage.
It is a term of belief that is leading a witness into a sexual expectation or conduct with the use of an official document. A witness cannot be expected to verify a sexual act only the general description of the participants. In clear, easily understood, unique way. The issue is that a word such as Binivir established two men could have always entered into a binding agreement without plagiary of an ongoing likelihood.
The term marriage is a likelihood and the term Binivir can gives new title to an impartial contract, making it all age appropriate when sexual preference is alienated, the word describes only two men in an impartial fashion, as title marriage can appear to do between a woman and a man, OnusMulier can express the same likelihood between only two women in the same way.
The creation of complex and hard to understand crime do not make constitutional separations decimation when the crimes of fraud are not easily exposed.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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