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

Should Gay Rights be Decided on a National Level?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/2/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 694 times Debate No: 100492
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Rules of Engagement:

1. Be polite and professional. No ad hominem attacks or personal insults. Do not beat around the bush, but keep it polite.

I will be taking the stance that gay rights should not be decided on a national level.

Note; I am not against gay rights. I just do not believe it should be a federal issue.

I look forward to debating.

Edit: I did not clarify. Thank you for pointing that out. I believe Gay Rights should be a state issue.


Personally, being Catholic, I am against Gay rights. (I will completely respect everyone who is gay, but I will not honor them, if you understand what I mean.) There is actually no gay gene, so when someone it's gay, it is completely their choice. I have been brought up learning that gay is not natural and against what God has planned for those who believe. I have been told that gays are mostly only fighting for their rights because they are against the teachings of the Catholic Church, and want to break the Catholic Church. My religion means the world to me, and I really would break without it. The fact that people try to break something that could break me angers me, and I will not stand for those kind of people.
Debate Round No. 1


Ah. This will make for an interesting argument, as your response was not what I had expected. However, the question still stands.

Gay rights, while an important social issue, is just that; an issue of society. As such, the federal government has not right interfering in it, whether in favor of legalizing gay marriage or of being against it. The states should be allowed to decide for themselves what they do, and the federal government should stay out of it. The federal government's job is to work for the good of ALL Americans, not one minority or another. The federal government should not interfere one way or another with issues like this. Picking sides like that is one of the primary reasons that the nation is currently so polarized.


I know, I'm sorry, I accidentally clicked pro instead of con. Are we really on the same side? (I'm sorry, this is my first debate!)
Debate Round No. 2


It would seem we are. However, someone is on the opposite side of the debate, so I will use this opportunity to respond to nomadn, if they are listening.

Saying that someone being against gay rights is against freedom is a strenuous assumption, and one that will fall apart shortly. This same argument is used for being against abortion, and that is just not the case; those who are pro-life are arguing for the freedom of the unborn child to live, and not be murdered by those who think they know better. Victoria.Hutt specifically said she did not hate gay rights; merely, she disagreed with their concepts, and wished, like me, to make the issue a states issue, instead of a federal one. This is arguing in favor of the state's freedom to let their people decide their laws, instead of having the federal government intervene in the affairs of the state. In both cases, either side is merely arguing for a different freedom than the other.


I can completely respect their choice to be gay, but I most certainly do not agree with it. I have been brought up learning that a marriage consists of a male and a female, not two of the same genders. I think the state should definitely have a say in this case. If you choose to be gay, that is completely up to you. But do not call your relationship marriage, because ever since day one, marriage has been granted to man and woman. To be granted to the same gender simply isn't natural. From what I have been told, the choice of being gay is actually encouraged by some activity happening in the gay person's life (I'm sorry if that sounded disrespectful, I just don't know what else to call them suggestions are most certainly accepted. Thanks), that is either traumatic or upsetting, so the gay finds pleasure in interacting with someone the same gender as them self. Again, I completely respect gays, but don't exactly agree with the concept.
Debate Round No. 3


Due to a resolution of the confusion regarding this debate the debate is closed. I thank my opponent for debating.


Thank you for allowing me to debate, and I'm really glad we were able to come to the same terms. Best wishes to you.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Confucius1 3 years ago
I agree with Con.
Posted by Nomadn 3 years ago
"so when someone it's gay, it is completely their choice."

I have gay friends, I can tell you they did not choose to be gay. One of my friends, a girl, said that she simply just feels attracted to women. If I wanted to be gay, I couldn't. I can date men and even marry a man, but what matters is how I genuinely feel, and I will never actually feel attracted to a man, just as my friend will only ever be attracted to girls even if she were to date a boy. [1]


"I have been brought up learning that gay is not natural and against what God has planned for those who believe."

Why would your God create somebody for them to be genetically against them? And besides, animals in 'nature' can be gay, so yes, in fact, it is natural. [1]

" I have been told that gays are mostly only fighting for their rights because they are against the teachings of the Catholic Church, and want to break the Catholic Church."

You need to stop believing everything people tell you just because they're older than you or your parents/religious leaders. Gay people just want to be accepted as normal people you do realise, not all of them are against the church, some of them are Christian.

"The fact that people try to break something that could break me angers me"

You could also say that gay people are really angry that your medieval church is trying to control their lives.

"I am against Gay rights"

Then you're against freedom.
Posted by thebestdebate 3 years ago
So you believe this should be a state issue or even lower?
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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