CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Yes it is and Obama and Hillary even made the statement it is. Barack Obama: 'marriage is between a man and a woman'
Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential candidate, has spelled out his views on gay marriage on the eve of the election. The White House front-runner(2008) said in an interview with MTV he did not support same-sex weddings and believed "marriage is between a man and a woman".
When Clinton was a senator(2004) ‘I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman.” The talk continued:
“...the fundamental bedrock principle that [marriage] exists between a man and a woman, going back into the midst of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.”
A decade prior, she stood by her husband as he signed the Defense of Marriage Act, a piece of legislation that codified gay America’s second-class status. So it’s fair to say that Hillary Clinton has had a longstanding opposition to gay marriage.
Hypocrisy is owned by the Progressive Left in America !
Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential candidate, has spelled out his views on gay marriage on the eve of the election. The White House front-runner(2008) said in an interview with MTV he did not support same-sex weddings and believed "marriage is between a man and a woman".
When Clinton was a senator(2004) ‘I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman.” The talk continued:
“...the fundamental bedrock principle that [marriage] exists between a man and a woman, going back into the midst of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.”
A decade prior, she stood by her husband as he signed the Defense of Marriage Act, a piece of legislation that codified gay America’s second-class status. So it’s fair to say that Hillary Clinton has had a longstanding opposition to gay marriage.
Come on you didn't like Obama SouthPark that i can't see as being truthful on your part. Was a nice try on your part though
When have I ever said I like Obama. You on the other hand have said that you like Obama. You are a self admitted progressive, too. If I disagree with you it is because you are a progressive and I am not.
Your love affair with the Progressives is always duly noted hell you live in Moonbeam Land and if you were so opposed to Progressives you would not reside in that State. There are van lines that move people from that state aren't there ?
. I vote in favor of it, and for the last time, I do not believe that homosexuality is a choice. Sexuality is not a choice, but actions are. You choose to have sex or to abstain, to marry or to abstain. That is all. Rant over.
Strange logic there chat bot. Progressives (whatever the fuck that means) shouldnt be compelled for government to become involved in marriage because there are 2 genders? Error 302. Shut down.
You just said that homosexuality is not a choice. So explain bisexuals. Do they choose who they want to marry? Do they flip flop back and forth?
If a person is born a certian way, which way was a bisexual born?
We all make choices to who we sleep with. There are men happily married to women who at the same time cheat with other men.
There are literally thousnds of weird sexual orientations in the world and guess what? They are a choice just like every other fetish people engge in.
No one forces anyone to live a homosexual life or a heterosexual life. It is a choice. It matters not your feelings. You can choose to act on your feelings or not.
Bisexual is when someone is attracted to both the same and the opposite gender. Also not a choice.
No one forces anyone to live a homosexual life or a heterosexual life. It is a choice. It matters not your feelings. You can choose to act on your feelings or not.
Right. You can spend decades lying to yourself and suppressing your feelings - feeling inferior to everyone around you and having a partner that you, ultimately, don't find sexually attractive. OR you can just relax and be who you are.
I said there were men with wonderful marriages and families with women, who would say they are also attracted to other men.
They chose the normal life of a family with a wife over their other attraction to men.
Yes. It would certainly be to their disadvantage to persue a relationship with men if they are also attracted to women. I dont see your point.
Like I said, there are thousnads of sexual fetishes and feelings, but that does not mean it is who they are. We all choose what feelings we act upon.
Can you really imagine never having a relationship with a woman? How painful would that be for you? This is what you are suggesting homosexuals should do.
Yes I deny this. Maybe you don't look at life and see the lifestyles of the majortiy of Homosexuals.
They seldom stay committed to the same partner for life. Most of the relationships lacked the one important thing needed..... commitment to the same person for life.
There is a reason why their committments most times do not last. The connection between two people of the same sex is not normal and therefore lacks the longevity and committment to one another.
My own personal opinion is that they are always searching for that perfect relationship to make them feel good about themselves, and it seldom is found.
There is a normal connection between a man and woman. We both possess differences that help make for a good connection and a good fit to one another.
Most men have personaities that would have a hard time melding with other men. We have personailty traits far different from women. The differences and roles between the two sexes make for a better fit when living together.
Why do you think the percentages of Aids was spread so much more by the gay community? It was because of their lifestlyes and lack of monogamous committed relatonships with the same person.
In the early stages of Aids, the Gay swapping parties, and promiscuous lifestyles were a huge reason for the initial spread of Aids before they started fearing the disease and started practicing safer sex.
Most Gay people will deny what I am saying. They will say heterosexual relationships also fail, and that there are life long committed Gay relationships.
Yes, heterosexual relationships also fail but no where near the percentages of Gays. I'm sure there are some lifelong Gay relationships. I'm speaking to the majority that are not.
Yes, heterosexual relationships also fail but no where near the percentages of Gays. I'm sure there are some lifelong Gay relationships. I'm speaking to the majority that are not.
You are right that gay relationships break up more frequently but that heterosexual relationships fail "nowhere near" as often is incorrect. For more info:
If one had a choice between heterosexual and gay relationships then heterosexual is more likely to succeed. This is not the choice though is it. A gay man is not sexually attracted to a woman. The thought of having sex with a woman is disgusting - he cannot love her. He could force himself to have sex with her but both he and, sadly, possibility the woman, would know that he is disgusted by it. How is this person going to have a happy life?
Okay well I am talking about those that are ONLY attracted to the same sex and repulsed by the idea of sex with the opposite gender. That is what I understand by "homosexual". I don't think I have ever met a gay man that doesn't find having sex with women disgusting to be honest. I am not sure who youve been talking to. They sound like bisexuals to me.
So you are saying that when pedophiles say they are born with an attraction for children, that they have no choice and will never be able to be happily married to adults?
So if they have no choice, we are suppose to swallow the LGBT dogma concerning homosexuality, and believe that pedophile attractions are just one more normal natural sexual orientation, even though they can not act on their attractions?
This doesn't even make sense. I think we were all born with an attraction for children, because we were children. When I was in kindergarten I remember having crushes on a couple of the girls in my class, and that attraction for girls continued through high school. You can't even be a pedophile until you're an adult.
I guess you are truly confused to the point I was making.
I'M TALKING ABOUT ADULT PEDOPHILES WHO HAVE ATTRACTIONS TO CHILDREN. SOME PEDOPHILES SAY THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY!
SHOULD WE USE THE SAME LOGIC LGBT GROUPS USE AND SAY THAT PEDOPHILE ATTRACTIONS ARE NOT A CHOICE(as long as they do not act on their feelings)? That would be saying that a pedophile could never have good relationships with adults because they are spposedly born with attractions for children.
Are you getting it now? You can't use the argument that Gays are born Gay and therefore have no choice in who they are, but then deny what Pedophiles say about being born that way and having no choice to who they are.
How can we say that Homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation, but Pedophilia is not.
Forget about the fact that Pedophiles can not act on their attractions because it's against the law. We are talking about all these different orientations and whether we should be lifting them up to society and our children, as a natural thing.
In my opinion, we should treat every person with respect and dignity, but we should not be trying to tell our children that all these unnatural sexual orientations are normal. This opens the door to the slippery slope of political correctness as we are seeing being pushed by the Democrat Party and their LGBT base.
You can't use the argument that Gays are born Gay and therefore have no choice in who they are, but then deny what Pedophiles say about being born that way and having no choice to who they are.
Actually I can and have already explained why.
How can we say that Homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation, but Pedophilia is not.
Pedophilia is not a sexual orientation, natural or otherwise. Sexual orientation is the term used to explain which sex you are attracted to (or orient yourself with), pedophilia has nothing to do with that, but rather what age you're attracted to.
but we should not be trying to tell our children that all these unnatural sexual orientations are normal.
You have yet to demonstrate that homosexuality is not normal. We have seen homosexual tendencies in many other animals, so how do you define normal? (And your answer cannot be based on what your religious fairy tale says; you need actual evidence).
Spew the lies of animal homosexual tendencies. I have refuted this deceptive hogwash many times.
A dog will hump your leg, or anything that moves. THAT DOES NOT MAKE HIM GAY!
Dolphins will at times fool around with other male dolphins, and they always go back to females. They are not Gay!
Geese always pair up, and once in awhile they will pair up with another male goose. THEY NEVER HAS SEX. There might have been a lack of female geese to pair up with at the time, WHO KNOWS! That does not make them Gay.
I ust told you that animals such as dogs will hump anything that moves when they re aroused. It means nothing when animals have sex with the same sex. They are NOT HOMOSEXUAL!
Maybe you missed it. Gays don't like being called bisexual because they say they don't go back and forth.
I'm not sure why the debate often turns this way. A black widow murders her used up partner, so then rabid violent feminism must be perfectly normal right?
If there was an animal whose natural preference was gay all year but during a particular mating week, that would not tell us anything about proper human behavior.
In all of nature, consider how unnatural it is to write. The point is that an argument about human behavior should not turn on the behavior of non-humans, regardless of your position.
You have giving me nothing but some animals who would have sex with anything that moves when aroused. It goes against everything Gays have told us about themselves.
Gays are not bisexual they say(even though many are), and here you are giving us animals that would have sex with either female or male.
For decades Gays have been telling us all how they are NOT bisexual and that they only have attractions for other men. They get very angry if anyone suggests they also have attractions to the opposite sex.
Now people like you want us to believe that animals are Gay when they OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT! Animals have sex with the opposite sex!
If you are going to compare what you call Gay animals to Gay people then you MUST use the same criteria for both.
I am sampling asking what evidence you would need to see to be convinced that homosexuality exists in nature. Are you saying that all the evidence you've seen only suggests that bisexuality exists in nature, meaning that bisexuality is natural and homosexuality is not?
Your whole premise is falling apart because it is government that is dictating to the people about whom should be married when it is none of the government's business. Being from Spain as you claim you are you know nothing about why government got involved in marriage which only shows how truly ignorant you are about something you know nothing about !
Right. The government has a law that says marriage can only be between man and woman. When two men apply, the government denies it. The government should back off.
Why shouldn't they? The constitution separates religion and the state, not marriage and the state.
Marriage has nothing to do with religion. Religion didn't create marriage. Marriage was created by the government, so why shouldn't they be allowed to say who gets married?
One of the government's priorities is equality for all citizens. Disallowing certain citizens from being married is restricting equality, plain and simple. It's a breach of human rights.
Yes. And marriage is between a child and a man according to Islam, of which liberals consider normal apparently, seeing they refuse to say anything bad about the cult of special needs.
What if the mother was raped? What if there is a medical reason? What if the mother lives in extreme poverty? What if the baby daddy is abusive to the mother? What if the pregnancy puts the mother at risk of a crime?
WHAT IF THAT UNBORN BABY GREW UP AND FOUND A CURE FOR CANCER?
It's truly sickening how your compassion only lies with the mother's inconvienence. You have lost all common sense compassion for our most innocent babies. WAKE UP!
I wouldn't generally care about disputing your posts from 3 days ago (and you wouldn't be able to counter me either way)... I wouldn't here also, but...
I wouldn't generally care about disputing your posts from 3 days ago (and you wouldn't be able to counter me either way)... I wouldn't here also, but...
You aren't better than OJ Simpson? You aren't better than a terrorist? You aren't better than Hitler? Does your position really go with the idea that sin is bad?
You have a crush on me, admit it. ......................................................................................................................
Let's take a look at what the Bible says about marriage.
•One man and one or more women who were sold to the highest bidder (Exodus 21:7-11)
•One man and the virgins he decides to keep as spoils of war (Numbers 31:17-18)
•One man and the hot woman whose family and friends he recently slaughtered (Deut 21:10-14)
•One man and one or more women whom he raped (Deut. 22:28–29)
•One man and many women and concubines (Gideon had at least 1 concubine, Nahor: 1, Jacob: 1, Eliphaz: 1, Caleb: 2, Manassah: 1, Saul: 1, David: at least 10, Rehoboam: 60, Solomon: 300, Belshazzar: more than 1)
•One man and the woman his deceased brother was married to (Gen. 38:8–10). If he won't get his brother's wife pregnant he is to be put to death.
Before anyone cries, "but that's the Old Testament!" watch this
BTW, I'm still waiting for answers to these questions. The verse we are discussing in that debate is also relevant to this debate.
In addition to those questions, I would like to know why you believe the Bible is God's word?
I mean, who cares? It isn't part of the real Bible.
Funnily enough, I haven't ever seen any of the fanatics claiming such things to ever be in a position to do so. None of the big Christian denominations exclude the Old Testament from their Bible. And I only care about what the more influential zombie leaders do, at best.
Wow what type of wedding do you think it was was it a Mormon type of very low key wedding or was it this big spectacle catholic like wedding. Although I guess the reception must have sucked and poor Adam never had a best man to toast him.
So you're just going to dismiss everything I said with a catch phrase?
You said you believe marriage is between a man and a woman because that's what the Bible says. So do you think that marriage is all of the things I listed, since they are also what the Bible says?
"•One man and the virgins he decides to keep as spoils of war" How do we know this man chose women virgins as spoils of war?? Unless, we are saying men can't be virgins? Care to explain??
I'm pretty sure you're just trolling and/or joking, but I'll play along.
"So they made war against Midian, just as the Lord had commanded Moses, and they killed every male."
"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves.
It's also worth nothing that the Hebrew word that was translated into "the girls" literally means female children. So gods followers would go on massive killing sprees, then kidnap and rape the young girls.
So you've tortured the concepts and words of the Bible by parroting an atheist apologetics site(of which takes 10 minutes to dismantle). Quote mines are easy to debate against. Nevertheless, you've quote mined from the old covenant of the Jews and completely ignored the new covenant of Christ.
So now quote for us Deuteronomy 22:25 and Deuteronomy 22:26. We wouldn't want you to quote the party line and leave out the context of what is actually being discussed now would we? Of course not, so give us the quotes.
And besides, I see zero down side to any two consenting adults loving each other.
And since I see references to religion in the other posts let me add:
1) In a society with freedom of religion no single religion gets to dictate their beliefs to everyone else for their compliance.
2) And every religion's texts are rife with influence from the cultures they arose in, meaning they're based on Bronze age belief systems. Just because the person allegedly writing on behalf of God had beliefs against homosexuality or gay marriage doesn't mean that God does as well. Indeed God made all those people too.
So tell us how the children of gay parents turn out and tell us about the mass influx of claims from gays about being messed up mentally from being molested as a child. Looks like it's destructive based on their own testimonies. Milo Yianoupolis' testimony is a perfect example. He's a gay man who admits it is a mental disorder triggered from messed up situations in their youth.
Some women like men some women like women.. Some men like women some men like men. I have no idea why this is such a difficult concept to grasp, how does it hurt anybody if someone decides to love whoever they love? It hurts nobody if a women decides she wants to marry another women, it is not killing anybody if a man decides to marry a man. Now get over yourselves and mind your own business, as long as nobody is trying to like force you into same sex marriage you're fine. You'll live, thank you and have a nice day.
Who says the deity "created homosexuals"? Did the deity create alcoholics, or did humans choose to be alcoholics by their own free will? If someone humps the couch, is that their mother's fault or was the booze kicking in?
