CreateDebate


Debate Info

71
59
For Against
Debate Score:130
Arguments:77
Total Votes:151
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 For (59)
 
 Against (33)

Debate Creator

StephenB(6) pic



Are you for or against gay marriage?

I'd just like to know if you are for or against gay marriage?

For

Side Score: 71
VS.

Against

Side Score: 59
3 points

I actually support marriage equality. "Gay marriage" doesn't exist anymore than "straight marriage". A marriage exists because two consenting adults seek a binding commitment, that will protect their loved ones.

Side: For
2 points

I am for it. If two people want to get married, they have that right.

Side: For
Westsail(40) Disputed
1 point

When the age old definition of marriage becomes open to interpretation it no longer applies to just "two people". Where does that interpretation stop? What if four people decide to be married? What if I wish to marry my horse? If homosexuals decide to live together what's wrong with a "civil union"? I have reservations concerning a miniscule number of our population dictating a whole new concept of marriage.

Side: Against
Sitar(3682) Disputed
2 points

Marriage is about love, not gender. Consenting adults have the right to get married.

Side: For
2 points

When the age old definition of marriage becomes open to interpretation

It always has been. Marriage and it's definition has never been static.

What if four people decide to be married?

What's wrong with that?

What if I wish to marry my horse?

The typical illogical response. Horses can not consent to either a contract or to sex.

If homosexuals decide to live together what's wrong with a "civil union"? I have reservations concerning a miniscule number of our population dictating a whole new concept of marriage.

And the rest of us have issues with people like you wanting to deny them their civil and Constitutional rights by forcing them into a "separate but equal" based off of "reservations". The same "reservations" kept couples like me and my wife from being married, because of "reservations" about the races intermingling.

Side: For
2 points

What if four people decide to be married?

Well, they would all four have to consent to it, which, as we know from human psychology doesn't work due to human jealousy and a few other obstacles.

What if I wish to marry my horse?

Legally, your horse cannot give consent.

If homosexuals decide to live together what's wrong with a "civil union"?

By denying them marriage, you are denying them all the benefits of marriage. You are also telling them that they are inferior to those who can get married.

I have reservations concerning a miniscule number of our population dictating a whole new concept of marriage.

First of all, those who are not heterosexual make up more than a minuscule number of our a population. Second, the 'concept' of marriage is not changed.

Side: For
1 point

Just remove the "gender" question from the marriage license application.

No body is "checking" anyway.

Side: For
1 point

Why should straight people have to be the only ones following an archaic practice. Let the gay people be as miserable as most of us have been at one time or another.

Actually, I don't think anyone should have to get married to be together. Maybe a renewable 10 or 20 year contract that is hard to get out of would be best. Married people shouldn't get special privileges or tax breaks.

I heard once a long time ago, when divorce was becoming fashionable that if it was harder to get married and easier to divorce, than maybe people would choose more wisely.

Side: For
1 point

I see no reason to forces churches to perform gay marriages as most governments let religions practice all sorts of discriminatory rituals.

I see no reason for secular governments to deny marriage licenses to gay couples, since a marriage license is a secular bureaucratic tool. For religious governments, that depends entirely on the religion.

Side: For
1 point

I'm for gay marriage because you cannot justify denying two people the ability to be united as one under love simply because their way of life is separate from yours, it doesn't hurt people and the only argument against it is from a 2000 year old book that is full of falsehoods

Side: For
1 point

equality is a human rights issue.

there should not even be a "gender" question on the marriage license form.

Side: For

Absolutely! Gay Marriage is now American as apple pie. It would be un-American to oppose it.

Side: For
1 point

I believe that marriage is a right for people, it doesn't depend on your sexual choices. Think about your first love, remember the skip in your heart the times you wanted to kiss him/her, could you controlled who to love? Of course not. Suppose that people were protesting against your love, because you want to spend rest of your life with that person. Therefore the Main problem with againts side is they can not empathize.

Side: For
3 points

With Obama in charge I’m sure ISIS will settle that answer in do time. As for me I could care less. I feel if you're stupid enough to do it then go for it but in time it’s going to come back and bite you in the ass, but then you just might like that. LOL

Side: Against
LucerneFerer(4) Disputed
1 point

What does President Obama have to do with this? The question is not about him. You stated you're "against", yet you proclaim, "..could care less....if you're stupid...". Clarify your argument please and focus on the topic.

Side: For
Czyka(7) Disputed
1 point

getting married as a homosexual person doesn't make you any stupider as a person who believes that committing to the marriage will somehow come back to hurt the couple that gets married. provide some evidence that 2 homosexuals being married results in bad things every time.

Side: For
0 points

Why come up with something so off topic and irrelevant?

Side: For
3 points

Marriage is between a man and a woman. I have no problem with Civil Unions; literally couldn't care less. However Marriage is a sacred institution and rite and no group has the right to erase it in favor of their own branding. More importantly get the government out of marriage.

Side: Against
2 points

Marriage used to be between a man and a girl in many places. It also used to be between two people of the same ethnicity. If it has changed before, why can it not change again? Seeing as how it has already changed in many places, who are you to tell them others?

Additionally, why should they accept a "Civil Union" (something that marriage already is)? There is no compelling interest for the state to create another institution simply for the purpose of distinction, especially considering separate but equal is inherently unequal. Marriage in this country is not a sacred institution, it is a civil contract as well as a civil right (as per Loving v. Virginia) and therefore protected by the Constitution. You and your group have no right to deny said right to anyone, and homosexuals are not trying to "erase it" in any way, shape, or form.

Side: For
2 points

I am against it, because in the Bible, it says that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Side: Against
LucerneFerer(4) Disputed
1 point

That's the issue. To rest your stance upon something that is debatedly "valid" (Bible), weakens your argument. Not everyone believes in that.

Side: For
Sitar(3682) Disputed
1 point
Cuaroc(8846) Disputed
0 points

it also says to stone non belivers to death.

Side: For
0 points

We've had plenty of debates about this already, but I'll respond anyways.

Where does it say that in the bible? I mean, I've read in the bible that you are supposed to stone all men who have sex with other men, and you haven't been doing that. I guess you're a pretty bad Christian. I can't remember the last time I saw some Christians stone gay people.

Side: For
skyfish(276) Disputed
0 points

Neither the "bible", nor any other religious text has any business determining public policy in a free and secular nation, such as the Untied States of America.

Side: For
2 points

I'm against listening about the issue. Gay marriage, gay rights, gay pride. How I wish they'd go and do whatever it is they get up to and shut to hell up. What a beautiful word ''gay'' used to be until it was ''appropriated'' by the homosexual brigade. The word 'Gay' used to conjure up so many beautiful images of carefree cheerfulness, almost a sort of childlike merriment. For the average normal person the current meaning of the word doesn't bear thinking about. No reasonable person has any prejudice against those of a deviant sexual orientation but all normal people I know are sick and tired of been bombarded with the inferiority complex driven squawking of homosexuals and lesbians as they try to assert their abnormal sexual preferences on the rest of society.

Side: Against
0 points

This really is the least I would expect from someone from Northern Ireland. You are asserting your sexual preferences on us by saying we can't get married.

Side: For
2 points

What is it about these mutant, deviant members of our population known as homosexuals? Why do they incessantly seek acceptance of their condition by normal people, most of whom, including me, couldn't give a chicken noodle what they do,''as long as they don't frighten the horses''. If they want to get married, that's fine, let them go and get married, and if that will shut them up, it will have my blessing and the approval of most of the normal population. They look for an anti homosexual agenda where none exists. They ask, ''do you approve of homosexual marriage''? ''Yes''is the reply. The homos continue, ''are you sure''? ''are you not a homophobic''? ''No, I've no issues with those of a deviant sexuality and feel that they have a right to get married, or even commit bigamy, as I really couldn't give a festering turd what they do''. Ah, ha, they cry, you're a liar, you find us disgusting and are prejudiced against us nice chaps, come on admit it!. Once again, I must stress I have no objection to you lot whatsoever, as long as you stay away from me, okay? So, get married/divorced, or whatever, but once again shut to frig up' just go and do it, quietly and happily like normal folk.

Side: Against
2 points

Marriage is between a man and a woman. If some perverts want to live together, I couldn't care less. Just leave the institution of marriage alone.

Side: Against
Blxchs(23) Disputed
1 point

Perverts you say? What makes these Humans perverts?

This is an issue making sly comments as such is undiplomatic, there is nothing perverted about 2 people devoting their lives to each other. Would you like to know why? Simple, there is no difference in a "straight" couple getting married versus a "homosexual" couple getting married both are professing love for their mates. People tend to focus on factors that SHOULD NOT matter in the situation, if these two humans are happy then let them live a blissful life without being stripped of their confidence and humanity.

Side: For
JontheCamel(18) Disputed
1 point

Is it possible to make an argument that is more unreasonable than what you just said? What makes people perverts just because they're gay or lesbian? You can't help it if you are.

Side: For
1 point

Not for it, If the gay community just used the term civil union instead of marriage, there wouldn't be this uproar about it.

Side: Against
2 points

Separate but equal is not equal. There is no reason they should have to use the term civil unions. There is no compelling interest for the state to create a distinction purely for the sake of distinction, and there is no way in which them having access to the same civil contract will have any effect on your life at all.

Side: For
Sitar(3682) Disputed
1 point

Right. "Will you civil union me" is so romantic. NOT! Gays have the right to get married too. If hetero couples have the right to get married, gay couples do too. The antigay concept is a religious idea that should NOT dictate the law. It is wrong to tell people what to do. What consenting adults do in their bedrooms is none of your business. We hold these truths to be self evident that all people are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Side: For
pvox(11) Disputed
1 point

There is no law that say's that one person of the same sex must use certain words when making a proposal. As you said "What consenting adults do in their bedrooms is none of your business"

I agree and what goes on in there personal life all together applies. It would have been wiser for the gay community to use the term civil union. A certificate of civil union would be a legal document that covers all tax laws and would not conflict with the Church. Our tax laws allow people to claim anyone as a dependent with that, they can place the dependent on their insurance policy. That is what the gay community is complaining about and they have an argument. I think the gay community is going a little too far by forcing others to change other peoples personal beliefs.

Side: Against
1 point

Does the legalization of gay marriage include legalization of gay divorce? Oh yeah, I forgot that we live in a perfect country.

Side: Against
1 point

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. Do you have a problem with gay divorce?

Side: For
1 point

I can't. Does that mean that I hate them or find them disgusting? No. I have gay friends. I can still love them as fellow human beings.

Side: Against