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.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Should gays just be happy to be together and not push there luck with marriage
Gays should just be happy that they get to go to hell together. They should not get marryed because know there just trying to hurt them self's and it is impossible for a man and a man to get marryed. Marriage came from God and only God can change the meaning of marriage.
This is truly what would happen and you guy, woman, animal need to forgive God for your sins and prey that you well not be seat to hell for your feelings.
There shouldn't be anything morally wrong for two (or more) consenting, sexually mature adult siblings to get married. They just lack the usual repulsion of having sexual relations with a sibling, like a gay man lacks the usual repulsion of having sexual relations with another man.
Our personal repulsion of sibling sex should not get in the way of their rights to achieve happiness.
After all, Noah's children and Adam and Eve's children practiced incest to multiply.
The only fear of incest couples, should be the conception of a genetically mutated, inbred child, but adoption will always be an option.
Should society ever be ready for that? If it is wrong today isn't it also wrong in the future? Do we not have good reason to ban those kinds of marriages today?
It is not wrong simply because it produces inbred children, it is wrong because it violates our nature as well as the laws of God, just like polygamy, just like bestiality, just like transsexualism, just like homosexuality.
They are all in the same boat, you can not enable one group without giving weight to the arguments of all the others.
And for the record, no one is getting in the way of a homosexual's right to happiness. They can have all the relationships they want. They can do whatever kind of commitment ceremonies they want to do. What they don't have a right to is public endorsement of their lifestyle. They don't have the right to make someone go photograph their "wedding" or make someone bake them a cake. They don't have a right to tax breaks and rights that the public willingly gave to married heterosexual couples.
If they want their relationships to be no one else's business, then stop making it everyone's business.
Should society ever be ready for that? If it is wrong today isn't it also wrong in the future? Do we not have good reason to ban those kinds of marriages today?
We don't have good reasons to ban those kinds of marriages.
And what is wrong today will change in the future.
Keeping African slaves wasn't deemed as wrong as it is now. Stoning people to death wasn't deemed as wrong as it is now. Society's views of morality are ever-changing.
It is not wrong simply because it produces inbred children, it is wrong because it violates our nature as well as the laws of God, just like polygamy, just like bestiality, just like transsexualism, just like homosexuality.
A “sin” is whatever a religion decides to label as a taboo action (like eating pork) and nothing more—just because something is a “sin” it does not mean that that action is immoral or something that can be made illegal in secular law. Homosexuality has no detrimental affect on society.
Actually, we should be more concerned with hate crimes of sexual-orientation bias, of which occur in 20.8% of hate crimes. Some of God's law are dated and morally bankrupt. My morals are developed enough to see this. Are yours?
They are all in the same boat, you can not enable one group without giving weight to the arguments of all the others.
Gay marriage consists of consensual adults, whereas pedophilia and necrophilia do not, leaving gay people on a slightly different boat.
And for the record, no one is getting in the way of a homosexual's right to happiness. They can have all the relationships they want. They can do whatever kind of commitment ceremonies they want to do. What they don't have a right to is public endorsement of their lifestyle. They don't have the right to make someone go photograph their "wedding" or make someone bake them a cake. They don't have a right to tax breaks and rights that the public willingly gave to married heterosexual couples.
Homosexuals are still not permitted to be as happy has heterosexuals. You cannot deny their higher suicide rates, and their general contempt for being denied equal rights.
If you could just put yourself in their shoes, that would truly be a godly thing to do.
If you could just put yourself in their shoes, that would truly be a godly thing to do.
The godly thing to do is to always uphold the truth, no matter what. If Christianity is the right religion, which I think it is. And if unrepentant homosexuality is grounds to get yourself thrown into Hell, which I think is possible. It would be a disservice to all homosexuals to withhold that warning or try to tell them it is ok when it really is not.
My opposition to homosexuality is not about hate, it is not about being "grossed out", it is about the truth. Even if there is no God, it is still the truth that homosexuality is a violation of nature, it is unhealthy, and correctly labeled a disease.
No, God did not make the true definition of the word 'marriage.' Marriage is an English word, and there is zero scriptural basis for God using the English language at all.
Perhaps, if the Abrahamic God exists, he made the true definition of the hebrew word 'nisuin,' but even if the definitions are similar, it is still a distinct term from the English word 'marriage.'
Language is not sacrosanct, and the definition of a word is not what a dated dictionary or other text says it is- the definition of a word is whatever the general consensus regarding its meaning is.
You think the only people who are people, are the people who look and think like you. But if you walk the footsteps of a stranger, you'll learn things you never knew.
Faggots should be content that they aren't put to death for their deviant behavior, as they deserve. Lev. 20:13, Romans 1:27-32. Anything short of execution should be considered icing on the cake to these beasts.
Faggot marriages, however, are nothing short of an insult to God Almighty, and a defilement of all that is holy. Marriage is a joining of a man and a woman for life (Mark 10:6-7), and a representation of the union between Jesus Christ and His bride, the Church. 2 Cor 11:2. Sexual sins are as grave as idolatry (1 Cor 6:18, 1 Cor 10:14), as they impugn upon the honor of Christ and His Church (1 Cor 6:13-20), implying that Christ would be party to such sin, and that God would preside over it.
Therefore, considering how faggot sin is egregious on its own (Lev. 18:22, Rom. 1:26-32, Luke 17:28-29, Jude 7), such an explicit joining together of two engaged in horrible sin is worthy of the most severe punishments. It implies no less than that our blameless Jesus, who died to conquer sin, is no less than a libidinous faggot, and that God would proclaim such sin as tantamount to the greatest of His Holy mysteries.
The only way that fags should be joined together is eternally cast into Hell, where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched.
" people want to get married, so they think it over, and decide to. They book a ceremony in 2 weeks time, invite guests. When the day comes, they get married, and all is well."
That's how it should be. And say unto you:
To all homosexuals- enjoy marriage, it should be something between you and your partner, no need to advertise it, or be all up in peoples faces about it, yours is no more special than the next.
To everyone else- it's their marriage, not yours, you shouldn't have anything to do with it. Just let it be and everyone can live happily together.
Yes, nothing bad... except bakeries and photographers getting sued and put out of business because they don't want to participate in a gay wedding... nothing wrong with that at all right?
Nope, if they're not willing to serve their customers then they loose their jobs. What, you see something wrong with that?
A small business owner being forced to shutdown because of their beliefs is not the same as a wal-mart cashier getting fired for incompetence. Your spin is invalid.
You're not an electrical engineer.. Or if you are, I am guessing you're the reason we're not all talking on holocommunicators and flying in to the outer rim o the galaxy to find new life forms.
Yes because know your hurting the holy union and now it's giving all other sexuality weight to get married and soon that well happen because of the false gay marriages.
Of course, a man and a man marrying will lead to male polar bears standing at the altar together, wedding. That, evidently, is how this world works, you wise, wise man.
Yes, I agree and what ever man and man or man and dog sex is just fine because there only hurting there relationship with God and if they want to go to hell to be in the love well that's them but they are not to hurt are holy union with trying to change the true meaning of marriage.
The Christian God doesn't exist. Perhaps some other God exists out there, but not the Christian one- he's too morally bankrupt. You should have noticed this, if you had a developed sense of morality.
You guys are going to hell but I wish that you didn't have to for some stupid sin but I'm just trying to help you guys out by letting you guys be together but you pay us back for hurting are union and hurting God more. If you want to hurt yourself that's fine but don't hurt others.
Yes, I agree and what ever man and man or man and dog sex is just fine because there only hurting there relationship with God
The line you've drawn here between whether it hurts just them or hurts you is completely defined by your bias.
and if they want to go to hell to be in the love well that's them but they are not to hurt are holy union with trying to change the true meaning of marriage.
How are they doing that? They're trying to change the legal definition of marriage, not your religion's definition of marriage.
Analogies don't have to be perfectly balanced. They only have to be similar. Black people were persecuted, and that is similar to the fact that homosexuals are being persecuted.
The degree to which homosexuals are persecuted does not even register on the same scale as black people. Homosexuals trying to sit around and equate themselves with African Americans is insulting to their legacy. It would be like me saying Christians in america are persecuted as much as the Jews in Nazi Germany, it simply makes no sense.
Here is a little hint for you, people who were persecuted for being black were simply persecuted for being born the way they are. Someone who was born black can never act less black. You may be able to argue that sexual orientation is genetic, but you can not argue that engaging in homosexuality is a choice. There is a MASSIVE difference between a government that persecutes someone for a choice, and one that persecutes someone for being born into a certain group.
Until the day comes where the police go out and test people for homosexuality, so they can take them and sell them to the highest bidder to do hard labor, you can just keep your cliché analogies to yourself.
You know the word 'faggot'? The word faggot really means a bundle of sticks used for kindling in a fire.
Now, in the middle ages, they used to burn people they thought were witches, and they used to burn homosexuals too, and they used to burn the witches on a stake.
But they thought the homosexuals were too low and disgusting to be given a stake to be burned on, so they used to just throw them into the kindling, with the other 'faggots'.
You might wanna know, that every gay man in America, has probably had that word shouted at them being beaten up. Sometimes many times. Sometimes by a lot of people, all at once. So, when people say it, it kind of, brings it all back up- much like the word 'nigger'.
You might wanna know, that every gay man in America, has probably had that word shouted at them being beaten up. Sometimes many times. Sometimes by a lot of people, all at once.
Maybe they should try behaving in a normal manner in public, just like everyone else does, and they wouldn't run into trouble. If that were to happen to a black person, it would be over something he can't control. A homosexual can control his actions, or at the very least can be in public without flaunting his lifestyle, so it is puzzling to me why you would have as much sympathy for the homosexual as for the black man.
Homosexuals, compared to the average americans, have higher incomes, higher education, and lower unemployment. Black people still have lower incomes, lower education, and higher unemployment. Black people are suffering more at the low point of their persecution than homosexuals were at the high point. Your comparison is completely invalid.
I can't find any resource confirming what you were saying about the word faggot.
at the very least can be in public without flaunting his lifestyle, so it is puzzling to me why you would have as much sympathy for the homosexual as for the black man.
There is a characteristic that homosexuals fit, just like there is a characteristic black people fit. It'd be oppressive say that homosexuals must hide their true selves in society. Seriously, that shit leads them to suicide.
Black people are suffering more at the low point of their persecution than homosexuals were at the high point. Your comparison is completely invalid.
My comparison was about historical context. But you still cannot deny the discrimination homosexuals have faced in the past, and the fact that thousands were targeted in the Holocaust. Do they not deserve a break?
Blacks have lower incomes in general because their rights were obviously restricted up until late- skin color making them beacons for discrimination.
And if homosexuals have higher incomes, education and lower unemployment, why would you want them removed from society if they contribute more to the world? Would it not be in God's greater interest for society to flourish?
Persecution is persecution. I didn't even bother to read all of that because you don't seem to understand that their is at least a comparison to be made.
Blacks never did anything to merit being enslaved; faggots, however, are simply being required not to engage in the same sort of behavior that is prohibited for everyone else (namely, copulating with the same gender.) Saying they are being persecuted because they are being prevented from acting on their evil impulses is the same as saying murderers are being persecuted for carrying out their own urges.
Why would you say that? They haven't done anything wrong, why would they go to hell and not be allowed to be married? I don't get it. It's their business if they want to get married, not some *ss like you. Leave them alone and stop being a jerk.