Question: Should gay marriage be legal?

Title: Gay (Same-sex) Marriage Should Be Legal Content: I challenge ViceRegent to this debate on whether gay (same-sex) marriage should be legal. This is not about States' Rights or whether the Supreme Court was in the wrong or whatnot. This is about whether gay marriage should be legal. May the best debater win!

Title: Gay Marriage Legalization Content: This is a debate over whether or not Gay Marriage should be legal in the United States. My position is that Gay Marriage should be legal. I will let my opponent start the debate with their arguments.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: Everything is okay in this debate as long as it is on track to our topic. The question is, is should gay marriage be legal? I say yes. I await for my opponent.

Title: Gay Marriage Should Be Legal Content: This debate will focus on whether gay marriage should be legal. Round 1 will be acceptance. Round 2-3 are for arguments/making your case, as well as rebuttals against your opponent. Round 4 will have no new arguments made, and will mainly rebut your opponent's arguments. Please cite all your sources.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: Resolution: Gay Marriage should be legal.I will be arguing that Gay marriage should be legal, whilst my opponent will be arguing the opposite, that Gay marriage should be illegal. The burden of proof will be shared.StructureRound 1 - AcceptanceRound 2/3/4 - Arguments and RebuttalsRound 5 - Rebuttals DefinitionsGay Marriage - The Marriage of two homosexual people of the same sex.Rules1. No arguments are to be made in the first round.2. No new arguments are to be made in the fifth round, with the exception of them being logically necessary to refute previously made arguments.3. No insults.4. No semantics or trolling.5. The burden of proof is shared.6. Failure to obide by the rules shall result in a 7-point loss.

Title: gay marriage Content: gay marriage should be legal

Title: Gay Marriage Legalization in the U.S. Content: I will be arguing that gay marriage should be legal in the US. First round is for acceptance only. Thanks! P.S. I am a straight male.

Title: Gay marriage Content: Gay Marriage should be legal because the govt should get out of peoples life. Gays dont do harm and the govt should let them do as they want. I will post longer debates after this round.

Title: Gay Marriage should be legalized Content: This debate will be about whether or not gay marriage should be legal. I believe they should not because I do not think marriage, be it gay straight or otherwise is a "right" As the opening argument state your position

Title: Gay Marriage Content: Gay marriage should be legal.

Title: Gay marriage Content: I will be debating in favor of why gay marriage should be legal. My opponent, should they choose to take it, will argue against this. Goood luck...

Title: should gay marriage be legal Content: Gay marriage should be legal. why shouldn't it? love is love it doesn't matter if its the same sex. Your taking away their constitutional rights! PEOPLE that are straight get married and divorced all the time gays just want to get married once. YES I believe that gay marriage should be legal through out the U.S.

Title: Legalization of gay marriage Content: I taking the pro argument believe that gay marriage should be legal. I believe that is a civil right and a necessity. Con will take the side and show why gay marriage should not be legalized. We will argue this from a federal(each and every state level), do not take the stand of legalization on state levels. If you are against it take the time to show why gay marriage is wrong, and should not be legalized.

Title: Gay Marriage Should be Illegal (JOKE DEBATE) Content: Yes gay marriage should be legal because if we did what God wanted us to do most gays still wouldent be around to get married in the first place

Title: Gay Marrige Content: I believe gay marrige should be legal. I believe this because there are no reasons why it shouldn't be legal. With the exception of religion. But you can't make a law based on religion. Therefore it should be legal.

Title: Legalization of Gay Marriage in the US Content: Gay Marriage should be legalized in the US for homosexuals and/or bisexuals. Homosexuals should be able to legally marry whomever they choose, no matter if the individual is of the same sex. http://www.debate.org...

Title: Gay Marriage Content: I will be arguing that gay marriage should not be legal, because there should be no kind of legally recognized marriage, because government should not be involved in marriage. Good luck.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: This debate is about the subject of gay marriage and if it should be legalized. My viewpoint is that gay marriage should be legalized, and I will be arguing pro for this debate. The first round is just for acceptance, as well as any information that my opponent might wish for me to know. Good luck to both of us.

Title: Gay Marriage Should Be Illegal Content: This debate is going to about whether gay marriage should be illegal or legal. Con takes the side of defending gay marriage and pro defends their own case about why it should be illegal. I, the con, will be fighting for gay marriage and the right gay couples have to marry, here is a lay out of the debate: Round 1: Acceptance Round 2: Opening Statements Round 3: Rebuttals Round 4: Closing Statement _________________________________________________________________________________________ Rules 1) No insulting. 2) Credible sources only, please. 3) Try to be as good with spelling and grammar as you can be, please.

Title: gay marriage Content: I believe that gay marriage should be legalized. If all men are created equal then they should have the right to marry who they want even if it is the same sex.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal Content: I'll keep this one simple.This debate is (quite obviously) on the subject of whether or not gay marriages should be legal.Round 1 will be for acceptance, with no arguments posted.Round 2 will be for arguments, no rebuttals of Pro's arguments by Con yet.Round 3 will be for rebuttals of round 2 arguments and for adding new arguments.Round 4 will be for rebuttals of round 3 arguments and for adding new arguments.Round 5 will be for final rebuttals with no new arguments.Now, since this seems to be the ongoing trend in my debates as of late, let me get this one thing clear:If you're going to forfeit every round, don't accept the debate.I apologize for having to be a jackass in getting this across, but in over half of the debates I am currently in, my opponent has forfeited almost every round. It's a necessary precaution to say that I at least tried.Now, for the specifics of the debate. The only thing that I will not accept from my opponent is the use of any religious texts as a source. This is a secular case for gay marriage. I support this rule with the establishment clause:"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . . ."This would mean that if religion were the only reason to prohibit gay marriage, it would be unconstitutional, as it would be a law respecting an establishment of religion.That being said, burden of proof lies on Con to provide any (non-religious) reason that gay marriage should be illegal."Legal" will be defined, in this case, as being fully recognized by federal and state governments. If you would like to further discuss the rules of this debate or ask me to add definitions or change some rules, please discuss this in the comments section before accepting the debate. Thank you.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: I believe gay marriage should be legal. The fact of denying happiness to human being IN THIS CASE is unacceptable.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal Content: I, UUDDLRLRBA, accept this debate, but I will state that I feel gay marriage should be legal regardless what I say. But I, UUDDLRLRBA, will debate in the side that says gay marriage should be illegal in the following debate.

Title: Gay Marraige Content: Do you think gay people should be allowed to get married?

Title: Same-sex marriage should be legal Content: I believe that same-sex marriage should be legal. Rules : 1. Round 1 is acceptance 2.No new arguments in round 3 3.No forfeits

Title: Gay Marriage Should Be Legal Content: I believe Gay marriage should be legal all over the world. It isn't a sin and it isn't wrong.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal. Content: Gay marriage should be legal. There is no valid reason homosexuals shouldn't have the same rights as as any other citizen of the United States.

Title: gay marriage Content: I accept. As a note, I am pro gay marriage, my opponent will be arguing for its prohibition. He seems to have switched the sides. Again, I will be arguing that gay marriage should be legal, and will focus on the US.

Title: Gay Marriage should be Legalized Content: I will be arguing that gay marriage should be legalized. I am giving us each 72 hours since I will have limited time for research and rounds. First round is acceptance. Any sources can be used, as long as they can be linked and viewed on the Internet or can be quoted, like the Bible or a study. Please no trolling. If so, I will end the debate. Gay Marriage is defined as The state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage"

Title: gay marriage Content: Gay marriage should be legalized because being gay is a natural part of life.

Title: Gay Marriage should be Legal Content: I will be going for the position that gay marriage should be legal, I am willing to have a fun and knowledgeable debate to anyone who is willing to debate me :) First round will be acceptance of the debate Looking forward to debate :)

Title: Gay Marriage should be legal. Content: Hi, I'm Kyle, and I believe that gay marriage should not be legalized. Gay marriage should not be legal because gay couples are not able to reproduce. According to a study conducted by Robert Miller in 2012, 80% of heterosexual couples were married for the main purpose of reproduction. In the next rounds I would like this to become a deeper debate.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalized Content: Gay marriage should be legalized because this is a step forward to more equality. Gay people should have the right to formally be able to call the love of their lives their spouses. The Bible might state that gay people shouldn't be married or even together but the Bible and a few Christians have a few twists with this statement (I'm a Christian myself so don't take this to heart ). There will be elaboration on these statements but I'm interested in my opponent's response.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal in the United States Content: (FYI, I already posted a debate like this, but someone accepted as Pro when they had actually misread the resolution. So, I'm posting the debate again, but if you see another debate around that is exactly like this, ignore it, it's dead and waiting to be deleted by a mod.) As Pro, I will affirm the resolution, attesting that gay marriage should be legal in the United States. As Con, you will argue against the resolution, attesting that gay marriage should not be legal in the United States. Definitions: Same-sex marriage (also called gay marriage): a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or social gender. [1] Legal: Permitted by law; lawful: Such acts are not legal. [2] Rules: Round One shall be for acceptance, not beginning one's argument. Sources: [1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_marriage [2] dictionary.reference.com/browse/legal

Title: Gay Marriage Content: Salutations, I will be arguing for the pro side of gay marriage. Gay Marriage should be legal. In the Declaration of Independence, it states "all men are created equal." Notice how there is no foot notes or any writing between the lines.

Title: Gay Marriage should be legalized! Content: Hello. I would like to debate a serious matter- should gay marriage be legalized? In my opinion, yes it should. Disagree? Join the con side and debate me!

Title: Gay Marriage Content: Gay Marriage should be legal for two main reasons. 1) There are no negatives to gay people getting married. The most successful countries in the world support gay marriage; Canada, Sweden, Norway, Denmark are all places that have legalized gay marriage years ago and have seen no problems in their respective countries from it. 2) Equality. If a man loves another man or a women loves another women there no difference in a man and women loving each other. As a society and a planet we must move forward and strive for Equality, so that every person is given an equal opportunity to love who they want as well as their lives. Please respond I am curious to hear your argument. I am open to being proved wrong and I hope you are to May the best man win

Title: Why shouldn't gay marriage be legal Content: Gay marriage should be legal, since when does anyone get off by being able to tell someone else how to live there life. If we claim we have equal rights then we should practice what we preach and allow same sex marriage. How would allowing two people weather they be the same sex or not get married affect the whole world? In reality it should only affect that couple, and everyone else should mind there own business.

Title: Rather Gay Marriage Should Be Legal Content: Gay Marriage SHOULD be Legal, gays are just like us.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal Content: First of all, my greetings and thanks to my opponent; hope this will be a good debate! :) PROPOSITION: Gay Marriage should be legal. DEFINITION: Gay Marriage: A legally recognized socio-economic union, treated as a single entity for tax and liability purposes, with or without religious sanction, between two humans of the same gender. Not arguing about the constitutionality or current legal status of same in America or any other country; just whether it SHOULD be legal. We are assuming that all humans have the same inherent rights, and that implementation is not an issue. I am approaching this debate from a centrist, authoritarian viewpoint, and will argue the CONVERSE. My opponent is welcome to argue any position he wants that AFFIRMS the proposition as stated. This is a philosophy debate; I don't have the time to dig out the most scholarly sources on this topic, and will not hold my opponent to a higher standard of research than myself. Wikipedia and a few online dictionaries/encyclopedias will have to suffice. Arguments begin R.2. Thanks again!

Title: Should Gay Marriage Be Legal Content: Should Gay Marriage be allowed

Title: There should be no laws in regards to gay marrige. Content: Ok, my opponent has not provided any good reason why gay marriage should be legal. I'll go through my oppoents points as presented in her opening argument. 1) Marriage Allows safer sex practices cause there is a written commitment. Response A: This is a generalization and not backed up by any facts. Response B: Marriage doesn't make safer sex practices. Response C: Civil Unions can provide the same protection. 2) There should be no laws in the basis of religion. Response A: The US was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy. Response B: Heterosexual marriage is more CULTURAL then religious. 3) It's a choice for a gay to be married. Response A: I could choose to be violent, but that doesn't make it right. Response B: They also have the right to choose to marry a member of the opposite gender. =============================================================================== My opponent has failed to adequately attack my contentions, thus they stand: Contention I: Gay Marriage undermines the very nature of family. The reason for marriage is to be able to create a natural family. I.e. a mom, a dad, and children. The reason for marriage is to bring children into the world and society. When this fundamental formula is taken out, then the family as a whole is threatened. According to the Economist, in Scandinavia, the legalization of gay marriage has led 50% of all children to be born out of wedlock. Also, in the US, Social Scientists have discovered a link between criminal behavior and gay couples. (TIME Magazine). "Kids that have grown up in single gendered families have a greater criminal tendency then kids growing up in a regular family because of the polarization these kids receive in school, etc." Essentially, the kids are affected even more. So, Gay Marriage leads to the destruction of a "family" while hurting the children in the process. Therefore, the government has an obligation to the preservation of the family and the future kids of America. Thus, a law defining marriage between a man and women is necessary. Contention II: Gay Marriage will lead to a Slippery Slope. The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions. In Utah, polygamist Tom Green, who claims five wives, is citing Lawrence v. Texas as the legal authority for his appeal. This past January, a Salt Lake City civil rights attorney filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of another couple wanting to engage in legal polygamy. Their justification? Lawrence v. Texas. The ACLU of Utah has actually suggested that the state will "have to step up to prove that a polygamous relationship is detrimental to society"-as opposed to the polygamists having to prove that plural marriage is not harmful to the culture. Do you see how the game is played? Despite 5,000 years of history, the burden now rests on you and me to prove that polygamy is unhealthy. The ACLU went on to say that the nuclear family "may not be necessarily the best model." Indeed, Justice Antonin Scalia warned of this likelihood in his statement for the minority in the Lawrence case.10 It took less than six months for his prediction to become reality. Why will gay marriage set the table for polygamy? Because there is no place to stop once that Rubicon has been crossed. Historically, the definition of marriage has rested on a bedrock of tradition, legal precedent, theology and the overwhelming support of the people. After the introduction of marriage between homosexuals, however, it will be supported by nothing more substantial than the opinion of a single judge or by a black-robed panel of justices. After they have done their wretched work, the family will consist of little more than someone's interpretation of "rights." Given that unstable legal climate, it is certain that some self-possessed judge, somewhere, will soon rule that three men and one woman can marry. Or five and two, or four and four. Who will be able to deny them that right? The guarantee is implied, we will be told, by the Constitution. Those who disagree will continue to be seen as hate-mongers and bigots. (Indeed, those charges are already being leveled against those of us who espouse biblical values!) How about group marriage, or marriage between relatives, or marriage between adults and children? How about marriage between a man and his donkey? Anything allegedly linked to "civil rights" will be doable. The legal underpinnings for marriage will have been destroyed. Thank you, I urge a negation

Title: Gay marriage should be illegal! Content: I accept. The following is the resolution at hand. "Gay marriage should be illegal! "Since I am con, I will be arguing in favor of legalizing homosexuality. Since my opponent gave a brief explanation of his opinion, I will do the same. Then, I will argue freestyle in the last four rounds. According to some of the principles in the US, the right for homosexuals to marry should be available. In addition, since my opponent has taken a religious stance, I will point out that religious freedom is also a principle of the US (making religious arguments irrelevant).

Title: Gay Marriage should be legal in all states Content: I believe that Gay Marriage should be legal in all states for many reasons, the first of which is because the constitution says that all people have the right to the pursuit of happiness. This isn't my main argument for saying Gay Marriage should be legal, but it is for the way I worded the question. A few rules before we begin: 1. No Religious texts can be quoted 2. Religion cannot be used to justify an argument (adding on to rule 1) 3. I am tired of the "because marriage is between a man and a woman" argument, so don't use that one I believe that's all for now

Title: Gay Marriage Content: The argument remains. Should Gay people be allowed to get married? Why or why not?

Title: Gay Marriage Ought to be Legalized Content: Title says it all, the question here is on Gay Marriage and should it be legalized or not!Standard DDO Conduct Rules Apply Uhrah!

Title: Gay Marriage I Content: Resolved: Gay marriage should be legalized.I have decided that I'm just going to keep debating this and reformulating my arguments until I start winning, or my point starts coming across more clearly.First round for acceptance.Second round is the only round to post arguments.All subsequent rounds will be for rebuttals.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalized Content: Gay marriage should be legalized because marriage doesn't have to have a couple of the same gender. Marriage is about true love.

Title: Same-Sex Marriage Content: I believe that same-sex marriage should be legal everywhere. The opponent believes that it shouldn't. During this round please state that you would like to debate me. I respect everyone's opinion, and I am not trying to bash them.

Title: Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized. Content: I've been trying to challenge some few individuals on this topic, but none of them seem to accept for whatever reasons. So I guess I'll just make another open debate. I intend to argue that any LGBT marriage should be legalized, and thus when I say "gay", I am referring to LGBT. My sole argument is that gay people have the same rights to marry as do heterosexual people. The word "marriage" does not need to be a definite prerequisite - the only thing that should happen is for gays to have the same rights as heterosexuals. Civil unions can be an appropriate alternative, but only until it has the exact same rights as marriage (of which it currently does not). I will allow my opponent to go first and I will refute his/her arguments accordingly.

Title: Gay marriage Content: Gay marriage should be legal in all states. Love is love no matter what shape size or gender.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal in all 50 states. Content: Hello, and welcome to the debate! I will be arguing as a pro that gay marriage should be legal in all 50 states. You will be arguing that it shouldn't. 1ST ROUND IS ACCEPTANCE ONLY. If you want to ask any questions please put them in them in the comments. I will never extend the debate. Good luck to you! Have a wonderful day!

Title: should gay marriage be legalized Content: I believe that gay marriage should be legalized because people have the right to love eachother. It's not like its doing anything to society if a man is to marry another man or a woman is to marry another woman infact in someways its better for society. Also there would be an increase in the rate of adoption since men cannot have children with eachother and neither can women. Also it would cause more people to marry someone they truly love so there would be a decrease in divorce.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal Content: Wow thanks for that excellent response. Well I guess I will just do a conclusion any way. Gay marriage should be legal because it is a fundamental right to be able be happy and marry whomever you want. Also as I previously stated that every man is created equal and this should apply to gays and lesbians because it is not a choice and you are created that way. Next in round three I stated that, yes the catholic bible outlaws gat marriage but sense when have we been a country based on the bible because of our separation of church and state. Well thats it for me so vote for me in this debate

Title: Legalization of gay marriage Content: I will be arguing Con, that gay marriage should be illegal. It is not a civil right that can be had in the context of the United States' history or founding principles, and would undermine the basis for our other civil rights.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalized. Content: We are going to be debating whether or not gay marriage should be legalized worldwide. Pro has burden of proof. This is not an on balance type of debate, they must prove that all of the world should legalize gay marriage. I will present my case next round

Title: Gay Marriage Content: You are changing the argument; the argument was very clear. Gay marriage SHOULD be legal. That doesn't mean that marriage is in the constitution, nor does it mean that the supreme court should have the right to decide whether or not it is legal. It means exactly what it says: gay marriage SHOULD be legal. What you are doing is creating a strawman and then arguing against that, rather than arguing against the argument. The argument stated very clearly that I believed that gay marriage should be legal. It did NOT say that I believed that the supreme court has the right to decide this.

Title: Gay Marriage should be legalized Content: Hello Ladies and Gentleman and welcome to this debate on the legalization of Gay Marriage. I believe that Gay Marriage should be legalized! I believe this for the following reasons: 1. Marriage is a civil right - Everyone should have the same right if they pay the same taxes ect 2. Marriage is no longer a lone religious experience. All marriages by law are civil marriages they are then later referred to religious marriage. 3. Gay Marriage supports the family - You can not turn someone straight so why keep that person from creating a loving family that can enrich our society. 4. Religion and state should be separated - Regardless of what your religion says you should not enforce it on people who do not share your views or religion. 5. I believe it unfair that you can demand a right and deny another the same right. 6. Civil Unions are NOT the same. 7. Gay Marriage does not ruin marriage- Divorce and cheaters do. How can a man who cheats on his wife be allowed to marry and then remarry after breaking the contract of marriage without being punished were a gay couple who have been in love for years who are perfect for each other be refused? It does not make any sense!

Title: Gay marriage should be illegal Content: I'm arguing gay marriage should *not* be illegal. You're supposed to argue that it *should* be illegal because you're Pro.

Title: Gay marriage Content: Gay marriage should be legalized.

Title: Legalizing gay marriage Content: Gay marriage should be legal because people should have the right to marry whomever they want, same gender or not. Even if your against it i dont think you should be the reason to denie people marriage benefits and rights. Even if god or religion tells you its wrong that also shouldn't keep people from marrying who they love. Yes, people say marriage is between a man and woman but its the 21st century. Things have changed. Women can vote, segregation has practically ended, we have made many technological advancements, ect. Back then women voting seemed wrong but now its normal. Gay marriage can be the same. .

Title: Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized Content: This debate is dedicated to 16kadams. He r pretty c00l gai who debates gay marriage nd duznt fraid of anything. As Con, I am affirming that gay marriage should not be legalized. Pro will be affirming that gay marriage should be legalized. Burden of Proof is shared. No semantics.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: Gay Marriage should be legalized, for if two people love one another, who are we to interfere? There are no reasons why gay marriage shouldnt be legalized. Marriage is about love and gender shouldnt matter.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: I do not know why gay marriage isn't already legal everywhere, but never mind that. Everyone should have the right to marry who ever they want, wherever they want, excluding things like incest.

Title: Gay Marriage be legal in the U.S. with no government restriction. Content: I personally believe that Gay Marriage should be legal throughout the U.S. with no government restriction whatsoever. I am open to any and all opposition, and this first round will be dedicated to anyone who wishes to challenge my point. Good luck to whoever wishes to oppose my point.

Title: Should Gay Marriage be Legalized Content: Gay marriage should be legalized because people should have the right to love who they want to love and love them however they want. Boys with boys and girls with girls this will not ruin or society or how or what people from other nations think about us legalize it because if you find true love go for it and there should NOT be government, politics or the president to stop that from happening because they gay people should have all the rights in the world they want to.

Title: Gay Marriage should be legal. Content: Gay marriage should be legal in all 50 sates. There is nothing wrong with two people loving each other that are the same gender. These people deserve their chance at love and the government should not hold them back.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: However, I do believe gay marriage should be legal, the majority DOES rule. Currently, the majority of the US population (assuming this is terms to gay marriage on US soil) is against gay marriage. Thus, I am going con to support the majority of the Americans. I await your contentions for round two.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal Content: I think gay marriage should be legal because every body deserves to marry who they love.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalised. Content: I accept the challenge on the side that gay marriage should not be legalized. I will provide support on the basis: consequences of gay marriage, children that may be eventually adopted and more. Thanks for the debate.

Title: "Resolved: Gay marriage should be okay in the united states" Content: I gladly accept my opponent's challenge. In the resolution I'm assuming the focus is on whether or not gay marriage should be legal or not. For clarity, I would have titled the resolution "Gay marriage ought to be legal in the United States." This is probably what you meant though, so perhaps I'm just being nit-picky. I just have one question for my opponent regarding the structure. What exactly do you mean when you say the third round is for questioning? Is it like cross-examination? With that, I turn the floor over to my opponent.

Title: Gay marriage. Content: Gay marriage should be illegal.

Title: Gay marriage Content: Gay marriage should be allowed

Title: Gay-marriage should not be legal in the US Content: As Pro, I will affirm the resolution and argue that gay-marriage should not be legal in the US. As Con, you will negate the resolution and argue that Gay-marriage should be legal in the US. ClarificationsThe debate topic is that gay-marriage should not be legal, so to say that there are many places in the US which already makes it legal (something which I'm fully aware of), is invalid. If the debate topic was however that gay-marriage is not legal in the US, then it would be valid to say that that there are many places in the US which already makes it legal. In fact, if you have said that, you would have negated the resolution (i.e., That gay-marriage is not legal in the US)Since I'm arguing that gay-marriage should not be legal in the US, that means that I'm also arguing that places in the US which already makes gay-marriage legal, should not make it legal anymore. And since Con is arguing that gay-marriage should be legal in the US, that means that he's also arguing that places in the US which doesn't make gay-marriage legal, should start making it legal. Basically, this debate is not about if gay-marriage is legal or not, but only about if it should be legal or not.DefinitionsGay-marriage: 'The practice of marriage between two males.' [1]Legal: 'Permitted by law; lawful: Such acts are not legal.' [Ibid]The US: 'United States or United States of America Abbr. U.S. or US or U.S.A. or USA. A country of central and northwest North America with coastlines on the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.' [2]RulesRound 1 is for acceptance only. No new arguments shall be given in the last round. No semantics.By accepting this debate, you also accept all the rules and definitions of this debate. Violating one of them will lose you all 7 points.Sources[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...[2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

Title: Should gay marriage be legal Content: I think gay marriages should be illegal. A marriage is between a woman and a man, and that should not change.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalized Content: I am for the legalization of Gay marriage in our country (United States). I would like to debate with someone their reasoning on why Gay marriage should not be legalized. Please be thorough with your points and explanation. The debate will go as follows: Round 1 - Opening Point(s) Round 2 - Rebuttal Round 3 - Rebuttal Round 4 - Conclusion

Title: Homophobic people for whatever reason I challenge you to a debate Content: I do want the gay marriage to be legal. I am homophobic in a way, so I will present arguments against gay marriage. I am great proponent of freedom, and I believe no arguments can outweigh it, but let's do this for fun. Since we have 5 rounds, I will use this one as acceptance only.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalized Content: Gay marriage should be legalized. To my future opponent: Thank you for this debate, I'll be looking forward to what you have to say.

Title: If We Legalize Gay Marriage, We Must Enact Protection Laws for the Rights of Churches! Content: I myself am pro gay-marriage. The way I see it, homosexuals have a right to live a homosexual lifestyle if they choose, whether I agree with it or not. Now I am not here to argue whether or not gay marriage should be legal. If my opponent does, I will refrain from posting any further arguments and I would ask the voters to vote PRO. What I am arguing is that if we legalize gay marriage, we must pass legislation protecting the rights of churches to refuse to perform such a marriage. I myself am a religous person. When I read an article about a homosexual couple who sued a church that refused to perform their marriage I was disgusted!!! The church was forced to perform the marraige on the grounds that to refuse based on sexual orientation was discrimination. Now I thought that this was a ridiculous ruling because there was a whole other aspect of this case that was ignored. There was a very clear and blatant violation of the church's freedom of religion! The church was forced to perform a marriage that was against their faith. That is a very clear violation of their religious rights. Now this disturbed me. It was one church, but if we legalize gay marriage, it will be lots of churches. It could very well be my religious leaders that will be forced to violate their religious beliefs because of a court ruling. There are many churches that will perform gay marriages and those that wont should not be governmentally forced to violate their beliefs. Many would see this as being forced to sin against god! Anyway, my point is this... If we legalize gay marriage, a church's or a religious leaders rights to refuse to perform the marriage must be entact! We must pass legislation to protect it!

Title: Homosexual Marriage Should Be Legalized Everywhere Content: Greetings.I will be arguing the point that homosexual marriage should be legalized. I feel that any law, especially one in the U.S., which likes to pride itself on being the Land of the Free, that prohibits homosexual marriage is unfounded and does not deserve to take effect.I feel there is no legitimate reason for the banning of homosexual marriage. The first round is NOT for acceptance - instead, it should be where my opponent offers his/her argument for the illegalization of homosexual marriage. Before concluding, I would like to mention that I am not homosexual or bisexual, and I am not arguing for my own freedom to marry, so I am not biased in any way.

Title: Gay marriage Content: Gay marriage should be legal because marrying someone its a union of love, and why if boy and girls can marry to unite their love, gays can't? Love is love, and even if marriage is not legal for them, they won't stop loving each other, so this won't do any change, you would just let them with the desire to marry. Is like taking them a right just because they are not like you. People hate on them because they are different to them, but its better to be different, you didn't came to the world to be like everybody else, and gays are a big example of this. And by marrying each other, it means they can also adopt children, but this is not bad, because they would take care of their children properly, and it could be even better than a heterosexual couple, because sometimes they mistreat their babies, and gays are really sweet and they couldn't hurt nobody, not even a fly. Well, the point is that they should marry, if we have that right, let them have it too. Love is love, and you can't do anything against it.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalized by the federal government Content: Gay marriage should be legalized. Government and religion should not mix. Not allowing people of the LGBT community to marry is discrimination against their sexuality. Something should not be illegal just because others don't agree with it. The LGBT community deserves the same right to marry who they love and be bound legally just like everyone else can be.

Title: America Should Legalize Gay marriage Content: I assume that when my opponent says "America should legalize gay marriage" he means that it should be put on legal par as traditional marriage. Just to clarify, this is what I shall be arguing against.As requested, the first round is for acceptance.Over to my opponent!

Title: Same sex marriage ahould be legal. Content: Just jump right in. I believe that same sex marriage should be legal, and I will say why. 1. The antigay mindset is for the most part rooted in religion, and religion should not be part of politics. 2. People have the right to be happy if they are not hurting anyone. 3. It is wrong for the religious minority to force their beliefs on the majority. 4. There is nothing wrong with being gay or bisexual. I am bisexual and I am not hurting anyone. I thank my opposition in advance for debating me.

Title: There are no valid arguments sufficient to justify same-sex marriage being illegal. Content: I "feel" that gay marriage should not be legal. Many arguments in favor of gay marriage are based on "feelings" and nothing else. One persons feelings on an issue are not more powerful than another. My feeling against gay marriage is therefore valid and sufficient. Any argument you make against my feeling against gay marrige is purely "your opinion based on your "feelings" in favor of it.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal Content: Thanks Pro for this debate! Debate meaning and purpose: I would also like to clarify that the title of this debate is, 'Gay marriage should be legal' which is a positive claim by my opponent with the burden of proving it true. My opponent never stipulated that the definition of marriage was not relevant in determining if marriage should or should not be legal. Let's note that my stance is in legal standing by our government and Pros isn't. It is up to the one making the claim to provide undoubted evidence to justify the claim. "It is very important that the resolution is worded properly. The general custom is that an instigator that makes a positive claim, must provide evidence that the claim is true. Unless explicitly stated, CON does not have to prove that the resolution is false. Before any debating begins, the criteria for who has the burden of proof and how the winner of the debate is determined should be established beforehand."[1] Pro however did make a specific burden on Con in his first round acceptance. Pro said, "burden of proof lies on Con to provide any (non-religious) reason that gay marriage should be illegal. My first contention would fulfill the burden placed on me by Pro which is, 'Same-sex marriage doesn't fulfill the definition of marriage.' This contention alone provides a (non-religious) reason that same-sex marriage should be illegal which is all that Con had to do. Marriage meaning & No right: I have determined that same-sex marriage has no right for marriage according to our governmental definition of marriage. My opponent can play this contention off as invalid but it implies legal and non-religious evidence to not allow same-sex couples to marry. Same-sex marriages were debated about at the establishment of the definition but were discredited. Nine states prohibit same-sex marriage by statue but 30 prohibit it completely in their constitutions. By Washington recognizing same-sex marriage nationally would infringe on at least 30 states decision and right to not allow same-sex marriage. The point is we can not know what will be legal or illegal in the future and by current definitions and majority there is more than enough reason to keep same-sex marriage illegal. The only reason the state has ever had an interest in a relationship between two people, is because their union could create another human being as a supreme responsibility to civilization. It has also never been understood as an exclusively romantic relationship. Only in recent history has romance come to be seen as the reason for marriage. My opponent mentioned that America is about freedom, liberty and rights of the people and I agree. We see that the out spoken voice of the people in America since its inception has not been for recognizing same-sex marriages. In fact not until recently after 2000 has same-sex marriage sought change by legal means. Before this, same-sex marriage were never even thought about as being legal or a rights issue. It has never been a issue because same-sex marriages can not be equal to traditional marriages. Same-sex marriages can resort to definitions of marriage that could allow polygamy, incest and other forms of relationships. Should we risk a change that could allow these to have freedom to marry? My opponent has never addressed this problem. The status quo and Pro show that past definitions on the institution of marriage have been rightly placed. Right Infringements & Norms: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." My opponent commits to a slippery-slope here by thinking that because homosexual discrimination is wrong that not allowing same-sex marriage is also. The 1st amendment gives the right for the religious to exercise their religion. Many states have religious people who have voted against gay-marriage in their state. These 30 states are a majority to 20 and yes it is against rights to reject that majority even if these states are religious states. It is these states free right to determine through law how they want their state to conduct its state laws. These forced laws would also detach the understanding of heterosexual importance. If this importance is lost then humanities basic survival instinct is then gone. Since the dawn of human development the role of mother and father as male and female have been essential to our society. Hetero and Same-sex relationships are not equal in many standards. Inadequate parenting: I never attempted to fight homosexuality itself because I did not see the need too, I just focused on marriage itself. My opponent said that homosexuals are born homosexuals but most studies show that children do not develop the stage of sexuality until after ages 2 thru 3.[2] Also my opponent never argued pre-birth homosexuality until the 5th round. His rebuttal here is also a fallacy of generalization by using small amount of cases and test to make a final determination for all. My opponent brought up earlier that marriages were arranged and that is interesting indeed. We have no documentation that same-sex marriages were arranged. Even then they recognized marriage as a institute and profitable for the society with children and the combining of families into civilizations. My opponent seemed to fight hard for the (AAP) but they have just as a recognizable advocate against them. The American College of Paediatricians (ACPeds) is a socially conservative association of paediatricians and other health care professionals specializing in the care of infants, children and adolescents in the United States. The College was founded in 2002 by a group of paediatricians including Joseph Zanga, a past president of the (AAP), as a protest against AAP. The organization's view on parenting is at odds with the position of the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical and child welfare authorities. The American College of Paediatricians argues that mainstream health organizations have taken public positions based on their own social and political views, rather than the available science.[3] As we see, (AAP) is not the sole authority. In fact (ACPeds) stands by the view that same-sex parents do produce more homosexual children. Divorce has been bad for children, second marriages have been, and adults just living together also. Though when it comes to re-defining marriage, we are now supposed to think that the gender of the parents makes no difference at all is just nonsense. Conclusion: My opponent addressed my sources more than his resolution. It could be viewed that focusing on attacking your opponents sources instead of focusing on the argument at hand as a insult. I do not think my opponent meant it this way but instead focused on them because that was his only way to leap over the definition of marriage. Pro gave us no adequate explanation why only both male and female can make children and guarantee the survival of humanity. While homosexuality decreases the survival of humanity. We never was told that current laws, definitions and majorities can not be used beforehand. The point is that homosexuality can not continue the human race and my opponent shrugs it off. My burden has been meet by numerous contentions and my opponents opening contentions were extremely weak and refuted. Same-sex marriage infringes on religious rights, state rights, it does nothing to further society, and is not the ideal situations for raising children. On top of the overwhelming fact that it does not fit the current definition of marriage. Thanks, I rest my case. Good job Pro! Sources: 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://kidshealth.org... 3. http://www.acpeds.org...

Title: Straight marriage should be legal. Content: Excuse spelling please as I just broke my dominant arm, and am typing rather slowly. On to the debate. I believe straight marriage should be legal because (1) it is natural for a man and woman to be together. From the beginning of civilization they have been wanting to be mutually connected or, in today's terms, married. 2. Deducting from genitalia and genitalia functions, one can see how a man and woman should be together as well. One would one be eliminating the obvious normal connection otherwise. And if it was illegal and looked down upon by society in the future, where would children come from? A man and woman would feel shamed for having intercourse and possibly a baby. So, in conclusion, I believe straight marriage should be legal.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: While I object to gay marriage morally, this debate is more about the legality. This debate is about what is commonly referred to as "legalizing gay marriage". I add quotes because I don't think this most accurately describes the debate at hand. No one (at least that I have met) is proposing that we should make gay marriage illegal. In fact, at least in recent history, gay marriage has not been illegal. The question we must ask is not, "should gay marriage be legal or allowed?". The question should be, "should gay marriage be federally encouraged or promoted by the government?". The government can either prohibit, allow, or promote an activity. I firmly believe the government should stay out of the bedroom and out of our lives, so it should only allow gay marriage, not promote it. In other words, homosexuals should be able to have relationships and call themselves married, but this should not be recognized by the government. In order to show that it should be promoted, It seems two premises must be established: 1) Gay marriage ought to be promoted. 2) The government would do a good job at promoting gay marriage. Regarding traditional marriage, it certainly ought to be promoted because it is one of the greatest predictors of societal success. This helps everyone, so it should be encouraged. It also does that without immoral consequences. However, since government recognized traditional marriage, divorce rates have skyrocketed. Government cannot competently support traditional marriage, so it too should be allowed and not promoted. Just get government out of our lives in terms of marriage. Regarding gay marriage, I believe it fails both parts. It is both immoral and does not lead to a prosperous society, so it ought not be promoted. I also, believe the government would do a terrible job at doing so if given a chance. Because of this, gay marriage in particular ought not be recognized by the state. I also think there is something else that must be addressed regarding this subject. That is the concept of church and state. This statement is not actually a part of our legal system, and the term never meant separating the influence of the church on the state, but the reverse. In law, the government is not allowed to promote or establish any form of religion. Promoting, allowing, or prohibiting gay marriage would not establish or promote any particular religion. A simple proof of this is that Christianity and Islam both deny the legitimacy of gay marriage. If this were put into law, which religion exactly would the government be promoting or establishing? Neither one. It is also important to note that morality can be enforced legally. Murder is made illegal because it is immoral. Speeding is illegal because it is immoral. Generally, the rule of thumb for law is that immoral practices should be prohibited if they affect others, immoral practices that do not affect others and amoral practices should be allowed, and moral practices should be promoted. Gay marriage may have societal implications, but it does not directly affect other people, so I see no reason to ban it. On the other hand, it is immoral, so it should not be promoted. I get my morality from the Bible. I do not want to enforce my Bible into law, I want to put my morality into law. Therefore, the Bible is relevant to the question of morality, thus to the question of law. However, this is not an issue of separation of church and state, but an issue of the morality or ethics of that which we are promoting. This is my stance on the issue. If you disagree with my point of view and would like to have a reasonable discussion, that would be welcomed. I made a few claims this round that I will support next round when I begin my arguments.

Title: Should Gay Marriage Be Legal Content: Gay marriage should be legal because its love it would be wrong to keep to people that love each other apart because of their genders

Title: gay marriage Content: I believe that gay marriage should not be legal. It is against many religions, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, which are some of the largest religions. Also, if you are thinking in the long term, the population will decrease because less people are actually marrying. Their only choice will be to adopt a baby, as they obviously cannot make one on their own. Also, with our children being brought up thinking that this is okay, we are corrupting what god and the founding fathers of our country believed.

Title: Gay marriage should be legalized. Content: Everyone, men and women, without any limitation due race, nationality or religion should have the right to marry and to found a family. I believe that gay marriage should be acceptable in all places around the world because it shouldn't matter how old or what gender you are, love is love and no one should tell you otherwise. Therefore, gay marriage should be legalized.

Title: Gay Marriage Content: The definition of marriage also includes a side note of, or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex. Therefore, it should be legal for gay marriages to occur in the U.S and everywhere else in the world.

Title: Gay Marriage Should Be Legal In All States Content: I believe gay marriage should be legal in all states because if a person truly loves a person, all religious bias set aside, how can you not allow them to be together? Also, gay people being together affects no other person personally and has no negative affects on society or the people that live in it.

Title: Homosexual Marriage Should be legal in all US states and territories Content: The topic of the debate: Homosexual Marriage Should be legal in all US states and territories. Con as the honor of posting their argument first.

Title: Gay marriage should be illegal Content: I think that gay marriage should be illegal,because me as an American should be walking around with my little son and see a gay couple having love. I also think that it is dangerous to the a adopted kid that is growing up in a gay household.

Title: Gay marriage should be legal in all 50 states Content: Gay marriage should definitely be legal in all 50 states. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Lets talk about kids. If same-sex marriage were legal, imagine how many children would be adopted and taken out of the foster systems. Let's say one woman has a biological child and have a partner (who's also a woman). If they live in a state where same sex marriage isn't legal, if the biological mother were to pass away, her partner wouldn't have the right to the child. That's putting ANOTHER child into the foster system. We also need to think about the fact that gay and lesbians are people who should have the right to be married to each other.