• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The "basic unit of society" arguement

Two people of the same sex cannot create a child that is genetically their own. Arguments for same sex marriage seem to denigrate fathers and mothers as nothing more than sperm and egg donors.

And your argument denigrates those men and women who step up and raise the children whose biological parents wouldn't by saying that they are less important and less "real" than a couple of dumb teenagers who had too much to drink at a party.

I really have no idea what to say to this. The fact that anyone actually believes this and has zero respect or regard for parents rights is deeply frightening to me.

Nothing that anyone has said implies any disrespect or disregard for the honor of parenthood or the moral prerogatives of parents. The problem is that you are attaching that honor and those prerogatives in the wrong place, to people who have not accepted or lived up to the responsibility of parenthood. In so doing, you are giving a grave insult to rightful and honorable parents, and doing a grave disservice to their children.

Family is a matter of honor. Blood is naught but mere biology, an accident of nature fated to become dust.
 
Certainly.

Do you need legal marriage for this to happen though? Is love, intimacy, and sharing only validated if the government gets involved?

No. But the government determines who gets benefits and who gets to be legally recognized as family. That is what is being discussed when we talk about legal marriage.

It is a contract that makes two adults, that are not of close enough blood relation to be legal family. It also, for the vast majority of married couples, makes those two adults each other's closest living relatives which gives them certain legal and financial responsibilities that benefit society. That is why the government cares about marriage. That is why we need to keep the government in marriage but only regulate marriage as far as keeping people from getting financially scammed or ensuring that such relationships will not be harmful to those involved.

Certain relationships should not be allowed legal recognition because they truly do cause harm in almost every case. These include a certain level of incestuous relationships and relationships involving underage people. Same sex relationships are not within that criteria. The majority of same sex relationships are not different than the majority of opposite sex relationships.
 
Last edited:
I call this argument the "how thin can you slice the baloney" argument. What is necessary to create a child is a male and a female, thus, that should be the basis for marriage, the only way to create families. I do not advocate a government sponsored fertility test because there are so few exceptions to the rules where a man and a woman conceive a child; that is, I am not interested in slicing the baloney that thin. Since you think it gives you a rhetorical rebuttal, you are willing to slice it that thin. Be my guest.

The government is not interested in ensuring that children are raised by their legal mother and father as much as you want to make it out to be. Neither are they interested in regulating marriage for only getting people to procreate. If the government really cared that much about it, they would make having children a condition of marriage. They would not allow anyone, not just same sex couples, from being legally married. And there certainly would not be states that specifically prevented certain couples from getting a legal marriage if they can procreate.

Your argument is based on wrong information and the mistaken belief that legal marriage is mainly for procreation.
 
Back
Top Bottom