azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

So you think people's rights should be based solely on things out of their control? And anything in their control or anything they care about is irrelevant to what they get?If someone doesn't care about an absolute truth, it doesn't make it any less an absolute truth. Likewise, preferring X over Y doesn't change absolute truths. So why should rights, which are absolute and objective to all humans be different?And yet you are asking people to have sex with people they are not sexually attracted to. I'm assuming your straight (just because 90% of society is, for no other reason than that), would you want to have sex with someone of your own sex?Thats irrelevant.And no, subjectiveness does not create right. However, the number of people who engage in sex with people of the same gender of themselves is much higher than the number of people who have sex with animals, children, and those who kill people or are kleptomaniacs. More importantly, having sex with people of the same gender is legal. If we're letting people be with other people who they love, why should be deprive them of the right of marriage?So if subjectiveness does not create a right, then we have no further argument.Can you provide me a source that explains how rights in America are in no way subjective? Because I am doubtful of this fact.The Declaration of Independence says that we are endowed with certain unalienable rights. The concept that has been handed down for Americans is objective. Go to any philosophy classroom in America and they will tell you that 'rights' in America is objective. Moreover, the reason why is because our Creator has given them to us. So, without God, under America, there are no rights. Continued, the primitive definition of 'rights' in America is simply that of being objective. Its like reducing 1 down to 1... it simply is that way. You can call a rose a triangle, but that doesn't make it any less a rose. The same with America. You can call what is subjective a 'right' but that doesn't make it in any way a 'right'A red herring is not an act... acts are actions, and according to the dictionary: a thing done; a deed. The verb done modifies thing, making acts connected to the very. A red herring is not an action that can be completed."The force the person who iscommitting the fallacy is appealing to might be physical in nature, or it might be economic."http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rfreeman/CHAPTER3.pdf You can commit logical fallacies.... Are you seriously still challenging this? Stop being thick headed...
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

All rights are absolute? Are you kidding? Do you think people have the right to live? And yet the death penalty still exits (not wide spread, but it still does.)Thats why rights in America are wrong. ;) Thats another topic for another day. Its irrelevant to discuss the logical ins and outs of a system, when already operating within that framework. We are operating within that framework, so don't commit another red herring.No, it's not. Straight people are being allowed to get married to people they are sexually attracted to. In a hypothetical situation, would you be ok with marriage if everyone was allowed to marry people of the same sex, and that's it? You'd still be sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex, but if you wanted to get the benefits of marriage, you'd have to marry someone of the same sex.You're bringing back the very thing I already addressed. Preference is irrelevant to rights.And also, you're sort of backing up what I'm saying. Being gay is something that you are born with (if you wanna argue against that, you're going down.) That means that, if you believe in God, He gave gay people the right to love people who are the same gender as you. Why can't this God-given right extend to the rights that people wish for in life... God gave straight people the right to marry those who he gave them the right to be attracted to, why are gay people any different?We are all born with evil characteristics. They all have to be shaken down.All you have done here is challenge the definition of 'right.' I don't believe in American 'rights' so you're preaching to the choir. I'm not arguing that here. I'm arguing that within the conceptual framework of 'rights' gays already have equal rights as all others. You cannot deny that without going outside of the conceptual framework, which I do not agree with anyways.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Thats why rights in America are wrong. ;) Thats another topic for another day. Its irrelevant to discuss the logical ins and outs of a system, when already operating within that framework. We are operating within that framework, so don't commit another red herring.My point is that we are operating in this framework, and denying gay's rights is going against both the ideals of rights and the goals of the rights we have now.You're bringing back the very thing I already addressed. Preference is irrelevant to rights.You didn't respond to this argument I made, which counters what you addressed.you could be objectively allowed to have choice, or preference. At an ice cream store, I have the right to decide what flavor of ice cream I get. It's still an objective right, the right to choose, and the right to get what you desire, and yet there is a subjective choice involved. You're arguing that it's fair for people who are gay to marry people they are not sexually attracted to because straight people can marry those people and they ARE sexually attracted to them. That would be like saying that at an ice cream store, everyone can only get chocolate. That works out fine for people who like chocolate, which is most everyone, but what about the people who hate chocolate, or are allergic to chocolate, etc.? You're saying that something is fair because the same option is available to everyone?We are all born with evil characteristics. They all have to be shaken down.All you have done here is challenge the definition of 'right.' I don't believe in American 'rights' so you're preaching to the choir. I'm not arguing that here. So, you think being gay is an evil characteristic? And what would lead you to believe that?I'm not really challenging right, you were arguing that gays do not have equal rights. I believed that by that argument, your definition of right was flawed. I'm arguing that within the conceptual framework of 'rights' gays already have equal rights as all others. You cannot deny that without going outside of the conceptual framework, which I do not agree with anyways.See the ice cream argument.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

My point is that we are operating in this framework, and denying gay's rights is going against both the ideals of rights and the goals of the rights we have now.No, you're challenging the framework of rights..... You didn't respond to this argument I made, which counters what you addressed.It doesn't, though.... You can't apply preference to rights. I've told you that so many times. How long does it take for you to realize this?I'm not really challenging right, you were arguing that gays do not have equal rights. I believed that by that argument, your definition of right was flawed.You don't know what you're talking about. I'm banning you from here on. I'm not arguing that gays do not have equal rights... I've been arguing the entire time that they do. You're even given me a quote saying that the notion of rights in America is objective, not subjective. Stop trolling.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

The gay marriage movement is all about the abnormal invading the normal ... the profane invading the holy .. and in a Biblical sense ... the Harlot invading the Bride just as it indicates in Revelation 17 .. they suppress the truth in unrighteousness and they seek to force by law your acceptance of their perversion
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

I do not see no point in it. Homosexuality is an unusual activity.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

It's a right, right-wingers need to get over it...............................................................................................................................................................................
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to sex? Before 1973 when did the supreme court even hint that there may be a right to have sex? The government has been regulating sex since the founding of the country, still do today, and you want them to continue doing so in the future.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

How has the government been regulating sex? What are you even talking about?
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Can you rape a person? Can you have sex with a child? Can you have sex with an animal? Can you marry a family member? Can you marry more than one person at a time?
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

I agree with what the OP has said. Marriage is between one man and one woman. If we change that, people could get married to anyone. You can see the trouble with that.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

No, actually, I cannot see the trouble with that at all.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

I am tired of the gays pushing their agenda. They need to stop. Their movements only angers conservatives. I like the way the Russians respond to their parades.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

Yes, why do conservatives like to be on the wrong side of history?
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Homosexuals already do have the same rights as heterosexuals. How do they not have the same rights? Homosexuals cannot marry those of the same sex, and neither can heterosexuals. Homosexuals can marry those of the opposite sex, and so can heterosexuals.That might be a more valid point if heterosexuals had any interest whatsoever in marrying the same sex. But they don't want it. And homosexuals don't want to marry the opposite sex any more than that. It is an unfair, heteronormative philosophy you espouse. They don't have the right to a marriage in which they would be satisfied. We do. So no, it IS a case of equal rights.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

I am sure they said the same when inter-racial marriage was illegal................................................
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

I'm sorry, what are you disputing?
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Before the religious argument springs up, because I know it will: 1) People are married under many religions and none 2) Marriage has benefits under the state, which are nothing to do with religion3) Many marriages that are unacceptable in modern society are allowed under religions: i.e. rapist-victim marriages, adult-child marriages, forced marriages and polygamy."Marriage is a socially or ritually recognized union or legal contract between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws." ~Cultural Anthropology: The Human Challenge (Well... wikipedia) But more importantly, marriage is an oath between two (or more) people that they love each other and shall live together for the rest of their lives. If two people cannot do this for some legal reason, they are being denied equal rights unless marriage is completely outlawed within that nation.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Could you answer me a question is marriage about love?
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

No. Marriage is about reflecting the relationship of Christ and His church. Love is within this relationship, most assuredly, but to degrade this sacred bond is blasphemy of the most highest sort. That is what both gay marriage and unjustified divorce do.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

That is your religious opinion. People have the right to make their own choices.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

It's not his opinion, it's God. God was the one who established what marriage is and how it should be.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Then let God make gay marriage illegal. Considering the increase numbers of states and nations that are allowing it, it seems he has left it up to us.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

Actually, God is having us Christians do something about it by proclaiming the truth that God stands up for traditional marriage rather than gay marriage. So it seems He has left it up to the Christian people to tell people the truth.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

WHY does God have a problem with homosexuals?
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

It's unnatural and it's not how God intended on us to be.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

How is it unnatural for someone to have sexual attraction to the same gender? It's no more unnatural than heterosexuality is.Besides, if God is meant to be infalliable, then how is it possible to have a deviation from his blueprint of how homo sapiens are "meant to be?"
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

How is it unnatural for someone to have sexual attraction to the same gender? It's no more unnatural than heterosexuality is.God designed us to be attracted to the opposite gender not the same. The reason why they are attracted to the same gender is because God gave them over to what they were in to as what's said in Romans 1. Besides, if God is meant to be infalliable, then how is it possible to have a deviation from his blueprint of how homo sapiens are "meant to be?"I don't get your question.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

God designed us to be attracted to the opposite gender not the same. The reason why they are attracted to the same gender is because God gave them over to what they were in to as what's said in Romans 1.Then this would mean virtually ever other orientation is considered immortal by Christianity; asexuality, sapiosexuality, pansexuality, demisexuality, etc. Again, I don't care about bible verses.I don't get your question.Yeah, figures.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

I agree we should proclaim it but sometimes I think moving through a man made system to proclaim spiritual things is a little silly. we can teach the people, not force the government.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

There is no point in the Bible where God condemns gay marriage. ;)
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

We can actually know that God does condemn gay marriage because of many examples in the Bible. In Genesis, we see that God made male and female and he created them for each other. If he was for gay marriage, God would have created two males or two females but He didn't. Also if you look in Matthew 19:3, the Pharisee's asked Jesus about marriage and Jesus quoted Genesis 2. So yes, Jesus did say something about homosexual marriage even tho it didn't say the word homosexual. He made it perfectly clear in the beginning that marriage is between one man and one women.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

We can actually know that God does condemn gay marriage because of many examples in the Bible. In Genesis, we see that God made male and female and he created them for each other. If he was for gay marriage, God would have created two males or two females but He didn't.That is a stupid argument because he eventually let's gay people get together.Also if you look in Matthew 19:3, the Pharisee's asked Jesus about marriage and Jesus quoted Genesis 2. So yes, Jesus did say something about homosexual marriage even tho it didn't say the word homosexual. He made it perfectly clear in the beginning that marriage is between one man and one women.Talk about taking things out of context. He is clearly talking about divorce being bad:"Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”"The Bible may have condemned gay relationships, but not gay marriage. Mostly because it would be redundant to ban the result of a banned action. It was just a little joke though.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

That is a stupid argument because he eventually let's gay people get together.He gave them over to a deprived mind as it said in Romans 1. Talk about taking things out of context. He is clearly talking about divorce being bad:"Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”"The Bible may have condemned gay relationships, but not gay marriage. Mostly because it would be redundant to ban the result of a banned action.It was just a little joke though.I knew the context of that verse anyway. Still Jesus still quoted Genesis 2 about how the man will leave his parents and be reunited with his wife. What we can know from the beginning is that He does condemn gay marriage.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

He gave them over to a deprived mind as it said in Romans 1.See? I am right.I knew the context of that verse anyway. Still Jesus still quoted Genesis 2 about how the man will leave his parents and be reunited with his wife. What we can know from the beginning is that He does condemn gay marriage.No, he condemned divorce. You condemned gay marriage.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

No, he condemned divorce. You condemned gay marriage.Yes, he condemned divorce but what we can observe for what He said, is that He quoted Genesis 2 about how man and women are meant to be together and basically saying that marriage is for one man and one women and not gay marriage.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

First, if someone asks you about divorce and you give them an answer and they use it against gays those people are real jerks. Second, that doesn't mean gay marriage is a sin. That just means gay marriage is not recognized by God.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

First, if someone asks you about divorce and you give them an answer and they use it against gays those people are real jerks. I dunno where your going at this but okay?  Second, that doesn't mean gay marriage is a sin. That just means gay marriage is not recognized by God.It's still a sin because it's throughout the Bible, it talks about marriage being meant by man and women. Nothing about gay marriage, if they talked about gay marriage then they would have mentioned it in the Bible and even in the beginning when God created man and women to be together.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

It's still a sin because it's throughout the Bible, it talks about marriage being meant by man and women.There is a difference between God not recognizing it as proper and seeing it as a sin, right?Nothing about gay marriage, if they talked about gay marriage then they would have mentioned it in the Bible and even in the beginning when God created man and women to be together.This is the point I was making. They never talk about gay marriage, so He never attacks gay marriage.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

In Genesis, we see that God made male and female and he created them for each other. If he was for gay marriage, God would have created two males or two females but He didn't.Here's the thing: No where in the Bible does it say that Adam and Eve were married! And even if you move past that, there's another big problem with this...Adam and Eve were very specific people. If your claim is that marriage is just for people like Adam and Eve, you can argue that people who are not white cannot get married, people who do not share body parts (Eve was made of a bone of Adam), etc. The genetic difference between everyone is about 0.1% of the genes... that is true between a gay person and a straight person, a white person and a black person, even a male person and a female person. Why are you so focused on gender when there are so many other ways you can spin that argument you just made!
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Nope. Marriage predates Christianity, and even written records.Also, keep in mind, America is not a theocracy. It's marriage is not a biblical based marriage, therefore, you can't use religion as an argument. However, churches should be able to refuse to marry gays, seeing as they are religious.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

Okay, if you're gonna downvote me, dispute my argument or fuck off
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

Again, that is your religious opinion, not fact. People have the right to do what they want. If a same sex couple wants to get married, you have no right to stop them. They are not hurting anyone.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

It is a fact. If you don't like the rules take it up with God because He is the one that established it. Not me, I am only the messenger.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

People have the right to make their own choices. you have no right to force your religious opinion on other people.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

When make people make their own choices it own brings them away from God and it depends on the choice. If they make the wrong choice they are only distancing themselves from God. I am not forcing any kind of religious opinion. So I guess atheists have a right to say their own opinion but when it comes to a Christian's opinion they can't have their own opinion and people say we are "forcing our opinion on others?" People asked what our opinion was and I am only answering. Basically what your telling me is that I shouldn't be giving out for a opinion.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

My give a fuck is broken. Afte3r what you said to me, bugger off.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

That has nothing to do with this debate at all.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

I dont care. Bugger off. I want nothing to do with someone who says I was raped do to possible sin in my life, now step and dont come back without an apology.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

If you didn't care you would have never responded to me in the first place but you did so that means you do care.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: No

What you said was wrong. I cant even believe that you said such a horrible thing. a mind like yours is what makes me hate religion.
Debate: There is no reason for the gay marriage movement....
Side: Yes

His statement is a religious fact. People do have the right to make their own choices. Is anyone saying homosexuals can't have relationships or even hold ceremonies professing their love. However the public has the right to chose to recognize those relationships as valid and religious institutions and businesses absolutely have the right to recognize those relationships.