Posted: Apr 16, 2012 9:46 am
To begin, I would like to thank Lion for agreeing to have this debate with me.
I particularly like the way that the topic of this debate has been phrased, as it perfectly encapsulates the information that I have long been searching for - could there possibly be a worthwhile reason not to allow gay marriage? I submit that there is no good reason not to legalise gay marriage. And, wherever there are benefits for allowing something to happen, in the absence of any good reason not to let it happen, it should be made legal.
I hope I am mistaken that Lion may have tried to paint me as a bigot under the incorrect belief that I have judged his position as wrong without even knowing the reasons for why he holds that position. Leaving aside for a moment his lengthy posting history on this very topic, I will simply say to him that I have yet to come across a worthwhile argument against gay marriage, yet I'm open to the possibility that he will knock my socks off with some stunning, persuasive reason for why I should change my position.
Throughout the debate I will limit the number of arguments I make in favour of legalising gay marriage. My role will be to demonstrate that all of the arguments made against it are insufficient so as to prevent it from occurring. I believe that through his arguments, my opponent will be unable to demonstrate that legalising gay marriage will have any material and/or relevant effect on anyone other than the individuals getting married.
One of the biggest problems that I find with those who argue against gay marriage is that their arguments are often irrelevant with respect to marriage. Lion has already foreshadowed that he plans to argue with respect to family and procreation. This is one of the most common and least relevant arguments. Should he decide to continue with this line of argument, I will demonstrate exactly why it is irrelevant and why it can be appropriately dismissed. Where Lion poses arguments that are relevant (of which I suspect there will be few), my goal will be to demonstrate that what he is arguing for or against is not sufficient to deny gay people from marrying. Should I have time (or words, as it will be), I will look to other possible arguments against gay marriage and demonstrate how they are insufficient or irrelevant.
Lastly, I would like to reveal a point of agreement and two points of contention between myself and Lion. I agree that a line in the sand must be drawn but I believe that such a line should always be re-drawn whenever it is appropriate to do so and in the absence of any reason not to. I don't believe that any "We" Lion is referring to (royal or otherwise) includes myself, many members of the forum, and many people outside of it.
I particularly like the way that the topic of this debate has been phrased, as it perfectly encapsulates the information that I have long been searching for - could there possibly be a worthwhile reason not to allow gay marriage? I submit that there is no good reason not to legalise gay marriage. And, wherever there are benefits for allowing something to happen, in the absence of any good reason not to let it happen, it should be made legal.
I hope I am mistaken that Lion may have tried to paint me as a bigot under the incorrect belief that I have judged his position as wrong without even knowing the reasons for why he holds that position. Leaving aside for a moment his lengthy posting history on this very topic, I will simply say to him that I have yet to come across a worthwhile argument against gay marriage, yet I'm open to the possibility that he will knock my socks off with some stunning, persuasive reason for why I should change my position.
Throughout the debate I will limit the number of arguments I make in favour of legalising gay marriage. My role will be to demonstrate that all of the arguments made against it are insufficient so as to prevent it from occurring. I believe that through his arguments, my opponent will be unable to demonstrate that legalising gay marriage will have any material and/or relevant effect on anyone other than the individuals getting married.
One of the biggest problems that I find with those who argue against gay marriage is that their arguments are often irrelevant with respect to marriage. Lion has already foreshadowed that he plans to argue with respect to family and procreation. This is one of the most common and least relevant arguments. Should he decide to continue with this line of argument, I will demonstrate exactly why it is irrelevant and why it can be appropriately dismissed. Where Lion poses arguments that are relevant (of which I suspect there will be few), my goal will be to demonstrate that what he is arguing for or against is not sufficient to deny gay people from marrying. Should I have time (or words, as it will be), I will look to other possible arguments against gay marriage and demonstrate how they are insufficient or irrelevant.
Lastly, I would like to reveal a point of agreement and two points of contention between myself and Lion. I agree that a line in the sand must be drawn but I believe that such a line should always be re-drawn whenever it is appropriate to do so and in the absence of any reason not to. I don't believe that any "We" Lion is referring to (royal or otherwise) includes myself, many members of the forum, and many people outside of it.