Interracial marriages are between a man and a woman. There's a significant difference between them and gay marriage.
many people have argued that interracial marriage did weaken the institution of marriage. And while it's not one you might hear when you are debating suzy jackass in her cozy church surrounding on your weekly ego trip, it's a perfectly good argument and is actually an answer to your question.
you didn't use the divorce argument properly. Here's the context of the argument: isn't
Quote:
|
law about limiting people's freedoms to some extent so that society can function more evenly and fairly? Isn't it accepted to some degree that people don't have the right to make certain choices/?
|
therefore divorce should be outlawed by families. SOCIETY SHOULD BE FAIR SO OBVIOUSLY FAMILIES SHOULDNT GET DIVORCED
What you should have said is that divorce points to the fact that society has already decreased the sanctity/value of marriage -- and or reduced it to a purely legal or economic institution. I'm not really sure what I'd say after that. I'd have to think about it for a while but I'm sure I could draw some distinctions and make some fun arguments.
also i might take advantage of that fact to argue why marriage and the benefits should be separate.
and you so took t his out of context
Quote:
|
Is this the best debating strategy that you can come up with?
|
;/