Debate on Gay Marriage

I attended the recent debate on gay marriage at Rollins College. The issue is in full swing right now because Florida is attempting to pass a constitution amendment that would ban same sex couples from marrying. I was very disappointed to see that the pro constitutional amendment side of the debate neglected to show up. The philosophy and debate team started out the night by explaining step by step how they attempted to get many people who support the amendment to ban gay marriage to attend this debate. Everyone declined to come, some first agreeing to come and then later withdrawing from the event. I found this to be quite a disservice to the important issue at hand. If there is not open debate the real issues can not be flushed out. It seems to me that so often people are only willing to state their opinions when giving planned speeches in front of audience that already support their ideas. When this occurs though it is simply preaching to the choir and no criticisms can be made and no real defense of that person’s opinions have to be made. I certainly hope that before this issue is on the ballet there are more open and honest debates about the issue so voters can make informed decisions.

However, the philosophy and debate team decided to continue with the debate anyway, splitting up and defending opposite positions. I thought the side that was pro-amendment was fairly transparent in the fact that they did not actually believe what they were arguing. They gave it their best shot but their heart, morals, and beliefs were not behind the argument. They research they had done provided them with facts and arguments but when asked to defend them they were often at lack of answers because they did not truly feel that way. This is why I think it is so important to have people who actually feel passionately about the issue on both sides partake in a real discussion about it. Overall I think it was an interesting debate and did shine some light on the issue. I highly doubt any minds were swayed at this debate however, because again I think it was preaching to the choir.