Animals that exhibit homosexual behavior exist in nature
Debate Rounds (2)
First Round : Acceptance
No use of Google Docs
There will only be two rounds because I don't think we'll need any more than that.
This is not truly going to be a debate, because the statement "Animals that exhibit homosexual behavior exist in nature" is irrefutable fact, established by extensive scientific research, which I provide below.
The research: https://en.wikipedia.org...
List of Animals that exhibit homosexual behavior: https://en.wikipedia.org...
As it clearly says at the beginning of the second link, in order to get on the list, the animals must have...
"documented evidence of homosexual behavior of one or more of the following kinds: sex, courtship, affection, pair bonding, or parenting"
As the statement I support is also supported by countless organizations and the scientific community. I rest my case.
First of all, unlike humans, hen animals hump another, they aren't mating believe it or not, usually they're just declaring dominance. Nextly, just because two animals follow each other around a lot doesn't mean they are gay, infact they only stay together enable to defend larger portions of land, so unless my opponent is going to mistake a police man having a partner for him being gay- gay animals do not exist.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Peepette 5 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: PRO contends that homosexual behavior exist in nature. PRO uses citations to make her argument rather than using them to support an argument. The reader should only need to check the validity of a cit. not read it in full as argument. PRO?s single quote makes the argument against CON contention that homosexuality does not exist in nature; where he rebuts behavior exhibited is for territory or establishing dominance. This is just an assertion with no evidence. This was a very thin debate where neither side put much effort into developing arguments. The win to PRO, merely due to quote. S&G tied, no readability issues. Conduct tied, both respectful. No source points since it was not used to support an argument.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.