The Instigator
comeatmebro1010
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
bigpoppajustice
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Being gay is not a sin.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/10/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,965 times Debate No: 16411
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (4)

 

comeatmebro1010

Pro

Sorry, my computer broke and I couldn't answer the last debate at all. This is my new debate and I welcome anyone who is willing to argue with me.
bigpoppajustice

Con

According to the Christian Bible, being gay is considered an act against Christ. Therefore, homosexuality is considered a sin.

"Leviticus 20:13." Holy Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007. Print.
Debate Round No. 1
comeatmebro1010

Pro

Okay, thank you for responding.
I have two very important points to make.
Let's take a look at the Bible, shall we? In the Bible, it states quite clearly in Leviticus 20:13 of the King Jame's Bible:
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be on them.
Notice something? It's an abomination, not a sin. Now, dictionary.com defines an abomination as "anything abominable; anything greatly disliked or abhorred." It also defines sin as "any reprehensible or regrettable action, behavior, lapse, etc.; great fault or offense." Those are different definitions.
Now, let's search through the Bible to see some other abominations:
Deuteronomy: A marriage is not valid if a women is not a virgin, and she shall be executed if she is not.
Mark: Divorce is not allowed.
Other rules:
Not having a round haircut
Not having a tattoo
Not associating with a women on her period.
working on the Sabbath
wearing something of mixed fabrics
Not eating shellfish
Not playing with the skin of a pig (football)
Most Christians I know do not follow any of these rules. So why do they not consider these things sins but being gay a sin? Answer me that, please.
bigpoppajustice

Con

Sin is wrongdoing. If the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination, I'm certain that those are pretty much the same thing. The sinner does not always regret, mind you.

Now, let's search through the Bible to see some other abominations:
Deuteronomy: A marriage is not valid if a women is not a virgin, and she shall be executed if she is not.
Mark: Divorce is not allowed.
Other rules:
Not having a round haircut
Not having a tattoo
Not associating with a women on her period.
working on the Sabbath
wearing something of mixed fabrics
Not eating shellfish
Not playing with the skin of a pig (football)

These points are all irrelevant to the proposition.
Debate Round No. 2
comeatmebro1010

Pro

"Sin is wrongdoing. If the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination, I'm certain that those are pretty much the same thing. The sinner does not always regret, mind you."
You're 'pretty' sure those two things are the same thing.
My point is, being gay was listed as an abomination. Many of the abominations I have listed have been ignored by Christians because they decide those weren't relevant anymore. Responding also to the comment, those are laws from the Old Testament, which Christian also follow. (Ten Commandments, etc.) So if Christians excuse other abominations, why not being gay an list it as a sin?
bigpoppajustice

Con

You're overcomplicating the question. The Ten Commandments aren't the only sins commitable. In they eyes of the Christian Church, homosexuality is as much an abomination as it is a sin. According to their beliefs, you can be forgiven for committing both. Sinning is an immoral act. Homosexuality is considered to be an immoral act according to Christianity.

THEREFORE, homosexuality is a sin AS WELL AS an abomination.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Prodigy35 6 years ago
Prodigy35
The bible was written by many men over the years... Plus, why would "God" create "faulty" humans ?
Posted by jar2187 6 years ago
jar2187
comeatmebro1010 wrote: "So if Christians excuse other abominations, why not being gay an list it as a sin?" which is irrelevant. What a Christian excuses does not negate what it is (if it is anything to be). Christians don't follow a lot of their own rules. Still, some of those rules remain sins to them. Total non-sequitor.

bigpoppajustice wrote: "In they eyes of the Christian Church, homosexuality is as much an abomination as it is a sin. According to their beliefs, you can be forgiven for committing both. Sinning is an immoral act. Homosexuality is considered to be an immoral act according to Christianity." which is nothing more than preaching ad nauseaum. He did not make his case that an abomination and sin are one and the same, and then added a third term, immoral act, without clarifiying that it is the same as 'sin' or 'abomination'. All he's done was appeal to the common intuitions of a church go-er.

They each needed to define the terms 'sin' and 'abomination', in order to clarify their positions. This is something neither of them cdid, which is why the debate seemed as if they were talking past each other...
Posted by Ahijah 6 years ago
Ahijah
In response to the comment these "are for the Jewish law and do not pertain to the Christians."

Romans 1:27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

This is a sin (abomination) however you want to say it. If a person dies in their sin, be in homosexuality, adultery, stealing they will not inherit eternal life. They will die in their sin and be lost in hell.
Posted by bigpoppajustice 6 years ago
bigpoppajustice
Can we limit the voting period, please?
Posted by potatolover 6 years ago
potatolover
I know that I am not in this debate, but I would like to point out that most of those rules that comeatmebro1010 posted are for the Jewish law and do not pertain to the Christians.

I like how you took those rules and used them, but it would have been better if you used them into context as in Jewish law not Christian.

You can read in the Bible also that the ways of the past are no longer necessary to become forgiven of God therefore they have no meaning to today's rules and lifestyle.

Just thought I would throw that out there!
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
comeatmebro1010bigpoppajusticeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by kohai 6 years ago
kohai
comeatmebro1010bigpoppajusticeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro should have used more scientific reasoning. Con had better arguments and easily refuted pro's arguments. It was a poor debate from both sides
Vote Placed by detachment345 6 years ago
detachment345
comeatmebro1010bigpoppajusticeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did better than con, but not by much
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
comeatmebro1010bigpoppajusticeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Simple argument by Pro, but Con could not refute abomination vs sin.