The Instigator
Gencsta
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points

Can you be religious and support homosexuality? (Judaism,Christianity,Islam)

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 871 times Debate No: 46407
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (8)
Votes (4)

 

Gencsta

Con

In this debate I will argue that in order to follow the laws of the Abrahamic religions, one must condemn homosexuality. Now this does NOT mean punish gay people, or even outlaw homosexuality. This only means that one cannot support homosexuality on a personal level if they follow the laws of God.
Debate Round No. 1
Gencsta

Con

First I would like to say the guy in the comment, who said "im religious and I support homosexuality, argument defeated."
Just because you support something without logic doesnt mean you have defeated my argument. This debate will be about reason, not emotion.
The second thing I want to do is ask the contender why she believes you can follow God's laws and support homosexuality.
This is something that boggles my mind. In Judaism, Christianity, and Islam homosexuality is condemned. God calls these actions immoral and wrong.
Now I understand if you could care less about God's laws, but that isnt what I'm asking. Im saying, if someone is truly following God's laws, homosexuality is a sin and immoral to them.
-Evidence from the old testament: "Leviticus 18:22, You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female, it is an abomination."
-Evidence from the Bible: "Romans 1:27, And the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."
-Evidence from the Qur'an: "And the two who commit it (homosexuality) among you, dishonor them both. But if they repent and correct themselves, leave them alone. Indeed, God is ever accepting of repentance and Merciful."
Clearly these quotes destroy any argument that following these religions requires condemning homosexuality.
If those quotes arent enough, I'll remind you of the story of prophet Lot. The prophet of Lot is believed by all three of the religions. He lived in Sodom with his family. The entire city was rampant with homosexuality (and adultery). He and his family were the only good people left in the city. He warned the people about their homosexual ways and said to seek God, but they mocked him. After being instructed by God to leave the city, Lot and his family witnessed the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Based on this indisputable evidence, I simply cannot see how someone can claim to be religious and follow God's laws, and at the same time support homosexuality.
Mikal

Pro

So let's get down to this

My adversary is claiming that you cannot be religious and support homosexuality.

there is a fundamental difference in between being religious and following the teachings of a religion to a point.

Being a religious can essentially be simply believing in a God by itself. You can believe in a God without following the teachings that are presented.

So can you be religious and support homosexuality? Yes you very well can be. You can subscribe to the Christian faith and disagree with the Bible. So you can believe in that God and support gay marriage. You theoretically can believe anything you want. So the resolution is flawed

You most certainly can be religious and support homosexuals, but I think what my adversary was wanting to argue is it possible to follow a Christian life style and support gay marriage. This is what I am going to focus on for the second part of this



Contention 1

The next thing we must look at is can you be a Christian without the bible? If you can disprove the bible and subscribe to the Christian faith then the resolution is also negated. There are a vast majority of Christians that note the stories of the bible are not to be taken literally. I mean Christians already cherry picks verses that are not literal and metaphorical. [1]

So going off the topic at hand all you must do is believe there is a God and accept him to go to heaven according to Abrahamic laws. That subscribes you to the Christian faith. So at the point you accept God you are a Christian and belief in the bible is not required for salvation.

Romans 10:13 - For all those who call upon the name of the lord shall be saved.

So what does it mean to subscribe to the Christian faith? Once you call upon the name of Christ and believe in him you are saved. Belief in the bible is not a necessity. If this where so the thief on the cross would not have made it to heaven. He called upon Christ in his last moment, and Christ promised that he would meet him in paradise. He had never acknowledged the teachings of Christ, just the fact that Christ is the savior. At this point Jesus promised him life in heaven. This goes to show that even from a biblical standpoint belief of the bible is not a requirement

Conclussion

Without belief in the bible as a necessity for salvation one can subscribe to the Christian faith and support homosexuality. The only place where we see that homosexuality is bad is the bible, and per my last few contentions we can see the bible is metaphorical , taken out of context, and belief in it is not required to be a Christian

Look at the resolution one more time

"Can you be religious and support homosexuality? (Judaism,Christianity,Islam)"


The key point I focused on was Christianity. All I needed to do was prove one point accurate to negate the resorption at hand. So again yes you can be religious and Christian and support homosexuality.




[1] http://www.icr.org...
[2] http://biblehub.com...

Debate Round No. 2
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Gencsta 3 years ago
Gencsta
Nobody said anything about showing respect. I dont like homosexuality at all but im never mean or rude to someone because theyre gay. However, if you support homosexuality then you are not supporting the laws of God. What arrogance, to think you have better judgement than God. This is why I am baffled that most people believe in God, yet support homosexuality! It makes absolutely no sense. Unless you're agnostic of course, which then you are just making up your own rules. God talks about hypocrites many times, and says they care not true believers.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
I don't support it per say. However, if they want to like people of the same gender, that is their choice! It wont affect me in any way! How is me showing respect for them because I am not perfect wrong?
Posted by Gencsta 3 years ago
Gencsta
I asked if you can follow the laws of God and still support homosexuality. I thought i made that very clear. He did not answer that at all. Of course you can believe whatever you want, but God clearly condemns homosexuality. Nobody said anything about reaching salvation.
Posted by progressivedem22 3 years ago
progressivedem22
The Bible also condemns, also in Leviticus, eating shellfish and pork, wearing cloth of more than one fabric, having a rounded haircut, working on the Sabbath (Saturday in Jewish culture), and having premarital sex. Yet, many Christians focus on homosexuality.

So if the question is whether you can cherry-pick the Bible, the answer is almost certainly "yes."
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
I'm really curious to see Mikal's rebuttal.
Posted by the_streetsurfer 3 years ago
the_streetsurfer
You can't necessarily support it... But you can just accept it. I'm a christian and I have many gay friends. I don't support what they do but I treat them with respect.
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
I am religious and I support homosexuality. Argument defeated.
Posted by richardk84 3 years ago
richardk84
Not according to a bible such as the "King James Version", no you can't.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by TheHitchslap 3 years ago
TheHitchslap
GencstaMikalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: No refutations due to shorter rounds. Look Mikael had a point: one CAN be religious and still support homosexuality, the two are not one in the same. If your United, you would even rock the rainbow flag on your church during Gay pride. As such, arguments to pro. Con failed to make the distinction, and furthermore con relies on OLD testimate writings...interesting, because the new testimate nullifies the old under Jesus, and he says to love everyone, so unless you've never sinned, you can cast the first stone.
Vote Placed by bluesteel 3 years ago
bluesteel
GencstaMikalTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con would have benefited from another round. As it stands, Con did not have any chance to refute Pro's argument that one can be "religious" while not strictly believing every word of the Bible. Without refuting that argument, Con cannot possibly win. S&G/Readability Point to Pro because Con did not format his argument in a way that made it very readable. The eye likes to see blank spaces.
Vote Placed by Josh_b 3 years ago
Josh_b
GencstaMikalTied
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: good conduct both sides. Pro attempts to separate religious practice from the instructions of religious practice and fails. Also attempts to assert other religions besides those named in the resolution. Con proves that the instruction of abramic religions is clear and definitive.
Vote Placed by YYW 3 years ago
YYW
GencstaMikalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO sufficiently affirmed the resolution, and showed that despite CON's interpretation and scriptural offerings, one can, in fact, be religious and support homosexuality.