The Instigator
Reeve
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
vardas0antras
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

DISREGARDING ANY RELIGION, why would homosexuality in general be wrong?

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: 11/12/2010 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,718 times Debate No: 13642
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

Reeve

Pro

Alright, I've seen a lot of arguments for both sides, but the con's always end up involving some form of religion or another. So leaving your religion at the door, i wanna know your unbiased opinion on the matter. Personally i think there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, I'd like to debate this with you.
vardas0antras

Con

Why Is Homosexuality wrong

This Debate
I must first say that just because it doesn't hurt or effect anyone, it doesn't change whatever homosexuality itself is wrong or not. Although I could, I wont argue that it effects people instead I'll say that pride especially when it comes to shy people doesn't have much effect (with the exception of the prideful person itself)on others however its still wrong likewise homosexuality. If my opponent wishes to argue that pride effects other people then I too will argue that homosexuality effects other people (I'm avoiding this because its time consuming and repetitive as in we both had probably debated this) . Needles to say, it would be a waste of time because ultimately both have to do more with morality than with anything else and according to you we should avoid morality. Indeed avoiding morality will be a problem. Wherefore unless I'm forgetting something, I think its established that morality must be avoided.

Explaining Homosexuality
Do you have any proof that homosexuals were born that way? I can most gladly accept that there are biological influences which lead to homosexuality just like I have no problem with accepting biological influences which lead to excessive alcohol consumption:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
The same goes for psychological influences.
If you have no solid proof, I'm afraid we have a problem here. However I wont expand on
this idea because first I want to see your response.

My argument:
My first argument is that homosexuality is wrong because homosexuals don't reproduce dissimilarly to nature where anything that is alive reproduces (Its a characteristic of life):
http://www.essortment.com...
Clarification:
My argument isn't that its immoral to live a lifestyle which doesn't reproduce, we must avoid morality. My argument is that its contrary to the normal course of nature. Hence its wrong.

As you can see I have made it a very short response but this is natural because I have avoided the morality and the effects on others argument. One I avoided because I was told to and the other one because I rarely have short debates. Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
Reeve

Pro

Reeve forfeited this round.
vardas0antras

Con

My opponent has forfeited this round.

Vote Con
Debate Round No. 2
Reeve

Pro

Reeve forfeited this round.
vardas0antras

Con

My opponent has forfeited this round.

Vote Con
Debate Round No. 3
Reeve

Pro

Reeve forfeited this round.
vardas0antras

Con

My opponent has forfeited this round.

Please Vote Con
Debate Round No. 4
Reeve

Pro

Reeve forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Yurlene 6 years ago
Yurlene
@ JimProfit.
Your hate is seething out of you like no other. The only sick and demented on here is you with your extreme "hate" targeted towards the lgbt community. I think that list might describe you, a clinical sociopath. But that description sounds a lot like the Religious Right though and the Phelps clan. Wow, you guys have a lot in common.
Posted by JimProfit 6 years ago
JimProfit
Honestly, if you think only religious people are against homosexuality, you're really really sheltered. I've personally worked with the lgbt, they're just sick and demented. There's no nicer way to put it. Have you been inside the halls of gay unions? I have. And it's a heirachy. (Yes, my spelling sucks) At the bottom is the niave ones who actually believe the crap spewed. Bull dyes, gay men, pretty much all the harmless ones. As you go up the social latter, you encounter pedophiles, group sex, even beastiality, it gets really damn gross and psychotic. I don't need religion to condemn homosexuality, lets just take a random movie like Brokeback Moutain. Brokeback Moutain is supposed to have us side with the gays, and why? Because they're gays? They go behind their wives backs and cheat on them, they sink them into depression, make them feel inadequite, possibly could drive them to suicide or doing something they'll regret. All because "they're homosexual". And thats really what gays believe. That the world revolves around them, and that people should suffer, possibly even die, just so they can have what they want. Which is exactly why they need to be destroyed. They're narccisists, pathological liars, and are devoid of any sortof moral quality that would be commendable to have. You cannot rely on them, you cannot trust them, so why let them live? http://www.mcafee.cc... That is a link to all the symptoms of a clinical sociopath. You cannot in good judgement even name one that gays do not possess.
Posted by Reeve 6 years ago
Reeve
true, and i was only looking for peoples intelligent opinion on the matter, and to see if there were any points that struck me
Posted by GeoLaureate8 6 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Please disregard my last comment. Idk wtf...
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
That is true. However, for arguing "right" and "wrong" there needs to be some moral basis to apply it to. That is why I think this debate is going to break down into a debate over what is "wrong." Should it be applied as for human rights? For procreation?

I mean, the fact is that it exists, so you can't really say it is unnatural. But one can argue that just because something is natural, does not make it "right" (back to the moral basis).

I think by the end of this, voting is just gonna go down to people's personal opinions on the matter.
Posted by Reeve 6 years ago
Reeve
Maybe i should have used the word irrelevant instead, i meant invalid as pertaining to the debate only because no one will ever agree if we use religion as a base for any argument, being that we have freedom to religion.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 6 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Scientologists oppose gays??
Posted by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
Hehe just because it's a religious belief doesn't automatically discount it as invalid, though you could argue that it's irrelevant (or should be) as the basis of infringing upon civil rights in our system :p
Posted by FREEDO 6 years ago
FREEDO
ITZ UNATRIL AN DICKUSTING!i!i!
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
religious argument =/= invalid argument
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bluesteel 6 years ago
bluesteel
Reevevardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06