The Instigator
Nemat
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Pro (for)
Winning
28 Points

Does Homosexuality actually exist and why has the issue risen now?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 5 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/12/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,463 times Debate No: 36608
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (5)

 

Nemat

Con

I believe that Homosexuality does not exist in natural humans but instead people become it due to stress, family problems, the feeling of not wanted by anyone, how the person grew up, what he experienced, how the media influenced him/her, and seeing things on the internet. I believe that if a person grew up in a perfectly happy, safe, and loving environment with loving parents and family it is impossible to become a homosexual. Proof of this I give to my background. I am from Afghanistan which is a very conservative and Religious country that follows it's traditional values. There are absolutely no Homosexuals in my country and there will never be any. Why? Because you are born in a Gay free environment and the media is not actively showing it. If one person does sadly become one it can easily be changed by comparing a lifestyle of a homosexual and a normal person. The Homosexual is 10 times more likely to get murdered. That should deter them quite easily. If you are normal you can get a job. Make money. Pursue your dreams and so on. But to leave all that just for pleasure is disgusting. If you somehow don't change. You should remain a celibate. You should stay away from these dangerous and nasty things and save your humanity. Being Gay goes against Natural law. It violates it in every level. Natural law"s most elementary precept is that "good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided." By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him. Thus, he can know the end or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to transform the means that help him accomplish an act into the act"s purpose. Pursue goodness and leave what is seen has evil by almost 80% of the world. If you are Gay you would still want a child but you can't, so what do you do. You adopt one. Sadly that destroys the child's life.It is in the child"s best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex "marriage." A child of a same-sex "marriage" will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model.Same-sex "marriage" ignores a child"s best interests. Homosexual activists argue that same-sex "marriage" is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s. This is completely false. First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.Same-sex "marriage" opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility.If homosexual "marriage" is universally accepted as the present step in sexual "freedom," what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain "avant garde" subcultures are already advocating such aberrations.By letting this happen you will let all sorts of unnatural things as well. It would make the word "marriage" meaningless. The truth is that I cannot get my head round two people of the same sex being in a relationship defined as a marriage, however much they love each other. I hold to a simple traditional view that the word "marriage" can apply only in heterosexual relationships.Homosexuality is unnatural for the most natural of reasons: it prevents continuation of the species.The main job of any life form is to procreate. Without procreation, the life form dies out. Any deviation from the normal that causes an inability to procreate is detrimental to the species, and thus by definition is "unnatural". This would include sterility, deformed genitalia, and homosexuality.
Mikal

Pro

I accept this and will go ahead and jump straight in on the debate. We are debating "does homosexuality actually exist", and why has it arisen now. The first part of this is the only one that that we can actually debate, because the question why has it arisen is more of a forum topic and would have no resolution. He would have to give a reason as to why he believes it has arisen to debate this.

So by my adversaries choice of topic he must to show homosexuality does not exist, and I have to show that it does exist. This will actually be relatively easy. I will still address all his contentions and misguided world view throughout the rest of this debate just to be polite. Remember the burden of proof is on him to show that in fact homosexuality does not really exist. My job is to undermine his argument, and give valid reasons as to why it does exist. So let us begin with the two terms we will be discussing.

Homosexuality - of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another member of the same sex

Exist - to have being in a specified place or with respect to understood limitations or conditions

So by definition we are debating does direct sexual desire toward opposite members of the same sex have a specified place in or is understood to be actually taking place within the world as we know it. The answer to this is obviously yes. The only thing that I must do to win this debate is to show you a real, living, eating, breathing gay guy/girl and at that point I have proven that homosexuality actually exists.

So meet Ellen DeGeneres one of the most popular figure heads of the gay right movement in America. She is in fact is gay and has stated so multiple times.






So by basic logic and arguably a bad choice of debate, my adversary has already lost this.

http://www.pewresearch.org...
http://www.merriam-webster.com...




So now since that would not make much of a debate, I will still address some of his points. While they are completely irrelevant to the topic of actually proving whether or not homosexuality does exist, I will still respond to them accordingly.


Rebuttal 1

"I believe that Homosexuality does not exist in natural humans but instead people become it due to stress, family problems, the feeling of not wanted by anyone, how the person grew up, what he experienced, how the media influenced him/her, and seeing things on the internet."

This is already a fallacy. He is stating that without the internet or media homosexuality would never have occured. So let use basic logic with this. The actual act of a girl being with a girl or guy with a guy had to start at some point in time. At some point two girls were sitting around really bored, and decided hey lets mess around. At some point there had to be an initial point and first time for this to actually happen. So there was a first "gay couple", in a way. Since the word gay had never been coined, the media or internet could not have influenced this. So it did occur naturally and without the media or internet having a hand in it.

You may be able to state, the media and internet make it more rampant because of how open and public it is. That is a debatable point. You could even say without the attention it gets, there would be far less homosexuals, but to say that it would never have happened without the internet or media is an error in logic.


Rebuttal 2

" I am from Afghanistan which is a very conservative and Religious country that follows it's traditional values. There are absolutely no Homosexuals in my country and there will never be any. Why? Because you are born in a Gay free environment and the media is not actively showing it."

In this same area women get their face burned off with battery acid for trying to learn to read because it is against the Quran. It is very religious orientated, and one of the most dangerous modern areas that is actually civilized. In the Quran it actually advises you to rain down stones on gay couples. Even in modern Afghanistan if someone is shown to be gay, they could face the death penalty. It is actually one of the few (maybe around 70 or so) countries that condone the death penalty in cases of homosexuality. So your statement that you never see it because of the environment is true, but it is not because of the fact that people naturally would never try it. If they did try it, they possibly and most likely would be killed.


http://islamqa.com...
http://www.answering-islam.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://deathpenaltynews.blogspot.com...



Rebuttal 3


"If you are normal you can get a job. Make money. Pursue your dreams and so on. But to leave all that just for pleasure is disgusting."

This statement is so obliviously incoherent and stupid I had to address it. You can get a job if you are gay actually, in fact if you refuse a job to someone who is gay it can be accompanied with a ten million dollar fine. Gay people have happiness to, and actually have a higher success rate in marriage than most religious people or hetero sexual couples. I am also sure they pleasure each other quite a lot, just like any couple does, but they are not leaving any of it for pleasure. It is just a perk with being someone you care about.

Also I would advise you to look into Ellen more. She is quite gay, quite rich, and probably more happy than most of us ever will be.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...





Rebuttal 4

" If you are Gay you would still want a child but you can't, so what do you do. You adopt one. Sadly that destroys the child's life.It is in the child"s best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. "

Actually if you did any type of fact checking there are more options than just adopting. Donating sperm is another option. Essentially give your sperm to another person and they can bear the child. It is a way to actually control the genetics of the child as well, and gives you the option for them to actually have less medical conditions.

Also to say gay couples who raise a child would potentially mess that child's life up is not correct. Actually gay marriage is becoming quite popular in the new generation, so people who are gay are beginning to face less and less discrimination and it continues to decline as time goes on. We are already legalizing it a few states in America with more following in the future. It is still a long battle, but one that is being fought hard.

Also children of gay couples show higher test scores, and lower failure rates throughout school. They are also inclined to score higher on standardized tests, and be very inept in the arts.

http://news.stanford.edu...


Rebuttal 5

"First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.Same-sex "marriage" opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility.If homosexual "marriage" is universally accepted as the present step in sexual "freedom," what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain "avant garde" subcultures are already advocating such aberrations.By letting this happen you will let all sorts of unnatural things as well. It would make the word "marriage" meaningless. The truth is that I cannot get my head round two people of the same sex being in a relationship defined as a marriage, however much they love each other. I hold to a simple traditional view that the word "marriage" can apply only in heterosexual relationships.Homosexuality is unnatural for the most natural of reasons: it prevents continuation of the species.The main job of any life form is to procreate. Without procreation, the life form dies out. Any deviation from the normal that causes an inability to procreate is detrimental to the species, and thus by definition is "unnatural". This would include sterility, deformed genitalia, and homosexuality."


This is the argument a lot of people try to argue against gay marriage with. If you love another person of the same sex you possibly may want to screw a goat. Liking someone who is another living human, within the realm of reality that exists within our civilian will not drive anyone to have sex with an animal unless they are already mentally deranged. It is no also saying it is okay to be a pedophile. Can you justify any of this? Sure you can justify anything, but the law and the moral objectivity within our society would have to bend to that. It could be shown by a philosophical view that it could in fact lead to this line of logic, but it has never happened so you are just making an assumption by saying this. You can justify anything with philosophy in some ways because of the subjectivity within it.

You could say because eating animals is legal, it would possibly lead to cannibalism so we should all be vegans. This is incoherent and the same line of logic that you are presenting.

In closing

In the first few sentences I have already shown that homosexuality in fact does exist. I even went on to address each of Cons arguments. Him saying that homosexuality does not exist, is illogical. It is like saying apples to do exist. We openly see it everyday, so the evidence speaks for itself

Thank you.





Debate Round No. 1
Nemat

Con

Hello Mikal,

I am glad that someone intelligent decided to join and debate. I would like to say that you give very good reasons and you are really good. I myself I'm only 14 and live in Canada. I immigrated to Canada when I was 3 from Afghanistan fleeing war. I came here as a refugee and and me and my family lived a really hard life back in the refugee camps. I am a excellent student and I'm about to start grade 9. I am academically very good at school and love to debate. I am seen as socially very liberal in comparison to other people in Afghanistan yet when I came here I am seen as socially very conservative. So in other words conservative people here are my country's liberals. Anyways back to the debate. I sadly worded the topic wrongly cause I was meaning to say the Homosexuality does not naturally exist and is caused later on life due to various reasons. I thank you for addressing my several other points I made. So I once again apologize for not making that clear. In a way I am correcting myself Homosexuality does not exist naturally and has been made by humans to distract us from other world events and problems. So in a way it does exist but it is a mere product of lust that has no real place on earth. I see you have brought one of the most famous Gays in the world. She has said it multiple times and it is true she is one but why she became one is really important. I just don't understand her stupidity in this choice. If only she grew up in a Gay free environment then she would happily be married and have children. Your first Rebuttal is sadly useless. In the modern age the media influences us on how we think and see the world. Obviously if it didn't exist the proportion of Gay would fall. In places where the media is promoting it such as in Canada, USA, Parts of Europe, and Oceania you see much more Gays in relation to places where the media is either neutral or actively discouraging it. I am against the argument of two girls/guys being together long ago and becoming the first couple cause that would be impossible unless they got lost. Even if they did chances are they would care more about finding a way back home than making out with each other. In most ancient cultures houses were joined together and even if you were married you still lived with your parents. The chance of 2 girls/ boys being together and starting it is zero. I believe once ideas starting spreading Homosexuality also came with that spread of both good and bad knowledge. In this case Homosexuality being bad knowledge. I agree that that without the media it would still happen cause as I pointed out it happens cause of various reasons including family problems. Now to talk about my Home country. Afghans are illiterate and 80% of women can't read and 60% of men can't read. If I was a religious leader I could say anything and say it came from the Quern and they would believe me cause they can't read. Afghans need to educate themselves and not allows take the word of religious leaders. Women's rights have a long way to go and hopefully one day all afghans can go to school. That is dream that I would love to see happen in my lifetime. In the Quran Homosexuality is only mentioned once. In Surah 7 verses 80-84 it says"And (We sent) Lot when he said to his people: What! do you commit an indecency which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males in lust besides females; nay you are an extravagant people. And the answer of his people was no other than that they said: Turn them out of your town, surely they are a people who seek to purify (themselves). So We delivered him and his followers, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind. And We rained upon them a rain; consider then what was the end of the guilty." So the people of Lot got destroyed cause of there sexuality and cause they refused to believe in one God. I support this cause I am a Muslim and always will be a Muslim. It was also only the men who did the act which makes it worst. In Afghanistan there is a death penalty but no one has ever been killed cause of homosexuality in it's history. That law has never been applied. I support the death penalty against Homosexuality and wish for it to be applied internationally. Naturally no one would ever true it is cause it doesn't exist. If they did try they would be killed yes but if there are any why not go public. Better to die than remain Gay. Rebuttal 3. If I was an employer my conscious would make me turn every Gay applicant I knew and obviously I wouldn't say cause you are Gay you don't get the job but I'll make an excuse. There are thousands more like me. So technically it is lower. Again Ellen gets paid to pretend to be Gay so the media can control us. She can't prove it. I would say that maybe the Gays here are happier cause it is gay friendly but not in a majority of countries. Overall the world Gay community is not happier. Rebuttal 4. I know there are many options cause there are hetro couples that can't bring children either. The child's life would be destroyed cause first of all he would be bullied. He would not know how other children feel like. Like I said it is becoming popular due to the media. Still they face discrimination. I hope states keep that ban and hopefully America will try to stay pure. Your last point is quite false. There are more hetro scientists, presidents, lawyers, doctors. Personally I feel offended cause I score high on tests and do not want to be compared with a sub human person. Homosexuality is mentally deranged so it is easy to compare to someone that does an animal. There pretty much the same. Homosexuality is bending my morals so is pedophile. One is illegal. I want both to be illegal. Do you have proof that eating animals leads to cannibals. No you don't. In my closing. Homosexuality does not happen naturally. It is a human product used by western governments to distract us from the millions of other issues. The people who say they are Gay are paid and they are all stupid. Homosexuality should be illegal and the world must act now before it spreads and leads to human destruction. I personally think that Homosexuals should be charged with crimes against humanity cause they indirectly and openly call for the destruction of the human race. They should be executed on live tv so other people don't fall for the governments trap and not destroy their lives just cause of a couple of millions of dollars. Gays are really good actors so they can convince anyone they are Gay. Anyways hope to hear from you soon.
Mikal

Pro

I have no idea whether my adversary is trolling, mentally deranged, or just believes some of the most ignorant statements that I have ever had the chance to read. I congratulate him on his grades and his new home in the US, and sincerely hope and wish that his primitive mindset evolves over the next few years.

Rebuttal 1

"I was meaning to say the Homosexuality does not naturally exist and is caused later on life due to various reasons."

You mention that homosexuality would never happen naturally. Remove humans from the equation. I have a gay dog named miko. This is literally no joke. He likes to hump other male dogs, and has no problem with it. This is quite common in some animals to. So to say that it does not occur naturally and is human made is illogical. Animals are not effected by outside issues such as media. They are primitive, and yet it happens there as well.

A quote from a study recently done

"IN THE LAST DECADE, however, Paul Vasey and others have begun developing new hypotheses based on actual, prolonged observation of different animals, deciphering the ways given homosexual behaviors may have evolved and the evolutionary role they might play within the context of individual species. Different ideas are emerging about how these behaviors could fit within that traditional Darwinian framework, including seeing them as conferring reproductive advantages in roundabout ways. Male dung flies, for example, appear to mount other males to tire them out, knocking them out of competition for available females. Researchers speculate that young male bottlenose dolphins mount one another simply to establish trust and form bonds — but those bonds actually turn out to be critical to reproduction, since when males mature, they work in groups to cooperatively gain access to females."

Essentially saying that when trying to establish dominance over another animal, it could lead to the idea. Thus allowing it to happen naturally. You could argue that the context in which the act is done is different, but it is still a homosexual act due to how we define it.


Rebuttal 2

" If I was a religious leader I could say anything and say it came from the Quern and they would believe me cause they can't read. Afghans need to educate themselves and not allows take the word of religious leaders. "

This is entirely the point that I am trying to make. It does not occur that often over there due to this issue. If you removed the penalties and punishment and people did not have to live in fear, you would be surprised how far the culture would evolve. Anything that could warrant a death penalty or could lead to someone being entirely rejected within the society is a huge deterrent. This is the primary cause of the low numbers of homosexuals and literate people who are in that country.


Rebuttal 3

"Ellen gets paid to pretend to be Gay so the media can control us."

You state that she is not happy and could be happy. You can not define or label if someone is or is not happy. This is illogical and such a failure in logic that I verily can produce words for it. If they are satisfied with their life, they are quite happy. Regardless of whether you think so or not.

Also the statement that she gets paid to pretend to be gay is just ignorant. I have no idea how to even respond to this. You would essentially have to say that every person whom is gay, is acting and they are all straight. Therefore no gay people exist. If you are actually stating this, you have my condolences for the mental deterioration that you are suffering from.


Rebuttal 4

" If I was an employer my conscious would make me turn every Gay applicant I knew and obviously I wouldn't say cause you are Gay you don't get the job but I'll make an excuse."

This could possibly happen but is not quite the case. Most companies would get pinned with this and even possibly make an excuse. The exact opposite logic could be used, because of the lack of facts you have shown. I could say if I was an employer i would always hire people because they are gay, and could make up a different reasons and explain it away and say they are overly qualified. Again this point is irrelevant. You would actually have to present studies to show that gay people are less likely to get jobs. Which you have not shown, I have also shown in sources the repercussion of denying someone a job because of their sexual preference.


Rebuttal 5

" Like I said it is becoming popular due to the media. Still they face discrimination. I hope states keep that ban and hopefully America will try to stay pure. Your last point is quite false. There are more hetro scientists, presidents, lawyers, doctors. Personally I feel offended cause I score high on tests and do not want to be compared with a sub human person"

This point is not false and I have cited it with sources to show they normally have higher test scores. It is not saying that heterosexual people do not make good scores, it is showing through studies that children from gay couples tend to score higher on tests and have lower repetition rates throughout school. Meaning they are less likely to fail a Grade.

Comparing yourself to a sub human? I will try not to rant on this to much for fear of forfeiting conduct. You can call someone not human and that is your opinion, but along the same line of logic I could call Muslims a Hindrance to society and subhuman because of their outdated belief structure and the negative effects that it has on society. To say a gay person is a "sub" human is a direct reflection of your lack of tolerance and demonstrates that you have a limited worldview.

Rebuttal 6

"Homosexuality should be illegal and the world must act now before it spreads and leads to human destruction. I personally think that Homosexuals should be charged with crimes against humanity cause they indirectly and openly call for the destruction of the human race. They should be executed on live tv so other people don't fall for the governments trap and not destroy their lives just cause of a couple of millions of dollars."

I am now convinced you are trolling, or you literaly are the perfect example of a religious fanatic and why people like Sam Harris take a stand agaisnt the dangers of Islam. This is such an igroant and mentally challeneged statement, that I really do not see the need to address it further.



In Closing.

My adversary has still not met his BOP. I have shown that homosexuality does in fact exist.

He claims that "All gays are being paid to be pretend to be gay". If you believe the argument is as illogical as it sounds, we are in the same boat. I have shown that in fact homosexuality does exist, and addressed everyone of his misguided and intolerant stances.
Debate Round No. 2
Nemat

Con

If the definition of trolling is a provocative posting on the Internet intended to incite an angry response then I am not. I am in no intention of making you angry. I am simply stating my views. Like I said I am from a completely different culture so my views are totally different from yours. I am not mentally deranged as I am a simple teenager who loves to talk a lot and to discuss things like politics. I live in Canada which is more liberal than USA. My views will obviously evolve over time but for now I believe most of the things I posted. I am sorry to those who are offended especially the "Gay" community. Back to the debate. The reason your dog might do it is cause there are no females around or females are taken. It is possible that Sex ratios in dogs are not completely 1:1. Most species do not have 1:1. In nature there are usually fights over mating. When for example all females are taken than a male might be forced to do it just temporally and not to a completely full pleasure. This happens when males out number females and vice versa. Humans on the other hand have almost equal number of both genders and it will stay like it. Animals are forced to do it and do not chose to do it for fun. Humans are influence by the government and media that supports it. That study shows that they do it not out of pleasure both in order to gain a female. They are not attracted to males. Rebuttal 2 Removing the penalities will have no effect. The family would kill the person. The government of afghanistan has only control of the capital. The rural areas fall under traditional customs and laws and also by the Taliban. What we need is to deter people from making that choice so the law most stay in place. Women rights and religious and ethnic minorities rights should evolve. I want my country to become free and safe and want it to become democratic. I am against the old customs and traditions they have. Especially the forcing of girls to marry at a young age. The abuse of women. The death penalty should be used against serious crimes that of course includes homosexuality. Rebuttal 3. I am in no position to call someone happy or sad but I can give a good guess. It may be right or it may be wrong. How do you know she doesn't get payed. I want proof. I don't care what they say in front of newspapers and tv. I want proof. No proof means I will follow the Theory that they are being payed so we can forget the world's real problems. It is possible no Gay people actually exist. Who knows. I hope the government can remove this policy. Rebuttal 4 Well I may not have studies to proof it but there are millions of people like me who would do it. That decreases the chance even if the chance decreases by 0.01%. Rebuttal 5. I have not seen a Gay President. Yes they are sub human cause they practice things that are sub human. End of story. They are against Human nature. Rebuttal 6. Like I said I am not trolling. I believe with full heart. Islam is a perfect religion with no flaws. Sam Harris also gets payed by the government. It is true. You don't have to answer it at all. Like I said The topic should have been called Homosexuality does no naturally exist. I am a Muslim and like I said a very liberal one compared to saudi arabia, iran, iraq, and my own country afghanistan. I am not a fanatic. There is no such thing. Islam is Islam. There is only one version with different views. I for one disagree with my culture mixing some pre islamic things with islam such as holy rocks you wear. My country is islamic but some people lack decent knowledge of it. There is no God but Allah and Muhammed is the messenger of Allah. May peace and blessings be upon you and may I hear from you soon.
Mikal

Pro

This is a clarification but when you call someone a "sub" human or stupid because of a sexual preference, it is quite possible someone can view you the same way. Have I took pokes at your beliefs? Sure I have but it is a viable response when you deliberately poke at an entire belief structure.

" The people who say they are Gay are paid and they are all stupid. "

" They should be executed on live tv "

" I just don't understand her stupidity in this choice"

When you make remarks like this, it is a viable response for me to call religion or Islam stupid, or say Muslims are sub human. With using your line of logic it is the next viable step that someone would take to arrive at that conclusion. By definition you are a fanatic. You are not a liberal nor conservative in US logic. When you state someone should be executed for something because of what they believed, and this is fueled with religious intentions it is a text book fanatic. Fanatic meaning someone who would make choices they normally would not, if you took religion out of the equation.


Rebuttal 1

"Homosexaulity is not natural"

You have completely derailed this point. The fact that in can happen without outside influences allows it to happen naturally. It is not the fact of why they are doing it, but animals can commit homosexual acts.

Lets break this down. I would like to start by defining certain terms, like what is ‘natural’, ‘normal’ and ‘human’? Natural is something that is found in the nature without the intervention of man. Trees, rocks, mountains are natural, while plastic is artificial. Sex, suckling, reproduction, baby care, also can be natural since it is found in certain higher order animals. These are natural and biological. Feelings, conscience, a sense of justice, the ability to produce music and art, etc, are human, and not necessarily found even in higher order mammals. These are natural and in addition, they are human. Now, do we accept everything that is biological and natural as acceptable? My adversary would even have to say no to this. Killing another human can easily be shown to be natural, but we do not accept it. 99 percent of the time unless it is out of self defense we do not. There are certain traits which are found in humans, like war, killing for sport, rape, etc, which are natural to humans but not necessarily desirable. Therefore a certain sense of law and order and its affiliated institutions are introduced, which are entirely human, to suppress, control or maybe even offset certain human traits. Therefore, though certain things are natural, we consider some of them to be inhuman. Now what is normal? When something deviates from what is expected, it is 'not normal'. For example, deafness or blindness is considered 'not normal'. It is deficiency or a handicap by which a person will not function the same way as any normal person would (of course, this is highly debatable and I am just using this to make a point).

A study by Against Nature shows that

""Homosexuality has been observed for more than 1,500 animal species, and is well documented for 500 of them."

This is quite natural. For you to state that it is not natural is not entirely correct. Also since we are defining normal by what is socially acceptable. It is also very socially acceptable at this point


http://www.psychologytoday.com...


Rebuttal 2

"Removing the penalties will have no effect. The family would kill the person"

This is the entire point that I am making and you keep derailing it. If someone happened to be a homosexual and was open about it they would face a severe punishment. This acts a deterrent, and is a variable in the equation. That is where the small numbers of homosexuals are coming from. If you took Islam out of Afghanistan and they took on modern western philosophy and it was adopted, you would see a drastic increase in the number of gay people. There are probably a lot of people who think or know they are gay, but would never attempt to say so for fear of persecution. So to say that in your country it never happens, therefore it should work that way everywhere is a fallacy. The united states doesn't kill someone for being gay, we actually give them the same rights as married couples and encourage it.

There are probably some people in your country who wish to convert to Christianity or atheism, but the same line of logic applies. You will not see those numbers because of the consequences that would come from it.


Rebuttal 3

"I am in no position to call someone happy or sad but I can give a good guess. It may be right or it may be wrong. How do you know she doesn't get payed. I want proof"

Again you are missing the line of logic. My point is to show you that there is in fact one gay person in the world. It does not have to be Ellen, it can be anybody. At that point your initial statement to be false. You are saying that every gay person is acting and is getting paid for it. You state this.

"Gay people are good actors"

For this statement to have any logical sense to it, you would have to apply it to every gay person and go as far to say there is no gay people because they are all getting paid to be gay. That is the only way that your claim "Does homosexuality actually exist", would stand. If there is one gay person, then it does in fact exist.

Just on a side note, you can not prove she is getting paid to be gay. This is arguing a negative. It is like arguing a God or the Illuminati. You can apply basic reason and assume the simplest solution in this circumstance. Is it more probable that every gay person in the world is being paid to be gay, or that there is one genuine gay person. Seeing and knowing a lot of gay people, they get far to much pleasure out of giving pleasure to each to be faking it. A lot of girls would argue that other girls please them better than guys because they know exactly what they want. It is highly improbable to assume everyone in the world is putting on a giant act.


Rebuttal 4

"Well I may not have studies to proof it but there are millions of people like me who would do it"

You have almost conceded to this point by admitting that. You offer no response and just say that because there are a lot of straight people who pass with high scores, this study is inaccurate. In fact you have proven my point. Lets use basic math to break this down

Lets just pick a random number for the earths population and say that 100,000 people exist in the world.

Lets then say that 90,000 are straight and 10,000 are gay. We will use x for straight and y for gay

x=(90,000)

y=(10,000)

So let us say that 10 percent of straight students do not do well on tests, and repeat grades.

So ( X / 10) = 9,000

So there are 9,000 students who are straight that are failing school. Lets give this value the letter N

So lets compare N to Y. Just in sheer numbers alone, the number of people that are failing school almost equal the entire population which is Y.

Lets them assume that because of variables within the home life that 2,000 out of the total number of Y pass and do better on tests. We are going to give this variable M

M is still significantly smaller than N. It is still 7,000 less students, but we are going by percentage. So we would then use this

(M / Y) = .2(or 20 percent)

Even though M is a much smaller number than N, when judging by percentage we can see that a higher percentage of the gay community are passing school than the heterosexual community.



Rebuttal 5

" I have not seen a Gay President. Yes they are sub human cause they practice things that are sub human. End of story. They are against human nature"

Irrelevant to proving your point. Again I can argue that because of the impact Muslims have on society they are "sub" human, because they condone such act as murder. As I stated earlier, girls who have been caught trying to learn to read have had their face burnt with battery acid. This could be considered "sub" human. Before you take the time to call someone a "lesser" human, take the time what it really means to be human. You say that it is characterized by the advancement of a species only, and Islam is so far from this that it is quite possibly characterized as "sub" human by your logic.



In closing.

My adversary has still not met his BOP and shown that homosexuality in fact does not exist. For him to do this he would have to show that every gay person or everyone who claims to be gay is in fact really not gay. This is impossible.

I have addressed all of his contentions and shown why they are flawed. Until he is able to show that homosexuality does in fact not actually exist. The most logical assumption to assume the obvious, that gay people are in fact real.








Debate Round No. 3
Nemat

Con

Since this debate is going nowhere I will tell you my final views and that is it. I was joking about the conspiracy that the government pays certain people to act Gay because certainly someone would have refused and told the public about it. I think that some people are born Gay and I feel very sorry for them. Though I believe that a majority of them do it out of choice and influence from the media. Gay people are still people but they are scared for life and are likely to live a bad life. Not all of them but quite a few. They are human but what they do is disgusting and gross but they can't help themselves and it is sort of like an addiction. I believe that if someone is born Gay they should try to abstain from Homosexuality acts and remain celibate. I believe that parents who have Gay children committed a serious sin and God punished them by making their child Gay. It is the parent's fault. If the parent's were good chances are there children would be normal. I still support the death penalty in Afghanistan cause that is unchangeable. As long as the people of Afghanistan want it I support it. Here in the western world they don't so I think it shouldn't be implemented. Laws should happen from support of people. If for example canada implements the death penalty I would not support it cause it goes against the wish of the people and the law would be undemocratic. Recent polls show that 80% of canadians support Gay marriage and it is cause of that Gays are allowed to marry. I am in no position to change how people think. I believe that each country must do what it's people want. If the people support it it should be passed. This goes for all issues such as abortion, legalization of marijuana, etc. One country must not force it's culture on another. IT may be legal here and I respect that and I will in no way disrupt it. Though Canada and other countries must not implement their laws and values on others. If someone for instance is Gay in an anti Gay country he should be allowed to leave and immigrate somewhere where it's safe. They are human just as I am and they have the same rights here. Let us muslims decide how we rule our countries though the current situation in the middle east is very much unstable. I support the democratic movements that are happening and I hope these secular dictators leave and get replaced with Democratically elected leaders regardless of who it is. I would even support a refurendum on allowing Gay rights in the muslim world and you'll find a very strong and clear majority against it. Though as time progresses things might change. Human rights should expand and move forward. If the Gay community feels threatened than they should just copy the jews and make a new homeland in Canada. I'm sure my Government wouldn't mind. All the Gay people can move their and live free of abuse and persecution. They are humans and they deserve protection but if it was someone I knew I would talk to them and tell them to either change or abstain. I will not allow him/her to do anything. As a teenager my life is complicated. I am in two worlds at once and in many issues my brain has trouble choosing which side is true and right but for now my religion and cultural background is more important. I am a proud Canadian of Afghan origin and I will support Canada. I am glad I live in a safe and democratic country free from poverty and I have a chance to go to school. I try real hard in school and I'm trying my best to become something great and to help Afghanistan rebuild after more than 30 years of war. My only wish is to see both Canada and Afghanistan advance and to get better. I view both of them as my country and I support both of them. Human rights are for all even if that person is cursed and living a bad life. I feel sorry that they are Gay but sadly some are stuck with it and they can't change. Nevertheless they are humans. I do not hate them I just view what they do as very weird strange and gross and very disgusting. Hopefully one day the world will be a better place with no war, poverty, discrimination, and full human rights everywhere. The only thing that is standing in the way is western hypocrisy and politics, and some religious extremist. I am a Muslim and nothing will change my belief. Islam is what keeps me from drinking, doing drugs, going out late at night, and anything stupid. Without it I would be playing video games all day and be skipping school. I thank my religion for making me successful in school. Homosexuality does exist and it has arisen now cause of the liberalization of the western world. I believed all of this before this debate but cause it was my first I decided to go from neutral to extreme right. Like I said I am a Liberal in Afghanistan but a conservative here. Hope to hear from you soon and I am really sorry to both you and some people are found it slightly offensive.
Mikal

Pro

"Since this debate is going nowhere I will tell you my final views and that is it. I was joking about the conspiracy that the government pays certain people to act Gay because certainly someone would have refused and told the public about it"


" I think that some people are born Gay and I feel very sorry for them"


" I still support the death penalty in Afghanistan cause that is unchangeable. As long as the people of Afghanistan want it I support it. "




And Most importantly


" Homosexuality does exist "


He states in fact homosexuality does exist, thefore I will take this as a concession. He also says he was joking with alot of his arguments. I do not think I need to respond any further and we can see he has all but conceded. He agrees that homesexuality in fact does exist. When he admitted that, this debate is over.

He just offers up his view on the subject and does not address any of my respondes. Therefore we can conclude that in fact homsexuality does exist. Thank you for reading this debate.
Debate Round No. 4
Nemat

Con

I think I have just won my first debate
Mikal

Pro

I really don't think I can respond any further. He has agreed to my side of the argument and did not prove that homsexuality does not exist.

He even directly stated that in fact it does exist.

At this point, the debate was over. There is nothing further to prove, because he disagreed with the stance he took and admitted most of his arguments were jokes. In addition to this he completely ignored all of my rebuttals in the last round and derailed the subject.

When he claimed "Homosexuality does exist", there is nothing left to debate. Seeing as how he took Con on this argument. He would have to show homosexuality does not exist, which he failed to do so

Thank you for everyone who took the time to read this, and best of luck to my adversary in his future endeavors in the US. I sincerely hope for your own growth that some of them do change.

In closing

He did not meet his BOP nor come close to resolving the resolution.
Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by LevelWithMe 3 years ago
LevelWithMe
"I think I have just won my first debate."

0-22. Wow, was that prediction off, or what?
Posted by Nataliella 3 years ago
Nataliella
"Gays should be executed on live TV". That's just messed up and plain wrong.
Posted by GlobalThinker 3 years ago
GlobalThinker
14 years old had a relatively good argument. However, i cannot disagree that you are quite bias to your beliefs, religion, back ground and influence of your family. You have to deal with this issues distant from your beliefs and see it as a fact and treat it with logics. Always keep in mind Humans as myself and you are creature who are born with curiosity and die with questions that will never be solved. Like Do God exist? Are there after life? Is there different dimensions in space? Things that are beyond our capabilities because we will only know them by fully scoping into space and we haven't even lived outside earth yet. So, you simply never know anything perfectly. If that is true then we cannot ever assume to be absolutely true and always open for changes. Therefore, in this topic especially, just respect there are different people with different reasons. Maybe it is partly environmental and maybe it is genetic. Who cares? Let them be if they truly believe they are right.
Posted by GlobalThinker 3 years ago
GlobalThinker
14 years old had a relatively good argument. However, i cannot disagree that you are quite bias to your beliefs, religion, back ground and influence of your family. You have to deal with this issues distant from your beliefs and see it as a fact and treat it with logics. Always keep in mind Humans as myself and you are creature who are born with curiosity and die with questions that will never be solved. Like Do God exist? Are there after life? Is there different dimensions in space? Things that are beyond our capabilities because we will only know them by fully scoping into space and we haven't even lived outside earth yet. So, you simply never know anything perfectly. If that is true then we cannot ever assume to be absolutely true and always open for changes. Therefore, in this topic especially, just respect there are different people with different reasons. Maybe it is partly environmental and maybe it is genetic. Who cares? Let them be if they truly believe they are right.
Posted by Nemat 3 years ago
Nemat
Sorry about the last comment
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
*Deranged

That makes a tad bit crazy. Which is an accurate statement. Again I am pretty sure this is a troll debate, just because of the probability someone actually believing all that is very unlikely
Posted by Shadowguynick 3 years ago
Shadowguynick
If he comes from Afghan, then it is realistic that his beliefs are that. That is just how he has been raised, but you didn't need to call him mentally handicapped. He just grew up in an extremely conservative environment. I don't believe he is trolling, because he seems to legitimately believe his views, and even if he was you would only be feeding the troll. There was no reason to insult him :/
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
Ahahahaha "People who say they are gay are paid and they are all stupid". That's flat-out hilarious. It's literally the gayest conspiracy ever! Seriously could not force myself to read anymore of that.... surprised I even got that far.
Posted by Nemat 3 years ago
Nemat
Message to everyone: My views are the views of my culture and my country. That is 33 million people. Like I said I have been western educated and am slightly less conservative than my parents, uncles, and everyone else back home (The Taliban would kill me if they found out I support education for women and equal rights). As for LGBT rights not even the Afghan Human Rights Commission which is tasked with handling human rights agrees to it. They are the most liberal that an afghan can get.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
The due said kill people and meant it legalistically. That is me being polite. I will say I think this is a troll debate. 90 percent sure
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 3 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
NematMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Blow out. Pro made source based points, while con just stated opinion based assertions. Pro had nice formatting, while Con had awful block walls of text. I also didn't like Cons conduct in the final round.
Vote Placed by Nataliella 3 years ago
Nataliella
NematMikalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were founded and logical, giving arguments to them. Conduct was given to Pro because Con's arguments were extremely biased. Sources go to Pro for actually using them. Spelling and grammar were efficient on both sides.
Vote Placed by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
NematMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons retarded arguments were based primarily off his own warped opinions whereas pros arguments were far more grounded in reality and were actually backed by sources whereas com didnt use any. Com also technically forfeited the last round by dropping all arguments, so arguments, sources, and conduct all goes to the pro
Vote Placed by frozen_eclipse 3 years ago
frozen_eclipse
NematMikalTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons arguments were simply unfounded. highly misinformed, and greatly illogical.pro had better grammar and conduct for proffesionalism
Vote Placed by GOP 3 years ago
GOP
NematMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Pro since Con just arbitrarily said, "I think I have just won the debate now." That's now how it rolls, Nemat. Moreover, Pro used a professional way to argue by laying out his arguments well. He made titles bold and made certain words italicized. Did I see any of that from Con? No. In fact, Con used poor paragraph structure, much to the chagrin of the readers. I found that his arguments were not readable because of this. Additionally, Pro also used many sources, whereas Con did not use ANY sources. Pro used those sources to back his points up.