Gay marriage should not be considered a sin for Christians.
I do not consider being homosexual a sin.
For many reasons that I will cover.
My thanks to comeatmebro1010 for initiating this challenge. In this debate, I will argue two points. These being that (1) homosexuality is immoral, and that (2) same-sex marriage is unjust. Though we both are Christians, my arguments against homosexuality and same-sex marriage will be purely philosophical in nature.
Why Homosexual Acts Are Immoral
First, a word of clarification. I will be arguing for the immorality of homosexual acts, not homosexual orientation. With that important distinction in mind, my argument is as follows:
1. The proper function of human sexual organs is reproduction
2. It is morally wrong to willingly act in a manner contrary to a thing's proper function
3. Homosexual acts are contrary to the proper function of human sexual organs
4. Therefore, homosexual acts are immoral.
Premise (1) is clear from reflecting on how our sexual organs are structured. Complementarity with the opposite sex reveals that they are to be used with a member of the opposite sex in a conjugal act for the purposes of procreation.
The second premise is also obvious upon reflection. The purpose of a heart is to pump blood. A heart which fulfills its function excellently can thus be properly called a "good" heart. A heart which does not exercise its function properly can thus be referred to as a "bad" heart. So "goodness" and "badness" are understood in terms of acting according to the proper function of a thing. For humans, this becomes moral goodness insofar as we can choose how we can act.
(3) is quite obvious, since homosexual acts cannot in principle result in reproduction. As it has been said, "homosexual reproduction" is a contradiction in terms.
The conclusion therefore follows.
Objection: They were born that way! / Gay Gene/ Homosexuality is observed in animals
Suppose I grant that a gay gene does exist, what difference would it make? None. Simply because one may have the genetic tendency to act in a certain way doesn’t mean that therefore there’s nothing wrong with acting that way.
Perhaps an analogy will help. Scientists have already identified a gene that predisposes certain individuals to alcoholism. Yet we don’t see people rushing to defend the acts of drunk drivers by saying “But they were born that way!” — for despite the fact that they have a tendency to drink excessively, they still can choosewhether or not they’re going to act according to it.
Similarly, attempts to justify homosexual acts on the basis of their being regularly observed in the animal world fail. Simply because animals sometimes act a certain way doesn’t mean that we are free to act that way as well. Animals are regularly observed eating their young and forcibly copulating with others — does that therefore give us license to do the same? Of course not.
Why Same-Sex Marriage is Unjust
I will be defending the following argument, as formulated by philosopher Jim Spiegel:
1. Heterosexual union is the indispensable means by which humans come into existence and therefore has special social value (indeed, the greatest possible social value because it is the first precondition for society).
2. The indispensable means by which something of special social value can occur itself has special value.
comeatmebro1010 forfeited this round.
comeatmebro1010 forfeited this round.
|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:||0||7|