The Instigator
bullslapper
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
kenito001
Con (against)
Winning
35 Points

Homosexual life stile is not natural.

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: 8/20/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,387 times Debate No: 5096
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (28)
Votes (14)

 

bullslapper

Pro

The study of nature clearly shows that the reason for sex is to reproduce the species.
Homosexual behavior is very very rare in nature ,so it's not the norm in fact It's abnormal. Also male and female sex organs match up or go to gather ,Male and male do not, nor do female and female ,nor can they repoduce naturaly.
If you put 100 homosexuals on a island for 150 years with everything they needed to live , when you came back there would be no homosexuals alive.This would hold true for Lesbians too.
So I have to conclude that it's against Nature to be homosexual or a lesbian .It's a perversion of the natural act of reproduction.
kenito001

Con

Note: I'm not treating this debate as to persuade you to believe that the CON is correct, I'm merely required to defeat your arguments and present mine adequately.

Topic: Homosexual life stile (style? spelling?) is not natural.

Definitions:
Natural: in accordance with nature
Unnatural: not in accordance with nature
Homosexual lifestyle: homosexuality

Observation: Natural should not be defined as the majority occurrence, opinion, or belief. So long as "Homosexual lifestyle", or "homosexuality", as I will refer to it as, is proven as natural, then the CON wins.

Burden of proof is on the PRO. If I am able to successfully defeat all of your arguments and one of mine stands, then I win the debate.

Case (very short):
Homosexuality is natural. Simple analogy to save explanations: mental retardation. It is not popular, common, nor even condoned by all. However, it occurs in nature, thus it is natural.

Homosexuality occurs in nature. You agree: "Homosexual behavior is very very rare in nature."

You concede that homosexuality occurs in nature. By my definition presented, I conclude that because homosexuality occurs in nature it is natural.

Refutations:
"The study of nature clearly shows that the reason for sex is to reproduce the species."
The study of SEXUALITY, not nature. Different forms of sexuality, however, do occur in nature, also known as homosexuality. The purpose of sexuality is to reproduce, however it occurs in the course of nature that sexuality may not always fulfill its purpose. So you have proven that homosexuality works against the purpose of sexuality, but not that it is unnatural.

"Homosexual behavior is very very rare in nature"
Not "very very rare" but I will agree with you that it does occur.

"so it's not the norm in fact It's abnormal."
Great observation, but it doesn't apply to the topic.

"Also male and female sex organs match up or go to gather ,Male and male do not, nor do female and female ,nor can they repoduce naturaly."
Sword fighting and scissoring, once again, great observation, but it doesn't apply to the topic.

"If you put 100 homosexuals on a island for 150 years with everything they needed to live , when you came back there would be no homosexuals alive.This would hold true for Lesbians too."
Once again, great observation. But it would be natural for them to live on the island, natural for them to hold those beliefs, and natural for them to stick to them and die as they were born homosexual and that is their form determined by nature.

Your arguments are feuds against homosexual behavior. You have only proven your (potential) homophobia and little else.
Debate Round No. 1
bullslapper

Pro

You are right it should be normal and abnormal in defining a Homosexual lifestyle as nature teaches us.
There is only 1 mammal among millions that will have sex with its own sex because it can not control itself in time of heat.
I have to conclude that homosexuality is abnormal or not the norm in nature.
The study of nature includes the sex life of animals so it does apply to the topic.
My arguments are my beliefs and I have had many homosexual friends I have seen how they became homosexuals and then renationalized that they were born that way.
They can live their lifestyle and I will live mine but I will not lie to myself and say its a normal natural lifestyle and you have not shown that it is.
kenito001

Con

kenito001 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
bullslapper

Pro

Many homosexuals argue that they have not chosen their condition, but that they were born that way, making homosexual behavior natural for them.
A German zoo was planning to introduce male penguins into a group of female penguins because the female penguins seem to be attracted to one another. Homosexual rights groups are angry with the plan because they believe the zoo's actions are trying to turn the penguins straight. Here's the premise: Whatever animals do in nature is natural. What's natural is normal. What's normal is moral. So if penguins engage in homosexual behavior, then that behavior must be natural, normal, and moral.
If we are truly the products of evolution, then there can be no moral judgments about anything. So then, if the homosexuals want to use penguins as their moral model, then they need to take all animal behavior into consideration when they build their moral worldview. If we should follow the animal world regarding homosexual penguins and thereby regard human homosexual behavior as normal, then we must be consistent and follow the animal world regarding rape and eating our young and decriminalize these behaviors as well.
Note that I have all ready stated that is only in the wild that we can find the true nature of things.
Truly we do have have a difference of opinion on what words like nature and natural means.
I am not debating that a person does not have the right to choose that life style or any religious aspects of it.
I believe in free will. Only that it is abnormal and not the norm in nature.
I am not trying to debate the philosophical aspect of it.
I think I have made my point in this debate that Homosexual is not the norm in nature.
kenito001

Con

kenito001 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
28 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by xeberus 8 years ago
xeberus
"Homosexual life stile is not natural."

Con proved Homosexual life is very much natural. Homosexuality is not the norm, but that is not being debated. There is no need, that is obvious.
Posted by bthr004 8 years ago
bthr004
Rezz,.. your article linked was pretty lame. Identicle twins are genetic clones? Ummm... this absolutely does NOT validate your point,... Identicle twins are not strictly identicle since the somatic cells may contain mutations in their nuclear DNA. Again, this blows your point clear out of the water.

Epigenome refers to natural chemical modifications within a person's genome (genetic material). Epigenome controls the higher or lower amount of activity of a particular gene. Epigenomic changes often occur before birth, triggering genetic differences between even identicle twins.

Research has also found changes in the DNA sequence between identical twins in Copy Number Variations, when a gene exists in multiple copies.

This is all evidence that discounts your articles attempt at linking homosexuality with genetics using occurences in twin siblings. As you can see, several differences CAN and HAVE occured in identical twin DNA.

You are an epic failure!
Posted by bthr004 8 years ago
bthr004
Oh,.. to rezz and puck,

Your links still provided NO evidence to homosexuality bieng genetic,.. In fact it conceded that many factors could and have come into play that would effect the embyronic development in the whomb.

Nextly,.. As pucks article mentioned, how could homosexuality be a selected genetic marker,.. if everyone was gay how could they have reproduced a homozygous gay offspring. Again pucks article can not validate its theory and trails off on how culturally homosexual behavior has existed with heterosexual requirments of reproducing,... Simply put, as I said before, of personal nature not of human or animal or earthly nature. Homosexual sex is not natural, ones homosexual lifestyle is exactly that, a lifestyle, personal nature.
Posted by bullslapper 8 years ago
bullslapper
Good come back bthr004

Puck and Rezzealaux yours stink.
"THe Truth remains true no matter when it was put out."Correct. But your side isn't truth.
That's no a fact Jack it is your opinion.

English definitions of the word natural:
functioning or occurring in a normal way; lacking abnormalities or deficiencies
"It's the natural thing to happen"
existing in or produced by nature; not artificial or imitation."A natural pearl"

Man on man sex does not produce offspring's thus it is not natural its unnatural sex.

That means my Island example is valid. It would have been better if I had used the World as an example ; If all males were homosexual the Human race would Disappear.
Remember the debate was on the life style which is man on man only and nature shows it's not.
Posted by bullslapper 8 years ago
bullslapper
Good come back bthr004

Puck and Rezzealaux yours stink.
"THe Truth remains true no matter when it was put out."Correct. But your side isn't truth.
That's no a fact Jack it is your opinion.

English definitions of the word natural:
functioning or occurring in a normal way; lacking abnormalities or deficiencies
"It's the natural thing to happen"
existing in or produced by nature; not artificial or imitation."A natural pearl"

Man on man sex does produce offspring's thus it is not natural its unnatural sex.

That means my Island example is valid. It would have been better if I had used the World as an example ; If all males were homosexual the Human race would Disappear.
Remember the debate was on the life style which is man on man only and nature shows it's not.
Posted by bthr004 8 years ago
bthr004
Rezz,.. perhaps you misunderstood me,..

"Why does man do it?" why does man kill? I was asking. You seemed to imply man does not kill for food, mates, or self defense. And you implied that if we did kill for those reasons the world would be more peaceful, which is a pretty stupid belief, as the occurrences of murders would dramatically increase amongst humans.

What other reasons,... well animals such as mother pigs have tendencies to bite (not eat) but bite their young to death. No real reason for doing it, just have a greater tendency when compared to other animals to kill their young, seemingly out of annoyance.

I alos saw my dog kill a rabbit yesterday, he chased it, killed it and then left it on the ground. He did the same to a kitten a week ago. He did not eat them. Animals also kill by accident, as I saw a cow step on her calf.

"Animals (excluding humans) have no rational mind, - i.e. no choice. They can only act in accordance with their nature i.e. only what is wholly natural."

Wow,.. wrong. Animals can be incredibly manipulated, influenced, and affected by outside "artificial" forces, thus, ruling several occurences unnatural.

Personal nature, yes. Human nature(animal nature) in general, NO.

Sex out of its primitive state,.. artificial, something out of its primitive state,= unnatural. Manipulation, changing organs naturally intended functions.

Natural= existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial):
Artificial=Biology. based on arbitrary, superficial characteristics rather than natural, organic relationships: an artificial system of classification.

Since homosexual intercourse requires the use of non reproductive organs and reproductive organs to be used artificially, it is ruled unnatural by definition.

Reproduction, the bases of sex. Are their occurences of homosexual behavior amongst plants in reproduction?
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
" It is just as unnatural for two animals"

Animals (excluding humans) have no rational mind, - i.e. no choice. They can only act in accordance with their nature i.e. only what is wholly natural.
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
"THe Truth remains true no matter when it was put out."

Correct. But your side isn't truth.

"He did not disprove the new info in my next two debates He lost . Your reasoning is left wing liberal
and there fore can not be trusted. If I still had a horse
I would not trust you around it."

1) If this line of reasoning is "left wing liberal", then "left wing liberal" is good.
2) That's quite reasonable. I don't know how to ride a horse.

"- Why does man do it? And they kill for more than those reasons,.."

1) Plenty of reasons.
2) Alright then, tell me some other reasons why animals kill.

"Why does the occurence of homosexuality in the animal kingdom prove it to be natural? It is just as unnatural for two animals as it is for two humans. Poor defense."

CON R1:
"Definitions:
Natural: in accordance with nature"

You are an epic failure.
Posted by bthr004 8 years ago
bthr004
Rezz,...

"If mankind based its morals on animal behavior, we would have a much more peaceful world. Animals generally only kill for 1) food, 2) self defense or 3) mates. Humans are the only animals that do it for any other reason."

- Why does man do it? And they kill for more than those reasons,..

Secondly,...

Why does the occurence of homosexuality in the animal kingdom prove it to be natural? It is just as unnatural for two animals as it is for two humans. Poor defense.
Posted by bullslapper 8 years ago
bullslapper
Homosexual life style is not natural. That was the debate.
The homosexual life style is exclusively Man on man sex. To be natural in nature all Male animals would have to do the same but they don't. I win you lose face facts.
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by kenito001 7 years ago
kenito001
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 
Vote Placed by PoliticalEconomist 8 years ago
PoliticalEconomist
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Alessia_Riddle 8 years ago
Alessia_Riddle
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 Bushido 8 years ago
Bushido
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Jase_the_Ace 8 years ago
Jase_the_Ace
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 Josh 8 years ago
Josh
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 xeberus 8 years ago
xeberus
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 sonofzapp 8 years ago
sonofzapp
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 
Vote Placed by lawyer_in_training 8 years ago
lawyer_in_training
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
bullslapperkenito001Tied
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