The Instigator
Questioning
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Carthage
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points

Homosexuality a sin

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 2 votes the winner is...
Questioning
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/18/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 514 times Debate No: 52872
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Questioning

Con

Hi just wanted to see if anyone wanted to debate. If so just sign up and we can start with opening arguements in round 2 and then conclude in round 5. Reference to religious texts appreciated if you use particular regions scriptures.
Thank you
Carthage

Pro

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Questioning

Con

My leading argument will be that homosexuality is not an active choice made. It is a physiological response to another member of the same sex and the sexual orientation of an individual is due to genetics and environment.

When talking about sin I think it is very important to stress it is an immoral act in the perspective of an divinity. To fully expand into this argument we need to recognise there are several religions, therefore I will address why I do not believe that homosexuality is a sin in different contexts. I also reserve the right to question the sources of my opposition to make clear whether they are representing the religion in a way I feel is fair.

1. Christianity. It has been insinuated that the Bible mentions that homosexuality is a sin, Paul in particular is quoted however there has been a stream of debate about the scriptures. First is that the Bible does not speak of homosexuality as we comprehend in the modern age instead a more accurate translation in my opinion leads us to believe it is instead referring to a forced exploitation of a sexual nature of those who are of homosexual orientation. Secondly we must read the different texts in the Bible while recognising the cultural influences that were present at the time. Paul also had the belief that women who were not veiled committed an act against The Lord but many believer would disagree. In the end the Bible is man's interpretation of God and not the true word of God.

2. Islam consider homosexuality not a sin if it is not acted on or if it is acted on it can be punished and therefore not a sin against God but a punishable crime. I don't have a full understanding of Islam but I did ask this of a religious leader therefore I submit this point to address this major religion.

3. Hinduism I would say is very open to homosexuality and though it is a taboo culturally religion still does not speak out actively against homosexual acts, indeed many temples have been found that depict quite graphic image of homosexuality. The only restriction is on twice born individuals who are spiritual and are not meant to pursue a life that contains homosexuality however this is similar to the practice in other religions where those in authority aren't allowed to marry.

I would like to finally submit to that never has God directly made the statement that homosexuality is a sin. Surely the teachings of prophets, apostles and brahman are influenced by their own beliefs and therefore cannot accurately represent what God himself believes purely.
Carthage

Pro

All right, first of all, we must decide which religion we are basing this off of. It doesn't matter wether Muslims or Hinldus belive about homosexuality. The only religious text that truly determines the morality of something is the Bible. And you effectively dicredited the Bible by saying it was blinded byt the apostles own beliefs, and is not truly God's word. No denomination believes that, and here I shall provide biblical evidence for that. 2 Timothy 3:16-All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right. (NLT). And if one part of the Bible is wrong, the rest is discredited. So the next step shall be stating agreeing (for the debate) that the Bible is credable.
Debate Round No. 2
Questioning

Con

Questioning forfeited this round.
Carthage

Pro

Well, unless Con comes back, I win. Regardless, he should lose conduct points.
Debate Round No. 3
Questioning

Con

Questioning forfeited this round.
Carthage

Pro

He forfeited. Unless he comes back next round with a REALLY good argument, I guess I should win.
Debate Round No. 4
Questioning

Con

Questioning forfeited this round.
Carthage

Pro

Yup, I win. He forfeited.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by clgaram720 3 years ago
clgaram720
The validity of a source is central to the validity of an argument in a debate setting. If we are allowed, nay, encouraged to debate the validity of a claim made by a scientific report that may be biased due to its source of funding, then it is only reasonable to assume we should also be expected to debate the validity of the bible as the source of the debate title "Homosexuality is a sin." I believe that's found in Leviticus. Thus the Pro side could argue that this portion of the bible was dictated to Moses directly by God himself at Mt. Sinai, thereby increasing it's validity compared the New Testament which IS self-reported to have been written by the disciples, from their own point of view, during the time of Christ.

Therefore I support the Con side's comment that the validity of the Bible is and must be a source of debate within any debate where it is presented as evidence to one or more opinions, and especially in this debate, as it is the main source, as the Pro commentator has pointed out, of the statement that homosexuality is a sin.
Posted by Carthage 3 years ago
Carthage
I'm fairly sure neither of those comment (positively) on homosexuality, so that's irrelevant for this specific debate. However, there is unity among denominations about what should be cannoned and what shouldn't (except for of course the apocrypha, which again, is irrelevant for the same reason, or possibly can be used for further evidence).
Posted by Questioning 3 years ago
Questioning
Hi Carthage, I just wanted to confirm that we are allowed to discredit or question screws critically as only then can we form an arguments that are accurate. So to agree that the Bible is credible is to ignore that God himself did not right nor decide which gospels or texts were to be used, instead this was done by election of religious leader and they didn't include gospels from Phillip or Mary....
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Bannanawamajama 3 years ago
Bannanawamajama
QuestioningCarthageTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Con lost conduct for forfeiting. Pro lost arguments for only arguing the Christian viewpoint and not giving adequate reasoning why others are unacceptable
Vote Placed by Skrone 3 years ago
Skrone
QuestioningCarthageTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Yup