The Instigator
JakeBoatman96
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
lotus_flower
Pro (for)
Losing
10 Points

Homosexuality is Genetic

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 8 votes the winner is...
JakeBoatman96
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/5/2011 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,122 times Debate No: 19682
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (8)

 

JakeBoatman96

Con

I believe being homosexual is a choice, not something you're born with.

You know the drill:
R1: Acceptance and clarification on stance.
R2: Opening arguments.
R3: Rebuttals and conclusions.

Good Luck.
lotus_flower

Pro

I accept. I believe that I can at least prove that it isn't a choice.
Debate Round No. 1
JakeBoatman96

Con

I thank my opponent for accepting my debate. Let's begin.

Before I start my main points, think about this: Where did that gene come from? It sure wasn't your parents, they're obviously not homosexual, they had you, didn't they? Well maybe it was your grandparents? Most traits and DNA make-up skip a generation, right? But, they had your parents, so it couldn't possibly be them either. So where did it come from?

Also, I request you don't bring in studies on animals that have structures very unlike the human body.

Columbia University Professor of Psychiatry Dr. Robert Spitzer has done several research projects and is the man that had homosexuality removed from the list of mental disorders. Dr. Spitzer interviewed more than 200 people, most of whom claimed that through reparative therapy counseling, their desires for same-sex partners either diminished significantly or they changed over to heterosexual orientation.

Robert L. Spitzer, "Can Some Gay Men and Lesbians Change Their Sexual Orientation?", Archives of Sexual
Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 5, October 2003: 403-417.
lotus_flower

Pro

My opponents arguements consisted of two points:
Where does the gay gene come from?
conversion therapy is an option.

rebuttal of the first point:

Although research for a gay gene has been in mainly small animals (worms, fruit flies, etc.)I understand that studies with animals not be cited, but we DID all share a common ancestor, (or 'common creator' as creationists say) and we all show similar behavior. A 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1,500 species, ranging from primates (who's body is structured much like that of a human.) to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them.
Rebuttal of point two:
I cannot go into the methods of conversion therapy, as the character limit doesn't allow, but I will give you some facts about it. Mike Bussee and Gary Cooper, the founders of the ex-gay movement, fell in love with each other, and divorced their wives. Exgay usually resuts in attempted suicide, Sexual disorders,etc.
Debate Round No. 2
JakeBoatman96

Con

My opponent has not made any separate points, therefore, no rebuttals from me.

My conclusion:
APA states: "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles...."[1]

VOTE CON
Good luck Pro

[1]http://www.onenewsnow.com...
lotus_flower

Pro

An examination of family pedigrees revealed that gay men had more homosexual male relatives through maternal than through paternal lineages, suggesting a linkage to the X chromosome. Dean Hamer24 found such an association at region Xq28. If male sexual orientation was influenced by a gene on Xq28, then gay brothers should share more than 50% of their alleles at this region, whereas their heterosexual brothers should share less than 50% of their alleles. In the absence of such an association, then both types of brothers should display 50% allele sharing. An analysis of 40 pairs of gay brothers and found that they shared 82% of their alleles in the Xq28 region, which was much greater than the 50% allele sharing that would be expected by chance.

Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
lotus_flower
@ american5 your right, I apologize, awdme. I took it as an insult.
But no, there are genetic mutations, which research shows could be the cause of sexual orientation.
Posted by american5 5 years ago
american5
that's a little harsh don't you think Lotus_flower and it kind of is even if it was not your father their had to be someone in your bloodline already like that or else you couldn't get the gene and if someone was gay in your bloodline chances are they didn't have kids.
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
lotus_flower
@awdme1524 you are a retard. That isn't how genes work, please go die and burn in hell. (:
Posted by awdme1524 5 years ago
awdme1524
Homosexuality can't be genetic. if you were gay you wouldn't have any children!!!
Posted by Jhate 5 years ago
Jhate
Of course they have most of the same genes they are related SMH
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
lotus_flower
me too. lol
Posted by JakeBoatman96 5 years ago
JakeBoatman96
Mine neither, but, I was mad at myself for setting such a short character limit. I could have fit a lot more stuffs in there.
Posted by lotus_flower 5 years ago
lotus_flower
yea, My rounds don't tend to be that long, anyway. (:
Posted by JakeBoatman96 5 years ago
JakeBoatman96
It was a 1,000 character limit to keep it short and sweet. I'll never do that again, I'm keeping it at 3,000 characters from now on.
Posted by caveat 5 years ago
caveat
Is there like a 500 character limit per round or something?
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by OberHerr 5 years ago
OberHerr
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con refuted Pro's arguments well. Good job
Vote Placed by InVinoVeritas 5 years ago
InVinoVeritas
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Based on con's argument, it can really only be concluded with the idea that the roots of homosexuality are uncertain. He does not suggest enough that homosexuality is DEFINITELY not genetic.
Vote Placed by american5 5 years ago
american5
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: JakeBoatman96 seems like he did a better job to me
Vote Placed by Boogerdoctor 5 years ago
Boogerdoctor
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Wiploc's reason for voting convinced me to change my vote. You can't just introduce your main (and only) evidence on the last round without giving your opponent a chance to respond.
Vote Placed by wiploc 5 years ago
wiploc
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides lacked cogency. Con may have had some kind of point to his where-did-the-gene-come-from question, but he never said what it was. Con's final argument was strange; if science doesn't know why people are gay, why does Con think he knows? Pro's final argument might have been telling if he'd introduced it sooner, when Con still had a chance to respond. As it is, not introduced until after Con's last post, we have to ignore it.
Vote Placed by logicrules 5 years ago
logicrules
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con makes no point in his first argument but attempts to use the absence of evidence is proof fallacy. Rather poor from both sides.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: well this was a tough decision, but con won. especially b/c pro just refuted first round instead of making an argument. He did have one last round, but since he only had one it was detrimental
Vote Placed by lannan13 5 years ago
lannan13
JakeBoatman96lotus_flowerTied
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:33 
Reasons for voting decision: strange, but the Con wins by an inch.