The Instigator
ADT_Clone
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ScottyDouglas
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Homosexuality is 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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/2/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,927 times Debate No: 24525
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (0)

 

ADT_Clone

Pro

Topic

The topic of this debate will be: "Homosexuality is not a decision, it is natural". The pro will be arguing that homosexuality is not a decision, and that it is natural. The con will be arguging that homosexuality is not natural, and optionally argue that it is a decision(However this leads on if it is not natural).


Definitions

Decision: "the act or process of deciding; determination, as of aquestion or doubt, by making a judgement" [1]

Natural: "existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial): anatural bridge." [2]

In this debate, we will be referring to natural as something that is formed by nature. Making a decision does not constitute being formed by nature.


Debate Structure

Round 1: This round will be used for acceptance of the debate and/or for any definitions either side would like to make prior to their arguments.

Round 2: In this round, both sides will state their arguments. Neither side will respond to each others arguments directly.

Round 3 and 4: In this round, both sides will respond to/rebutt their opponents arguments. No additional arguments may be made during this round, only response to pre-existing arguments.

Round 5: In this round, both the pro and con will conclude their arguments. No additional arguments may be made.


Debate Rules

Burden of Proof: The burden of proof is on both the pro and the con. Pro must prove that homosexuality is natural and is not a decision, whereas Con must prove that homosexuality is unnatural, and optionally that it is a decision(However this follows if it is unnatural).

Respect: Both the pro and con must be respectful to each other, and must refrain from any insulting, discriminating or harmful remarks that are not directly relevant to the debate.

Evidence: Provision of evidence will be required for any kind of statistical/scientific finding. All evidence mentioned or used during the debate must be cited or else the opposition will not be required to respond to the particular argument in which the evidence is used.

Listing of Arguments: It is required that when making an argument, that it be labeled and optionally numbered. If an argument made by either the pro or con is not able to be clearly referenced, misinterpretation will be the fault of the person who made the argument. In other words, number/name your arguments so clarity can be ensured.


References

(1) http://dictionary.reference.com...
(2) http://dictionary.reference.com...

Note: This debate is a repost of the following(http://www.debate.org...) in which someone accepted it thinking they were taking a different position to what they were. The debate is open.
ScottyDouglas

Con

I agree to the terms and conditions.

I accept this debate!

I turn it back to Pro->
Debate Round No. 1
ADT_Clone

Pro

Thank you Mr. Douglas for accepting this debate, it will sure be an exciting one. I have three arguments which I will be focusing on during this debate.

1. Homosexuality is transfered through the genes

The question often comes up whether homosexuality is genetics or simply a decision that one must make. Often the argument is made that it is simply a decision, however this is not the case.

A study was conducted, surveying all pairs of adult twins(20-47 years old) in Sweden. A total of 3826 twin pairs who identified themselves in same sex relationships were studied. In men 34-39% of cases of homosexuality cases could be described by genetics and woman 18-19% of homosexuality cases could be described by genetics[1]. The other factor, which accounted for a large proportion in both cases was individual environmental factors.

In sight of this information and the strength of this study, isn't this a good indication that perhaps homosexuality is natural? We can extend this idea into other parts of nature, specifically the animal kingdom.

2. Animals, part of nature also exhibit homosexual behaviour

It is often the assumption that animals do not possess some of the qualities that humans do, but homosexuality is one where this assumption does not hold. Little do most people know, some animals do show homosexual behaviour. Couldn't it then be argued, since animals are apart of and partly represent nature homosexuality is natural?

A passage in "Animal Homosexuality" states that "other primates, but also rodents, various social mammals and some bird species express intimate sexual contacts between members of the same sex on a regular basis..."[2]. This highlights homosexuality in a natural world.

To go a step further, there are many animals that are very familiar to us that have been observed expressing homosexual behaviour, including the brown bear, cats, cattle, dogs, chickens, horses, seagulls, bearded dragon and many many more. [3]

So as said many times before, if so many animals in nature exhibit homosexual behaviour, this mounts a strong case for the argument that homosexuality is natural. But often the argument that arises out of this is how does homosexuality survive through natural selection?

3. Natural selection promotes the homosexuality gene

Our common sense would have us infer that homosexuality should be eliminated through the process of natural selection. Since homosexuality does not allow for reproduction, the consequential laws of natural selection should phase it out. How can this not be the case if it is natural? Well, this requires us to take a deeper look into natural selection.

The theory of natural selection states that genes/traits that are detrimental to the survival of a species will not be selected in future generations. But it is often forgotten that genes can correspond to multiple traits. So in theory, if homosexuality is natural, and there is a gene associated to it, if this gene also contained a trait that benefitted survival/reproduction more than homosexuality detracts from it, then this gene would be transfered through natural selection.

As stated in another twin study on homosexual behaviour, it was found that the evidence was in line with the above idea. They went further, using their evidence to theorise that genes influencing homosexuality have two effects. Not only do these genes increase the risk of homosexuality, but they also increase sex-atypical gender identity which could increase the chance of mating in hetrosexuals. [4] In other words, the risk of homosexuality caused by this gene would be out weighed by the benefits of increased mating success amongst heterosexuals.

Summary

In summary of the above three arguments, they clearly present a strong case that homosexuality is a natural trait. In a comprehensive study of twins, a decent proportion of homosexuality was found to be caused by genetics. Homosexuality is also prevelant in the animal kingdom, and surely that can be considered natural. Finally, it was shown that homosexuality could work under the laws of natural selection, with the heterosexual benefits of the homosexual gene outweighing the negative effects.

Despite the apparent downfalls of homosexuality being genetic, the above arguments have shown that this is indeed a possibility and that the evidence supports this. Hence homosexuality has a strong case towards being natural.

References

(1) Långström, N., Rahman, Q., Carlström, E., & Lichtenstein, P. (2010). Genetic and environmental effects on same-sex sexual behavior: A population study of twins in sweden. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39(1), 75-80. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9386-1
(2) Poiani, Aldo (2010). Animal Homosexuality : A Biosocial Perspective. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved July 05, 2012, from Ebook Library.
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(4) ZIETSCH, B (01/01/2008). "Genetic factors predisposing to homosexuality may increase mating success in heterosexuals". Evolution and human behavior , 29 (6), p. 424.
ScottyDouglas

Con

ScottyDouglas forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ADT_Clone

Pro

It is a disappointment that Mr. Douglas did not make his initial arguments. If Mr. Douglas wishes to continue the debate, he may ONLY publish his arguments in this round, and not provide both arguments and a rebuttle as this would be unfair to myself.

I continue to hold my three arguments, and look forward to my opponents arguments on this issue.
ScottyDouglas

Con

ScottyDouglas forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
ADT_Clone

Pro

Mr. Douglas has yet again forfeited his round. Furthermore, he has been online on his account, so it is obvious he is avoiding this debate.

I continue to hold my three arguments, and believe his lack of participation should be on everyones mind when it comes time to vote.
ScottyDouglas

Con

ScottyDouglas forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
ADT_Clone

Pro

Yet again Mr. Douglas has forfeited this round, and hence only has one more round to make an argument. However, considering I would not be able to rebut his arguments, I highly urge that he forfeits this debate completely.

I await the end of this debate and remind all voters that I was the only person that presented an argument.
ScottyDouglas

Con

ScottyDouglas forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Pros 3 assumes a gene exists. Gives evidence, but sadly the evidence is weak.
Posted by OneElephant 5 years ago
OneElephant
I would have voted, but I can't. Sorry.
Posted by ADT_Clone 5 years ago
ADT_Clone
Well that is just sad. You didn't deserve that Scotty.
Posted by ADT_Clone 5 years ago
ADT_Clone
Hopefully someone views this debate and votes as Scotty would be very undeserving of a tie considering not a single argument or explanation was made.
Posted by ADT_Clone 5 years ago
ADT_Clone
Mr. Douglas's is cutting a fine line with his argument, I hope he posts one.
Posted by johnnyboy54 5 years ago
johnnyboy54
Are we talking about sexual attraction to the same-sex, or engaging in homosexual behavior?
No votes have been placed for this debate.