The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
2 Points

Homosexuality is natural

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/25/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 457 times Debate No: 91843
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (16)
Votes (2)




Homosexuality is natural and therefore homophobia is obsolete.


Thanks,for challenge me to a debate.I accept your argument but now i will reasoned you, in opposition to your statement,why i think homosexual should be re-criminalize.
Reason here following:
1.Homosexual has been genetically associate with pedophile,while in spite of the fact 88 % of pedophile has identified themselve as either homo or bi sexual orientation.According to some statistical data review,that homosexual are three times more likely than hetero in attempt child molestation and victimize multiple victims. In conclusion doesn't mean all gays are pedophile but, many are.That's mean LGBT groups are dangerous to our society that we should always be aware of.
2.Homosexual are to the main cause of widespread of aids which cost lost of millions lives
3. The bible condemn homosexual as abominable sinful act.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting my debate request- I was hoping you'd reply. However, your arguments are very flawed. You provide statistics, but do not state the source(s) you gathered this data from, rendering the "88%" claim unreliable and therefore inconclusive. As for your other points, I'm inclined to say you haven't done much research in order to dispel the albeit common myths surrounding homosexuality.

1. 'Homosexuality has been genetically associate with pedophilia...'

The first issue here is the use of the term 'genetically'. Technically, though there is a strong possibility that there is so-called 'gay gene', this has never been fully confirmed[1]. The supposed gene that 'causes' homosexuality is called Xq28, but there are allegations that the scientist who found the gene during the 1980s cherry-picked information. What's more, many scientists believe that this gene (if it even exists) has little influence on sexuality[2]. In fact, the homosexual gene doesn't appear to exist in lesbian women. While the gentic link between lesbians is around 25% [3] (as opposed to around 40% in gay men [4]), a single gene that causes lesbianism has not been found. What's more the link with pedophilia is even smaller- pedophiles don't usually care about the gender of their victims, just so long as they are prepubescent[5].

In a nutshell, we don't know if sexuality, pedophilic or otherwise, is a biological trait. Therefore, the idea that gay=pedophile is shaky at best and appears to be a rumour spread by homophobes

2. 'Homosexuals are to the main cause of widespread of aids which cost lost of millions lives'

Yet another myth. AIDS has multiple ways of infecting people. It can be spread via the sharing of hypodermic needles, anal and oral sex (which heterosexuals also engage in), and even between an infected mother and her baby via placenta prior birth or through breast feeding. However, unprotected sex is the culprit in all cases [6].
Admittedly, gay men and lesbians may be less inclined to use protection, as they cannot become pregnant anyway, which is the primary objective for why a couple may use a condom during sex. This makes the gay community slightly more at risk of AIDS, but that isn't because of their sexuality- it is simply because they don't feel the need to use condoms during intercourse [7]. The cure to AIDS is not to somehow get rid of homosexuals, but to promote the importance of the use of condoms among the LGBTQIA+ community.

3. ' The bible condemn homosexual as abominable sinful act.'
The Bible is not a reliable piece of evidence in this argument. Homosexuality predates the Bible, with some of the earliest depictions of homosexuality going back to 3rd century China [1]. A more fitting religious text would be the Hindu Laws of Manu.
Why Hinduism? Because Hinduism is possibly one of the oldest religions to still exist. Hinduism is a mixture of small religions and Indian cultural beliefs that eventually bled into one religion, which is why it's so hard to pinpoint when it was founded [8]. As a result, Hinduism could have existed around the same time as 3rd century China (which was described as having a pretty much 50/50 homosexual-hetrosexual society).
Now, if God truly does say homosexuality is wrong, why did He not make this clear during the 3rd century? Why would His earliest known rule over humanity (Hinduism) include a text that states that their is a 'third-gender' which will and can have sex with both women and men[9]. Many people have interpreted the idea of a third gender as a way Hindus would explain the existance of sexual orientations other than heterosexuality. For example, if your daughter told you she was bisexual, the Laws of Manu would tell you, as a Hindu, that your daughter is not female, as she is not exclusively attracted to men, but a member of the 3rd-gender population.
If homosexuality is so sinful, yet it has existed far before the Bible, why did God leave humanity to sin for so long before setting the record straight with the gift of the Bible? If it is so sinful, why did He allow people create a religion hailing Him which was not only tolerant of homosexuality and bisexuality but embraced it as a societal norm?



1.Okay,i will revise your argument due to there is something that need to be corrected.You said ,,there is little to no scientifically association between pedophile and homosexual',but the scientific academic has peer reviewed that among 88 % of pedophile are homo or bi-sexual.That doesn't mean all gays are child molester but the majority are.
2.Homosexual is a mental illness
The DSM-I the first version of (diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorder) has classified homosexual as mental disorder,paraphilia,and sexual dysfunction.
Debate Round No. 2


Again, con fails to provide sources. Con seems to disregard anything I posted in the previous round, suggesting they did not even read it. As a result, con is unable to refute my arguments that indicate homosexuality predates the Bible and the 3rd-gender argument raised in Round 2 by myself.

Con also seems to reiterate the same (uncredited) 88% statistic. Without a link to this apparent study that cocluded that 88% of pedophiles are gay or bisexual, this statistic has no support, making it useless. As far as I know, con could have made up the 88% figure from nowhere.

Secondly, I take great issue with the idea that 'a large majority of gay people are pedophiles'. This is quite clearly a misinterpretation of the 88% statistic, if such a statistic does in fact exist. The (possibly imaginary) study would conclude that 88% of pedophiles have gay/bi tendencies, NOT that 88% of gay/bi people are pedophiles.

Con drops the AIDS argument, presumably because they have either decided to ignore my critique of their previous statement 'gay people spread AIDS'. If not, con may have simply forgotten to address my critique. Either way, they have not backed up their prior statement concerning the prominence of AIDS and homosexuality.

Con puts a new point forward: homosexuality is a mental illness.

Again, there is no url link to their evidence, only a name of the DSM-I as the title. I have no reason to believe such an organization even exists unless I am to leave the debate and research this myself. On further investigation (which I have gone out the realms of the debate to check cons statement concerning the DSM-I), it turns out that such a document DOES EXIST but CON HAS FAILED TO MENTION THAT LATER VERSIONS OF THE SAME DOCUMENT NO LONGER CATEGORIZE HOMOSEXUALITY AS A MENTAL DISORDER.

In fact, DSM-1's authors (American Psychiatric Association) decided that homosexuality is NOT a mental disorder as of 1974, in the 7th revision of DSM-II (which was the second edition of the DSM but was very similar to the original), in response to criticism from the LGBTQIA+ community that had deemed the AMA was 'the enemy', 'waging an execution of homosexuals' with no proof that homosexuality was an illness. This was backed up by sociologist Erving Goffman during the 1960s, who deemed the concept of mental illness a way of belittling and undermining non-conformists, including minorities like the homo/bisexual community. Even fellow psychiatrist, Thomas Szasz, claimed "mental illness is a myth used to describe moral conflicts". Of course, Szasz's argument should be taken with a pinch of salt...

This change to the document appears to be because the original DSM document was released in 1952. This also happens to be the only version con is referring to, so I can conclude that con's evidence for the idea that homosexuality is a mental illness is OUTDATED BY 64 YEARS. From this, it is evident that Con has deliberately used obsolete evidence to back up their belief that gay/bisexual people are mentally ill.

All info on the controversy surrounding the DSM:


According to the 2007 medical journal article entitled,,Neurological control of human sexual behavior.Insights from lesion studies which was published in the journal neurology,neurosurgery,and psychiatry.
'Kolarksy and colleagues 54 examined the relationship between ' sexual deviation'.age lesion onset and localisation of lesion (temporal v. extratemporal ). The authors defined two diagnostic categories : 1.) sexual deviation involving a deviation of sexual object (for example,Pedophilia,Homosexual) was included in this category,which would now be considered inappropriate, and 2.) sexual disturbances other than deviations including organism in response to stimuli unrelated to the subjects sexual preference,hypersexuality and hyposexuality.
An association between temporal lobe abnormalities and pedophilia.homosexual has been reported by Mendez and his collegue See,'(
And ,sorry that i haven't provide you the source where the statistic come from.The statistic,that point to the fact 86 % pedophile describe themselves as homosexual and bi-sexual has been testify by on study,, Archives of Sexual Behavior from A study 1998 detailed Baldwin's report See',(
Debate Round No. 3


ReeThoughts forfeited this round.


And homosexual has been taken out from DSM-II in 1973 because of polital pressure and the influence of homosexual propaganda but not because scientific outline that point to the fact that homosexual is a sexual orientation.Nonetheless, an estimate about 3,810 of psychiatrist do not support declassified homosexual from mental illness.Some of psychiatrist even believe homosexual is a mental disorder and need a medial treatment.NOTE,homosexual and lesbian sex is socially taboo in many country around the world 57 out 100.While middle east country maximum penalty for homosexual can carry out death penalty.
Debate Round No. 4


What a surprise. I googled Kolarsky's study and the fee results seem to come from bias sources like conservapedia and ( seems to revolve around a famous conspiracy theorist, so this discredits cons evidence). That aside, what proof- scientific proof- does con have of the 'mental illness' of homosexuality? We know people with depression have a chemical imbalance, and we know people with APD have underdeveloped or damaged amygdalas; what, exactly, makes a brain a gay brain?
There was political pressure for homosexuality to be declassified as a mental illness, that's true, but why does con think this is? It (DSM-1) was protested because there is no basis to suggest that being gay is a mental illness. Homosexuality is natural, thus why it was declassified as a mental illness.


Homosexual and pedophilia are among the most hatred groups in the society.While especially in the middle east area,such as saudi arabia and iran,maximum punishment for homosexual and pedophilia is whipping and death penalty.Many people seemingly to have strong negative impression toward homosexual ,as they often think homosexual group collaborate with pedophilia in attempt to accomplish their need such as legitimize sexual relationship between adult and children which we often emphasis as child sexual abuse . This is why i think gays should not adopt children or same-sex marriage should not be legal because it's a bad reputation to our society. Back to 19th and 18th century LGBT rights has never been recognize by law.
Debate Round No. 5
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ReeThoughts 4 months ago
Harrytruman, yes, but the belief was most likely there in Indian culture before Manu was written.
Posted by harrytruman 4 months ago
What? Hindu laws of Manu aren't older than the Torah, those were written at 200 BCE, the Torah was written in 2000 BCE.
Posted by stephannoi 4 months ago
Are anyone going to vote ??
Posted by Desert 4 months ago
Adam and Eve is a myth. Do you live with us in the 21st century?
Posted by PonticGreekMacedonian 4 months ago
Desert it was Adam and Eve, the first 2 humans in the world! God created a Man and a Woman. It is Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve!
Posted by govind911 5 months ago
Proving whether homosexuality is natural or not (strictly) does NOT require excerpts from Bible or Religious books.
Posted by ReeThoughts 5 months ago
@killerchicken12 "Hinduism has been called the "oldest religion" in the world,[note 2] with some practitioners and scholars refer to it as Sanātana Dharma, "the eternal law" or the "eternal way"[4] beyond human origins.[5] Scholars regard Hinduism as a fusion[note 3] or synthesis[6][note 4] of various Indian cultures and traditions,[7][note 5] with diverse roots[8][note 6] and no founder.[9] This "Hindu synthesis" started to develop between 500 BCE and 300 CE,Template:Asfn after the Vedic times.[10][11]"

Abraham is considered one of the founders of Judaism and, according to a source I found puts Abraham's date of birth as 2050 BCE.

"Given that the earth is approximately 6000 years old, that makes Abraham's birth about 2050BC."

Hinduism and Judaism are very roughly the same age. How come Hinduism explains and accepts homosexuality, while Judaism doesn't? Are you suggesting Hinduism is not 'the real religion'? How do you know?
Posted by Killerchicken12 5 months ago
Pro's Argument number two about the Bible is False. It is Unknown as to how old exactly Judaism (the Old Testament believers) is. Pro's statement that Homosexuality is older than the Bible is sketchy as best. The First book of the bible was made circa 1500 B.C. by Moses, and according to the bible, the belief and worship of YHWH (Yahweh) stretches back to the beginning of time. It has also been found that the worship of the Christian (The only) God stretches back to pre-flood times.
Posted by Desert 5 months ago
Pontic Greek, please give me names, surnames, date of birth, date of death, the street that they lived this man and woman. I am very intrigued.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Udel 4 months ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con says many pedophiles are gay and gay people have lots of AIDS. Even if that were true it does not prove that homosexuality is not natural. Con's bible argument is also irrelevant to the resolution. Pro also didn't prove that homosexuality is natural though and failed a round so conduct points to Con, arguments to no one since Pro did not meet the easy burden of this debate. In round 1 he simply repeated the resolution and then argued against Con's points but did not make a case of his own.
Vote Placed by dtien400 4 months ago
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:61 
Reasons for voting decision: Both were civil but Pro forfeited (albeit possibly accidentally) so that's a loss of conduct on Pro. Con's grammar was poor while Pro did no wrong in this category so spelling and grammar goes to Pro. Pro also gets sources because he showed sources from the beginning,. Con either used outdated sources or misconstrued the info from his sources or used sources from heavily biased sites. As for arguments, Pro refuted all of Con's points. No matter what Con brought up Pro used great sources, great science, and great logic to refute it. His argument "homophobia is obsolete" seems stretched but it was unchallenged so it stands. Not one of Con's arguments were logical and not one could stand up to even the barest of scrutiny, especially since he basically had no scientific evidence to support them. In fact Con would lose even if his arguments were great because he argued that homosexuality was bad, while the point he was contending was "homosexuality is natural." Arguments to Pro all the way.