The Instigator
TrueChristian
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Daltonian
Pro (for)
Winning
46 Points

Homosexuality

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...
Daltonian
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/23/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 877 times Debate No: 59415
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (8)

 

TrueChristian

Con

i dont wanna long debate like you people do on here just keep it simple ok?????!? the limit is going to be only 2000 characters cause of that cause people go overboard, 2 rounds that it!!!

i am against homos because in the bible it says clearly they are not to be permitted. god is all knowing, he cant be wrong about this -- from the first source

homos/gays are also disproportionately pedophiles. they are so small in our population and yet they are still close to 20-30% of registered pedos -- from the second source

gays effect the family unit,, how will we reproduce if they take over. if their agenda succeeds, america will die. period.

first source
http://christianity.about.com...
second source
http://www.frc.org...

good luck opponent
Daltonian

Pro

I'm glad I was able to debate this topic, as I bet if I'd been a minute later someone else would have debated it. Thanks to con for instigating.

Rebuttals

1. Legitimacy of the bible
The bible can not be used as a legitimate or sole source when judging upon rather an entire group of people deserve respect socially. Due to character limits, I will be brief:

- The bible is from thousands of years ago. It is not verifiable and is very open to interpretation. Some argue that it is metaphorical.

- The bible is only viable or even relevant to one group; christians. So, when judging for a group on the behalf of all of society, christians. What does christianity have to do explicitly with homosexuality? Why not source Odin? Or the Quran? Or the Gospel of the FSM? One holy book is not explicitly legitimate.

2. Pedophilia
My source [1] refutes this point in full, but again, character limit. It even debunks your source amongst many other sources that claim that homosexuality is associated with pedophilia.

Your source supporting your claim is from the family research council, an extremely biased and anti-gay organization.

- LOADS of research has been conducted on this issue. The origin of association between pedophilia and homosexuality can be attributed to propaganda produced in the 70's/late 20th century, an example being what is displayed in the youtube video above

3. Family Unit
- Gays will never stop being born, People will not stop being straight, because sexuality is not a choice.
Allowing two gay people to wed will in no way affluence future generations, or make all of America gay. Gays will keep being born, so why force homosexuals to live unhappy lives?
This also assumes that all homosexuals seek to form a family.

More arguments to come, hopefully.

References
[1] - http://psychology.ucdavis.edu...;
[2] -
[3] - http://www.apa.org...;(last sentence especially)
Debate Round No. 1
TrueChristian

Con

my opponent just criticized me for citing what he thinks is a bias source but he linked to a source which is obviously also bias, it has an lgbt banner at the top of the webpage

this guy im debating wants to trick you through lying. good for him for being so convincing, but hes arguing for the wrong side, that video you posted is in favour of my side of the debate, warning about pedophilia in homosexuals. thanx for the informational warning,not sure what thats about

so pro didnt give response to my pedophilia bit

also, the APA is an organization extremely influenced by liberal media pressure. the family research council holds its ground from the beginning. APA is all over the place. when america is majority conservative, theyll switch to being anti gay to appease people.

sexuality is NOT a choice you think babies have sexual thoughts? I know 100% its a choice because i chose to be straight

also there is supposed to be not round 3 but i guess we will do it. only ending parts in round 3, nothing new like round 2 and 1 or else you lose

so, summary: my opponent linked to an lgbt source, the apa which can't be trusted due to all constnat pressure from the liberal media and the gay agenda, and given a confusing youtube video as a refute for my pedophilia argument that actually is my favor because it shows gays are dangerous.
Daltonian

Pro

Very, very brief Arguments

1. Homosexuality is not a bad thing. It is equivalent to a skin colour or a physical apperance. It's something that people cannot control, despite what con claims about himself. People should not be judged on their sexuality, but upon if they are a gay black jewish clansman. joke <3


2. From a non-emotional or moral standpoint, homosexuality could be a factor in decreasing the ever increasing birth rate and the inflated population.


Rebuttals to.. whatever con is trying to say

1. LGBT flag in my source There is an extreme difference in bias between displaying an LGBT flag and having a reputation as being one of the most anti-gay organizations in America. My source does not manipulate evidence in it's favour and uses logic in it's reasoning. Since my support is summarizing studies that affirm that homosexuality is not able to be correlated with choice of orientation or pedophilia, it has the right to wave that flag in affirmation of it's findings.

Here is my source again, btw, because it seems the link is broken to me, don't know how con got it:
(http://psychology.ucdavis.edu...)

2. The video - Oh, goodness.

The purpose of the video was to
illustrate the origins of the myth that homosexuality and pedophilia are correlated. It's a propaganda video meant for small-minded people. The fact that you interpreted it as "evidence against LGBT people" speaks words.

3. Reliability of the APA - Con has made some big claims about the legitimacy of the APA, pretty much suggesting that it is corrupt, fake, and totally unreliable. Unfortunately for him, he's failed sto supply any proof of this.

4. Babies want hot, delicious sex - It's a known fact that all babies love sex. Don't know what con is getting at here. No, but seriously, the experiences and possible illusions of one person (TrueChristian) speaks nothing to the status of an entire sexual orientation.

Try comments for source if not working. Maybe its just me.
Debate Round No. 2
TrueChristian

Con

well my opponent for some reason decided to join a gay kkk. this does not help his argument, he is proving he is the true phobic one here

also, who are you to say a video is propaganda, you didnt make it, you have to source that or prove

also, do YOU KNOW MY BRAIN? you are CLAIMING that you know my CHOICES better than i do. i was born void of sexual preference, im not some sort of freak baby fetish pedophile. my preferences matured as god intended, I did not commit this sin, although I have sinned we have all sined, I did not deviate from my path and i am straight, i chose it. i chose to be straight and accept jesus.

let jesus have mercy on your soul. accept him into your heart and you will be permitted to the gates of heaven romans 10:9, john 3:16

i should win this debate because the pro here is affiliating with the kkk and being irelevant to the debate, he also is tricking the voters on purpose with misleading videos.

if you are a godo christian, vote for con in thsi debate please.

all christian voters, remember your savior
Daltonian

Pro

I admit it, I am affiliated with the gay-kay-kay (gkk). I am also satan. I am part of a huge conspiracy into tricking christian voters into abandoning their saviour and voting for me, I am satan, head of the gay kay kay, evil manipulator of youtube videos.

But seriously,voters, please vote me for one of the following reasons:

1. Con has literally offered no valid reasoning for his position, only rapid allegations of misconduct and baseless statements
2. Con is making pleas with voters and trying to get them to vote for him out of sympathy. He is attempting to manipulate his religious affiliation to gain voting position.
3. Con needs to learn DDO is not a place to rant senseless/effortless opinions like this.

He has misunderstood my argument in it's entirety, perhaps out of willfull ignorance, and all of my random jokes. This debate was over in seriousness after my first round. Everything in this debate past round 1 is nonsense, and pretty irrelevant, because con has chosen to make it that way.

Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Firelife 2 years ago
Firelife
Christian you are using peoples religous beliefs to bias towards you as you said " If you are a true christian vote for me" or something along those lines. Things apply to gays that are considered harmful also apply to straights. Daltionian has the logical and Moral high ground here
Posted by Progressivist 2 years ago
Progressivist
Besides, this one is an obvious win. No fun to judge >:(
Posted by Progressivist 2 years ago
Progressivist
Looks like you don't need votes anymore, lol. I'll vote on your other debate instead, k?
Posted by TrueChristian 2 years ago
TrueChristian
Leave it to the voters.
Posted by Daltonian 2 years ago
Daltonian
TrueChristian, you whizzed through this debate in very little time at all. If you want a debate to go more in your favour and how you want it to, then you need to put in more effort.
Posted by TrueChristian 2 years ago
TrueChristian
sorry called you stupid, angry,, i am confused how I AM the one who ruined the debate when you started posting pictures and not responding my points
Posted by TrueChristian 2 years ago
TrueChristian
kkk is not a joke, wtf, stupid, you accuse me of ruining it?
Posted by Daltonian 2 years ago
Daltonian
lol.
Posted by KhalifV 2 years ago
KhalifV
I'm speaking to my friend Daltonian. I was expressing a slight disappointment that he accepted this debate before me, because this debate is basically a free win.
Posted by TrueChristian 2 years ago
TrueChristian
what do you want khalif
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con is an obvious troll. Points to Pro for playing along while still thoroughly winning the debate.
Vote Placed by Codedlogic 2 years ago
Codedlogic
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con claimed that the Bible was a legitimate source for condeming homsexuality but failed to show the Bible has legitimate views on homosexuality when pressed by Pro. Con also asserted that homosexuals are pedophiles and disruptive to families but also failed to support either of these positions.
Vote Placed by patrick967 2 years ago
patrick967
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided no solid proof for his stance and pro took advantage of that, providing rebuttals for opinions with no fact behind them and presenting logical and reasonable arguments in response.
Vote Placed by TorqueDork 2 years ago
TorqueDork
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons relying on logical fallacies
Vote Placed by ArcTImes 2 years ago
ArcTImes
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had way better argument. Con didn't understood Pro's argument, not even the jokes. Unreliable sources of Con and bad grammar, so points for Pro.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had terrible grammar so that point goes to Pro. Pro's arguments were also more superior and since he provided more sources those points also go to Pro.
Vote Placed by Samreay 2 years ago
Samreay
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con present no worthwhile arguments. The strongest he could have presented was a biblical argument, but as con provided no reason to accept the Bible as a source of moral authority (and it was not an assumption of the debate), this is an unsupported and spurious argument. Pro's sources were also more credible, and Pro spoke better (seriously con, spelling, grammar, shortening words, not hard to type properly). Easy win for pro.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
TrueChristianDaltonianTied
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: Neither side took this seriously.