The Instigator
TheGayAtheist
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
LogicalLunatic
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Homosexuality

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
LogicalLunatic
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/12/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 657 times Debate No: 61614
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)

 

TheGayAtheist

Pro

1: Acceptance round.
2: Argument.
3: Argument.
4: Argument.
5: A thank you.
LogicalLunatic

Con

I accept. As Con, I will be taking the Anti-Homosexuality stance.
Also, I ask that my opponent waits until sometime tomorrow to post his argument, as to give me more time when it comes down to it.
Debate Round No. 1
TheGayAtheist

Pro

Homosexuality: Homosexuality is completely alright, natural, and not wrong, evil, demonic, a mental disorder, a choice, and not something you can change. Homosexuality is not a choice, no one would make the choice to risk being discriminated, tortured, killed, locked up, fined, etc. Anyone who does make a choice and risk these things needs to get immediate help. To further more prove being gay isn't a choice, a gay gene has been discovered already. The fact that we can't reproduce with other males don't disprove anything, there are no official natural laws or anything. Gay marriage: Gay marriage is alright, traditional marriage will not be attacked, and it certainly won't open up a gateway to men marrying children or anything. Why not change it? Why not progress and change? Alright, it's your turn, good luck!
LogicalLunatic

Con

"Homosexuality is completely alright, natural, and not wrong, evil, demonic, a mental disorder, a choice, and not something you can change."
Because making a claim automatically makes that claim true. Right.

"Homosexuality is not a choice, no one would make the the choice to risk being discriminated, tortured, killed, locked up, fined, etc."
So you're saying that humans are always rational and they never do harmful stuff? Why do some people in certain Islamic countries commit adultery when they know they'll be stoned for it? Why do people in the United States do illegal drugs when (obviously) such drugs are illegal to possess and/or use and they could go to jail for it?
There is a difference between having a desire to do something and not having a choice about said thing.

"A gay gene has been discovered already."
Oh? Please provide evidence for this claim. But like I said before, having a desire to do something doesn't mean that you have to do something. There is a little something called self-restraint and self-discipline. If we were to follow your logic, meth addicts should be left alone. Psychopaths with ultra-violent minds should be allowed to kill as they please. Desire is no excuse for breaking the law, and it is no excuse for homosexuality.

"It (gay marriage) certainly won't open up a gateway to men marrying children or anything."
I agree; the gateway was opened up long before gay marriage came around. But you have to close the (figurative) gateway at some point, or else society will degrade to its worst possible state. And it should be closed right here and now, before homosexual marriage becomes widely accepted in the United States.

So far, I have provided some rebuttals, but I have done nothing to prove that homosexuality is wrong.
First of all, Christianity is opposed to homosexuality, as is Judaism and presumably Islam. But as you are an atheist, I'll need to provide some secular reasons.

Homosexuality prevents breeding. There is no species (that I am aware of) which practices population control. Even locusts and krill don't do much (if anything) to handle their outrageously high populations. Therefore, any and all cases of homosexuality are contrary to nature, just like a third arm in a human or a chicken is.
Besides having no apparent purpose (naturally occurring sterility sterility could handle population control much better without introducing a whole village to the sexually transmitted diseases perpetrated through homosexual activity), homosexuality also has the potential for devastating a nation.
According to this link (Liberal bias notwithstanding), the actual number of gay men in the United States is approximately 5% of the male population.
http://www.nytimes.com...
It's reasonable to assume that the percentage of Lesbians is around the same.
Ultimately, this would mean that AT LEAST 5% of the United States wouldn't breed if all LGBT people "came out of the closet" (not counting the people who aren't gay who don't have kids).
This is important because the U.S. population growth is currently at unsustainable levels.
http://www.lifenews.com...
To keep the American population from declining, everyone able adult should have kids, which will raise the population to sustainable levels.

I plan on discussing some more of the dangers of homosexuality in the next round, provided that my opponent doesn't forfeit.
Debate Round No. 2
TheGayAtheist

Pro

"Homosexuality is completely alright, natural, and not wrong, evil, demonic, a mental disorder, a choice, and not something you can change."
Because making a claim automatically makes that claim true. Right."

I was only trying to type my opinion.

"Homosexuality is not a choice, no one would make the the choice to risk being discriminated, tortured, killed, locked up, fined, etc."
So you're saying that humans are always rational and they never do harmful stuff? Why do some people in certain Islamic countries commit adultery when they know they'll be stoned for it? Why do people in the United States do illegal drugs when (obviously) such drugs are illegal to possess and/or use and they could go to jail for it?
There is a difference between having a desire to do something and not having a choice about said thing."

I do in fact take that back.

"A gay gene has been discovered already."
Oh? Please provide evidence for this claim. But like I said before, having a desire to do something doesn't mean that you have to do something. There is a little something called self-restraint and self-discipline. If we were to follow your logic, meth addicts should be left alone. Psychopaths with ultra-violent minds should be allowed to kill as they please. Desire is no excuse for breaking the law, and it is no excuse for homosexuality."

(Get Educated On Homosexuality, YouTube)

"Homosexuality prevents breeding. There is no species (that I am aware of) which practices population control. Even locusts and krill don't do much (if anything) to handle their outrageously high populations. Therefore, any and all cases of homosexuality are contrary to nature, just like a third arm in a human or a chicken is.
Besides having no apparent purpose (naturally occurring sterility sterility could handle population control much better without introducing a whole village to the sexually transmitted diseases perpetrated through homosexual activity), homosexuality also has the potential for devastating a nation.
According to this link (Liberal bias notwithstanding), the actual number of gay men in the United States is approximately 5% of the male population.
http://www.nytimes.com......
It's reasonable to assume that the percentage of Lesbians is around the same.
Ultimately, this would mean that AT LEAST 5% of the United States wouldn't breed if all LGBT people "came out of the closet" (not counting the people who aren't gay who don't have kids).
This is important because the U.S. population growth is currently at unsustainable levels.
http://www.lifenews.com......
To keep the American population from declining, everyone able adult should have kids, which will raise the population to sustainable levels."

Modern science cannot state conclusively what causes sexual orientation, but a great many studies suggest that it is the result of biological and environmental forces, not a personal "choice." One of the more recent is a 2008 Swedish study of twins (the world's largest twin study) that appeared in The Archives of Sexual Behavior and concluded that "[h]omosexual behaviour is largely shaped by genetics and random environmental factors." Dr. Qazi Rahman, study co-author and a leading scientist on human sexual orientation, said: "This study puts cold water on any concerns that we are looking for a single 'gay gene' or a single environmental variable which could be used to 'select out' homosexuality " the factors which influence sexual orientation are complex. And we are not simply talking about homosexuality here " heterosexual behaviour is also influenced by a mixture of genetic and environmental factors."

Interestingly, some scientists think they have come up with the answer. There does seem to be a genetic component to homosexuality, but how would it be passed on? The answer is that female relatives of gay men seem to be somewhat more sexual, and have more children, and that passes on the gene of homosexuality and it also causes the women to reproduce more, thereby meeting the needs of reproduction and continuation.

Reproducing isn't the purpose of life, either, it's just a goal.

If you want to continue this debate, I can make another one so we can go on, if that's what you prefer. G'Luck!
LogicalLunatic

Con

My opponent has devoted a large amount of his argument to showing that homosexual is not a choice. I concede that homosexual desires are natural to some people.
But what does this prove? People have desires inclined towards doing lots of stupid stuff.

What is important here is the question of whether or not homosexual behavior should be tolerated, not whether or not it is natural.

But, just because I have the time, I'll respond to what my opponent said about male homosexual traits being beneficial to females. If evolution and natural selection is such an intelligent force, why the heck would it maintain these genes in men when clearly they only benefit women?

Now, I am going to plagiarize myself. I was once the (notorious) user known as Bubbatheclown, and I give my consent for me to plagiarize myself. If you need confirmation that I was once Bubbatheclown, ask some of the older highly active members of this Site.
Anyway, here's the link to the debate:
http://www.debate.org...
In this debate, I showed that gay people who MUCH MUCH MUCH more likely to cheat on their same sex spouse and that they generally have an insane number of sexual partners. Oh, and they don't usually live very long.
This is NOT a healthy behavior, and we as a society should not endorse it.
Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
TheGayAtheist

Pro

This does not prove anything. I've never cheated on any of my past partners, and I never, ever, EVER will. Only a piece of garbage would do such a thing. There are bad people within every group, Atheists, Christians, Straight, Gay, Transgender, Fat, Skinny, etc. You've proven nothing. Yes, homosexuals may have a higher rate of cheating on their straight spouse, but that doesn't include all.
LogicalLunatic

Con

I didn't say all. I said most. Regardless of whether or not you are telling the truth, you being an exception proves nothing. If gays are much more likely to cheat on their spouses and have thousands of sexual partners, there has to be some reason. And I think that the reason lies in the homosexuality itself.

It's my opponent's turn now.
Debate Round No. 4
TheGayAtheist

Pro

If gays are more likely to cheat on their partners because of the homosexuality, then Atheists are less likely to divorce their partner because of their non-belief in God. See what I did there?
LogicalLunatic

Con

"Atheists are less likely to divorce their partner because of their non-belief in God."

That literally made no sense. Vote for Con!
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by LogicalLunatic 2 years ago
LogicalLunatic
Please remove the Vote Bomb.
Posted by dayton_mack55 2 years ago
dayton_mack55
" Homosexuality is completely alright, natural, and not wrong, evil, demonic, a mental disorder, a choice, and not something you can change. Homosexuality is not a choice, no one would make the choice to risk being discriminated, tortured, killed, locked up, fined, etc. "

I think this comment is absolutely brilliant. I do agree with some other commenters to back up the gay gen information but it is definitely an interesting statement until proven a fact, but I will be willing to actually look into this comment. I don't know how I can agree with the against side as I have always been for homosexuals because I believe a person is a person and we are all equal no matter who we love. But I don't want to strip the fact the the con side has very good and valid arguments. A great debate nonetheless!
Posted by Natsu_Dragneel 2 years ago
Natsu_Dragneel
Stating opinions in a debate is obviously how you are supposed to do it.
Posted by pmarie 2 years ago
pmarie
Please state your resources on the gay gene.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Homo is simply a sex act. is not the color of your eyes, which is what you were born with. And people all the time do things that gets them shunned by society. Drunks, druggies, hateful,stinky, obnoxious.And they do these things all the time.And if iit to be around someone that I know does nasty sex acts and voices it , that is my right. When I worked in the mill there were guys that would come in and talk about sex with their wives. I thought that was ignorant too.If you want to do that nasty stuff with a man, keep it to yourself.
Posted by GoOrDin 2 years ago
GoOrDin
It is a negative influence on society to promote sexual behaviors. always.
Posted by LogicalLunatic 2 years ago
LogicalLunatic
Duuude...
Posted by LogicalLunatic 2 years ago
LogicalLunatic
I know that I'm gonna hate doing this, but...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
TheGayAtheistLogicalLunaticTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro fails to meet his burden of proof. First off, it's not clear what the topic is. It just says "homosexuality," but Pro never states what it means to be on either side of this debate. He appears to take it to mean that all he must do is prove that homosexuality is natural and shouldn't be rejected, but only does so insofar as he makes a number of unwarranted claims and, even if I buy them all, only manages to prove that many of the negatives people ascribe to against homosexuality are untrue. That doesn't ever prove that homosexuality should be accepted or tolerated, as Con points out. I will, however, afford Pro conduct as Con cited a separate debate within this one, which LogicalLunatic knows all too well is a no-no.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
TheGayAtheistLogicalLunaticTied
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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provides no evidence to support a pro homosexuality stance.