The Instigator
grreeder105
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Sitar
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

If you suppart LGBT then you are not a true christian

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 2 votes the winner is...
Sitar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/1/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 495 times Debate No: 93268
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (21)
Votes (2)

 

grreeder105

Pro

Sitar supports LGBT people and say's she is a Christian. Se is lying to herself and God. The very own being that created her. You are not a sheep of God's herd, therefore you will not know his voice when he calls.
Sitar

Con

First, you are using the no true Scotsman fallacy. Second, who are you to judge? Only God is a true judge, not you, and not me. http://www.gaychristian101.com... is full of proof on how wrong you are. Gays and bisexuals can be "true Christians". I am bisexual, and I amm a Christian.
Debate Round No. 1
grreeder105

Pro

Yes only God judges, but he did give us eyes to see and ears to listen. A blind man could tell you what path you are taking. You are taking the scripture and changing it. You are trying to tell God what you can and can't do. You have to get an internet source that you did not make your self to back it up. You don't have God on your side, only a hyperlink. And all the other people of wrath
Sitar

Con

Did you READ what I wrote? You have not addressed ANY of my claims. What you are saying is the no true Scotsman fallacy.
Debate Round No. 2
grreeder105

Pro

I am sorry for everyone who looks at this debate. Apparently she is to focused on how proper it is other than being focused on the debate. This debate wasn't on how to debate
Sitar

Con

The point is this: Christians can be gay or support gays, and I have proven so with my link which is full of information refuting antigay claims. You have not proven that I am not a Christian. Why do you care so much what people do in their private life?
Debate Round No. 3
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Racingfan53 10 months ago
Racingfan53
@TheWorldIsComplicated

Pope Francis has never said anything out of line with official Church teaching. Pope Francis has said nothing specifically about gay marriage or homosexual acts, but merely about homosexuals themselves as people. The official Church teaching is that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered" and "under no circumstances can... be approved." However, it also states that

"2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition."

Therefore, official Catholic teaching on the subject is that homosexual /acts/ are grave sins, but the homosexual /condition/ is not.

Pope Francis has said nothing to contradict this teaching.
Posted by TheWorldIsComplicated 10 months ago
TheWorldIsComplicated
But mom!
Posted by David_Debates 10 months ago
David_Debates
TWIC and grreeder105, make a debate. Don't do it in the comments.
Posted by TheWorldIsComplicated 10 months ago
TheWorldIsComplicated
I never said God is wrong, you are simply putting words into my mouth.
Posted by grreeder105 10 months ago
grreeder105
Everyone does sin, but it is different when you change scripture and go around trying to teach it and say it is god's work. You are doing work for the devil trying to say that the true god is wrong.
Posted by TheWorldIsComplicated 10 months ago
TheWorldIsComplicated
Yes they are bad. I never said I don't judge, everyone judges, but it is absurd to say someone isn't a Christian because they sin when everyone sins everyday.
Posted by grreeder105 10 months ago
grreeder105
So you think that they are bad
Posted by TheWorldIsComplicated 10 months ago
TheWorldIsComplicated
No, never said that they are good.
Posted by grreeder105 10 months ago
grreeder105
So you do think that a killer is still good
Posted by TheWorldIsComplicated 10 months ago
TheWorldIsComplicated
No, you're putting words in my mouth. God is the only one that can truly judge.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by HeavenlyPanda 10 months ago
HeavenlyPanda
grreeder105SitarTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: The instigator has the burden of proof on their shoulders. Pro made empty claims without backing them up with a source. Pro could have quoted scripture or something but instead went on to just penalize con whereas con actually gave good points and backed them up with a source.
Vote Placed by David_Debates 10 months ago
David_Debates
grreeder105SitarTied
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:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was no where near meeting his burden, giving arguments to Con. Several spelling and grammatical mistakes give Con the grammar and spelling point. Although Con was the only one who used sources of any kind, simply citing a website without explaining or quoting from it is not debating, it's letting a website debate for you. For this reason, the only point that Pro is getting is for conduct.