The Instigator
Andrew.Cerean
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
vekoma123
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Is Homosexuality simply a sexual addiction?

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...
vekoma123
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/16/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,227 times Debate No: 46067
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

Andrew.Cerean

Pro

Hey guys,

The basis of my argument is under the notion that homosexuality is merely as sexual addiction. There are many forms of sexual addictions which society views to be immoral. Child molestation, incest, bestiality, and other various forms of taboo. People view these forms of sexual addictions as unnatural and wrong. Isn't homosexuality unnatural based on the manner in which it's conducted. Evolution allowed for the production of reproductive organs. The process of stimulation has evolved so that a male and female can procreate, allowing for the evolutionary process to continue. That being said, I would like people to view this topic from a different perspective for arguments sake. Many people have their own sexual addictions. I am simply making the argument that homosexuality is a sexual addiction, and should be seen as an inappropriate act based on the notion that it is unnatural. Granted there are quite a few people who view themselves as homosexual, but if we take a look at the evolutionary process, shouldn't all humans have the ability to procreate with the opposite sex? If that is not the case, would homosexuals simply be victims of survival of the fittest and no longer partake in the evolution of human beings since they will not procreate passing on their genetics to their offspring. Lastly, there are many gay people who have children, and decide to give into their sexual addiction and partake in homosexual acts behind closed doors...how do people explain that?
vekoma123

Con

I will gladly accept your debate. Just going to say now, any religious arguments given to me will be ignored, because religion should have absolutely no say in civil rights except for freedom to practice religion that doesn't infringe.

My opening statement will be the definition of 'sexual addiction': 'Sexual addiction is a conceptual model devised in order to provide a scientific explanation for sexual urges, behaviors, or thoughts that appear extreme in frequency or feel out of one's control"in terms of being a literal addiction to sexual activity.' (Wikipedia). Even though Wikipedia isn't the most reliable of sources, it really encompasses just the two words themselves in a more detailed fashion.

That being the case, what I'm seeing from your argument is that your comparison of 'taboo' sexual acts is defined by sexual addiction. Those are merely sexual acts, nothing to do with sexual urges, behaviors or thoughts that are constant or out of one's control. Such acts are usually committed by people who make a conscious decision to commit such sexual acts.

Of course, evolution has been solely based on (a)sexual reproduction, whether it be through plants, organisms, and humans. Obviously same-sex partners cannot reproduce, but that has nothing to do with being addicted to, well, sex.

Homosexuals are able to reproduce with the opposite sex, but choose not to based on their attraction to the same sex, and I can't really say they are victims necessarily, because homosexuals, and I don't mean to sound cliche, are born that way. Again, that is not an addiction to sex.

Children wise, I think any couple with children will want to hide their sexual acts from them because sex is best when there is a level of privacy and connection. Heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, whatever, unless you get turned on by PDA of that level, that has nothing to do with sexual addiction at all, but a choice of privacy for an act that, if public, could be public indecency, regardless of the partners' sexes.

I await your rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
Andrew.Cerean

Pro

" I can't really say they are victims necessarily, because homosexuals, and I don't mean to sound cliche, are born that way."

The human genome sequence was decoded in 2001, there is no "Gay" gene. If homosexuals were, "born that way", how do you explain a gay person changing his status to straight? You cannot claim that has never happened, because it has. There are many social factors that can play huge roles in a confusion of sexual identity. The confusion of sexual identity, paired with the addiction of the act of homosexuality, allows for a person to be committed to homosexuality.

A sexual taboo, is just another form in which a sexual addiction is played out. Some people really need a certain scenario to play out for them to achieve arousal or sexual gratification, this is often seen in serial rapists. But, your basis in which you claimed that sexual taboo is merely a sexual act is influenced by a sexual addiction.

The point that I attempted to bring forth in regards to sexual reproduction was to explain that homosexuality is unnatural. The entire process of a sexual act is completely designed to achieve an orgasm so a couple can procreate. Nature allowed our bodies to become sexually aroused, which is a natural act, but it was intended for a male and female to procreate. Women become aroused which allows her body to accept the male sperm easier, and men become aroused to transfer that sperm. Its simply a sexual process that was designed, by nature, to be between a man and a woman.

Why are certain people attracted to children or animals? Can you explain that? What is the difference between homosexuality and bestiality? Granted, the sexual partners are completely different, I understand that, but how does a person come to being addicted to bestiality or child molestation? Isn't that the same process as homosexuality?
vekoma123

Con

'The human genome sequence was decoded in 2001, there is no "Gay" gene. If homosexuals were, "born that way", how do you explain a gay person changing his status to straight? You cannot claim that has never happened, because it has. There are many social factors that can play huge roles in a confusion of sexual identity. The confusion of sexual identity, paired with the addiction of the act of homosexuality, allows for a person to be committed to homosexuality.'

You seem to have missed my word 'cliche'. Homosexuals are not 'born' gay, but is used as an empowerment for identity where a person's sexuality is based on their own personal upbringing, and not something that changes automatically. With that, that does make social factors part of my statement and one's upbringing for sexual identity, but who says that all people who have come out have done so with confusion? What even proves that homosexuality is an addiction? It's a life choice, just like heterosexuality is.

Yes, sexual taboos are taboo in society, and are often frowned upon. Homosexuality has been taboo for quite some time, but nowadays, it's becoming a socially accepted norm in some cultures, but not all. Also, my comment had nothing to do with being addicted to sex or having constant urges, you seem to be having trouble wording your own argument. I am not a sex addict, I am saying that they are sexual acts. Frowned upon? Yes, but they are not based on sexual addiction, but a choice one has made on what/who they choose to have sex with, even though it's not always moral. That has nothing, again, to do with addiction of any kind.

Reproduction wise, as I said before, same sex couples are obviously not able to reproduce. Don't you think everyone already knows that? What even spells out or defines a sexual act that procreation has to be in the picture? Sensual stripping and blowjobs are sexual acts, but they are not for reproduction. Wouldn't you agree that those two are sexual acts? I rest my case.

I cannot speak for all, but the way I see it for why people are attracted to children or animals is because they are either mentally ill or have some level of strange kink, but how does one start having such a lifestyle? Most likely not an addiction, but of a taboo life choice. I'm not justifying child molestation or bestiality in that verbal usage, but it's not about addiction, it's about life choice that can affect others whether it be a positive or negative effect.

For example, I am a social smoker, it's a lifestyle I choose to have, but I am not an addicted. smoker. Some people find smoking to be rather taboo, but that, again, has nothing to do with an addiction, but a life choice.

I await your rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 2
Andrew.Cerean

Pro

"With that, that does make social factors part of my statement and one's upbringing for sexual identity, but who says that all people who have come out have done so with confusion?"

I would go as far as to say much of homosexuality along with other forms of sexual deviation is out of confusion. That being said, its something that could be controlled, not marketed and made out to be a natural act.

"What even proves that homosexuality is an addiction? It's a life choice, just like heterosexuality is."

Any sexual act can become an addiction, as sex itself is very addicting. Many people have urges to achieve sexual orgasms all of the time. The act itself is addicting, but the question is what is a natural process? Is masturbation a natural process? Technically no, as the design of sex is for procreation, but many if not most people still masturbate. Oxytocin is released when having an orgasm, and it helps build an attachment to a sexual partner, that is one of the reasons in many cases of homosexuality, bonds are created between individuals. Oxytocin is also released during a woman's labor, which creates an undeniable bond between a mother and her child.

"Homosexuality has been taboo for quite some time, but nowadays, it's becoming a socially accepted norm in some cultures, but not all."

You hit the nail on the head, and you also brought forth the notion that homosexuality is becoming a socially accepted norm. Even though homosexuality is becoming accepted in some cultures, does that make the sexual act natural in any way? I am not having trouble wording my own argument, you fail to comprehend the power of sexuality. I work on a Special Victim Unit, and I have investigated countless sex crimes, I have attended several seminars in regards to sexual addictions and how they lead to sexual deviation and taboo. When a person achieves an orgasm, they strengthen the bond with a specific sexual act. It's strengthened through association and the great feeling behind the sexual act only strengthens the urge. Through this process, I can claim that any sexual act can become addicting, why do you think so many people do it. As a result, it is fair to conclude that homosexuality is addicting, see my point. The only difference is that homosexuality is unnatural, and should not be advertised as something that should be accepted by all people.

Did you really say that you are a smoker, and not addicted? Smoking for nearly all people who do it (when the product contains nicotine, which is designed to create an addiction) is an addiction. I would have chosen a different reference. Even though you may not be addicted and you are a social smoker, there are still millions of people who are addicted. Just like there are some couples who even though they maybe heterosexual, still may have homosexual sex from time to time.

You fail to distinguish the differences between life choices and addictions. Nearly anything can become an addiction when you throw in environmental influences along with how your body responds to the act. Nearly every person battles with some form of addiction. Society views doing things in excess as an addiction, even though some people may perceive them as life choices, but once again, I don't think you are using deductive reasoning. Since humans have the ability to experience a large range of emotion and have a strong connection with their senses. Sexual arousal can be compared to the mouth salivating when smelling a good food while hungry. Based on your reasoning, are you trying to say that there are no addictions in humanity?

Did you know that the human digestive system begins at the smell of food, the saliva is needed for the digestion process. Sexual arousal can also be viewed the same way, but instead of a digestive system, the reproductive organs are activated and are prepared to procreate. Its simply a body function.

By the way, I have worked child molestation and bestiality cases. The people were not mentally ill, actually, most of society would have viewed them as normal people. Nearly every person has three personas.

The first persona is revealed when you meet a stranger. You reserve your personality and in many cases you conduct yourself professionally. You are not likely to reveal secrets to a person you just met. In many cases you attempt to portray yourself as a normal person within society.

The second persona is revealed to your close friends, family, and significant other. They may know some embarrassing things about you. You are opened up and may have some very personal conversations.

The third persona is that which you keep in secret. The things that you will take to your grave because you are too embarrassed to reveal them to others. These include your sexual addictions, bad habits, and things society may view as not normal.

Ironically, nearly everyone has their secrets and strange sexual desires. Many people have them under control, even though from time to time, they get the urge to act on it. Did you know that when men are penetrated in the anus, the object puts pressure against their prostate? Also did you know when a prostate is under that type of pressure, the male experiences a stronger sexual release? That is why there are some straight men who like to be anally penetrated with an object during sexual intercourse. That also helps create an overall addiction to homosexuality.

In closing, I do believe homosexuality is merely an addiction and can be controlled. I also believe that the process is unnatural, therefore society should not force people to agree with homosexuality. You create the argument that homosexuality is a life choice. Rape, incest, child molestation, bestiality are all choices. However, rape is a forcible act upon another, which is a crime. Child molestation, can be forcible, but it is also a manipulation of a child who cannot understand their actions. Bestiality can be seen as a crime against nature in some cultures. Incest however is slightly different then the aforementioned. Incest usually has two willing individuals, but society still views it as unnatural and illegal. Therefor, shouldn't homosexuality also be viewed as unnatural as well?

Thanks for the debate.
vekoma123

Con

'I would go as far as to say much of homosexuality along with other forms of sexual deviation is out of confusion. That being said, its something that could be controlled, not marketed and made out to be a natural act.'

Great, YOU yourself would go as far to say that, but that is just an opinion, not a fact, nor a justifiable argument.

'Any sexual act can become an addiction, as sex itself is very addicting. Many people have urges to achieve sexual orgasms all of the time. The act itself is addicting, but the question is what is a natural process? Is masturbation a natural process? Technically no, as the design of sex is for procreation, but many if not most people still masturbate. Oxytocin is released when having an orgasm, and it helps build an attachment to a sexual partner, that is one of the reasons in many cases of homosexuality, bonds are created between individuals. Oxytocin is also released during a woman's labor, which creates an undeniable bond between a mother and her child.'

Cool beans, not everyone is addicted to sex. I could be wrong, but I'm not sure if you are trying to base this off of sex addiction reports in the media, Tiger Woods for example. People will try to find excuses for everything, and it seems to be more about getting attention and giving diagnoses for diseases at random. Also, with design of sex, yes it can be for procreation but it also can be for pleasure, but one can get a pleasure out of something without being addicted. And okay, you admit that oxytocin can be released through such bonds, so what's the problem. Is breastfeeding an addiction too?

'You hit the nail on the head, and you also brought forth the notion that homosexuality is becoming a socially accepted norm. Even though homosexuality is becoming accepted in some cultures, does that make the sexual act natural in any way? I am not having trouble wording my own argument, you fail to comprehend the power of sexuality. I work on a Special Victim Unit, and I have investigated countless sex crimes, I have attended several seminars in regards to sexual addictions and how they lead to sexual deviation and taboo. When a person achieves an orgasm, they strengthen the bond with a specific sexual act. It's strengthened through association and the great feeling behind the sexual act only strengthens the urge. Through this process, I can claim that any sexual act can become addicting, why do you think so many people do it. As a result, it is fair to conclude that homosexuality is addicting, see my point. The only difference is that homosexuality is unnatural, and should not be advertised as something that should be accepted by all people.'

Homosexuality is not a sexual act, its a sexual lifestyle that a person chooses to hold. If you are talking about gay sex, primarily anal, what makes it different when a straight couple does it? The only difference is genders that partake in such an act, not an issue of what is natural or not. And okay, so you have been a part of these groups and have noticed these details. Of course, yes there are people who are sex addicts, I will not deny that at all, but that has nothing to do with a choice of life to be sexually attracted to the same sex. You are confusing something for something else, so no, I 'do not see your point.' Homosexuality is unnatural? Cool, that's your opinion, not a fact.

Smoking wise, no I am not an addicted smoker, I smoke with people during social occasions, and rarely on my own, but I do not use smoking as a 'fix' or a 'resolve' to any problems I have. And you said 'Smoking for nearly all'. NEARLY all. And great, so there are millions of people who are, great, that's their problem, not mine, and it never will be. Also, I don't understand what you are trying to say in your last sentence, I mean, there are couples who can experiment, but that doesn't justify the fact that they are committed to one another, whether a straight or gay couple.

'You fail to distinguish the differences between life choices and addictions. Nearly anything can become an addiction when you throw in environmental influences along with how your body responds to the act. Nearly every person battles with some form of addiction. Society views doing things in excess as an addiction, even though some people may perceive them as life choices, but once again, I don't think you are using deductive reasoning. Since humans have the ability to experience a large range of emotion and have a strong connection with their senses. Sexual arousal can be compared to the mouth salivating when smelling a good food while hungry. Based on your reasoning, are you trying to say that there are no addictions in humanity?'

Umm, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I actually have brought up the topic of life choices and addictions being different, so.....no. I can have sex with multiple partners, but that doesn't mean that my life revolves around sex. And that is totally true that humans are able to feel such emotions and connections, but I never said that there are no addictions at all. I don't quite understand where you are getting that assumption from. I am aware that people have sex addictions, drug addictions, fandom addictions, etc, but the way I see it is that even though any addiction can have some level of negative affect, there's really no negativity in having a homosexual lifestyle. The only negativity is how people react to it, and you seem to make that quite clear, and it still does not prove whether or not a sexual identity is an addiction. That's basically like saying that heterosexuality is an addiction, which I know it's not, so what makes it different? But no, there's just intolerant bigots like you out there who will make up an excuse for anything they don't support.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
No problem. The best debates I've had are the ones I feel I learn the most from, and those are always the ones I lose.
Posted by Andrew.Cerean 3 years ago
Andrew.Cerean
Thanks, it was my first debate on the site, I'll make sure I title things in a better way.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
And by the way, I didn't notice the ad hominem attack at the end of the debate. That's my bad. I'll give you conduct for that.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
No problem. There are plenty of arguments on this site that I've definitely disagreed with and still voted for. If the debate had been regarding the topic of "homosexuality is more often the result of sexual addiction than heterosexuality," you might have garnered my vote. Phrasing can mean a lot.
Posted by Andrew.Cerean 3 years ago
Andrew.Cerean
I respect your decision, I don't expect to receive many votes, as anyone who is already passionate about the issue on behalf of homosexuality will likely vote against. I merely made the claim that it was a sexual addiction, and that it was unnatural. I do not expect many people to understand the psychology behind sexuality. I provided scientific backings behind my claim (oxytocin and the prostate info), and I believe that makes sense.

I probably should have titled the category differently, as nearly all sexual acts carry some form of addictive traits, therefore there should have not been a debate on the issue in the first place.

As for the Con, he was fairly quick to label me as a bigot, which I thought was interesting.

Thanks for reading.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
"I do believe homosexuality is merely an addiction and can be controlled. I also believe that the process is unnatural, therefore society should not force people to agree with homosexuality."

I really want to highlight these two sentences to explain my decision, because I think that, in spite of Pro's expertise in the area of sex crimes, he's simply not understanding that there's a gulf between his arguments and what he's trying to prove.

Even if I go ahead and accept all of the arguments Pro's made, I'm still easily able to vote Con. And it's not just the fact that Pro's first actual argument about how sex is addictive come in the final round (a little late). If I accepted all of these arguments, this is what I'm left with: some people are addicted to sex, homosexuals are slightly more likely to be addicted to sex if they are men having anal sex. Note that none of that leads logically to a conclusion that homosexuality itself is a sexual addiction. It doesn't even really support the slightly easier burden that Pro seemed to establish for himself in certain rounds that people become homosexual mainly to fulfill a sexual addiction.

In fact, your arguments seem more supportive of the idea that all of sex is addictive, and therefore anyone engaging in it is an addict. If that's the case, then you're only hurting yourself, since any sexuality can fulfill the addiction, and therefore any individual sexuality isn't the result of that sexual addiction.

The latter sentence has nothing to do with this debate. The fact that it's absurd for you to say that anyone's "forcing people to agree with homosexuality" without any sort of support is bad enough, but doing so when it has absolutely no bearing on how the round plays out? It just showcases bias, and your desire to have a very different debate.

So that leaves me with arguments going to Con. Both sides should use at least SOME sources, but otherwise, Con dominates this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
Andrew.Cereanvekoma123Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Given in comments.
Vote Placed by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Andrew.Cereanvekoma123Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO's problem here was that he didn't argue about whether homosexuality was an addiction, rather he turned the debate into whether homosexuality was natural or not. CON kept to the resolution and pointed out that at no point did PRO properly establish that homosexuality was an addiction. Further than that, CON argued that homosexuality was simply a lifestyle, which went improperly rebutted.