The Instigator
Tree_of_Death
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
IceDragon
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Is it wrong to be Gay?

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 1 vote the winner is...
Tree_of_Death
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/4/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 346 times Debate No: 96719
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (14)
Votes (1)

 

Tree_of_Death

Con

Hullo! Just thought this might be a fun debate if you're interested. BoP is on you, as something should be assumed to be moral until it has been proven to be otherwise.
IceDragon

Pro

I think it is wrong to be gay because just look at it this way god created a family with one guy and one girl if god wanted there to be gay people he would have made it to where they can reproduce.
Debate Round No. 1
Tree_of_Death

Con

I would like to thank IceDragon for agreeing to this debate.

Pro's argument is as such: that heterosexual reproduction is obviously what "God" intended for humanity and that because of this, it is immoral. There are two problems with this statement.

1: The God you speak of has not been shown to exist. In other words, there is no evidence that God is real, and even less that he created the world. The whole premise to your argument (which you have stated as a given) is based off of the existence of a supreme deity when there is no evidence that said deity exists. There is even less evidence that he created the world, and lots contradicting it. One may logically say that the events that created the universe as described by science were put into motion by a God, but the creation story as described in Genesis is completely unsubstantiated.

2: Your other premise is that God is the source of all morality, which you fail to back up with logical evidence. Pro has failed to fulfill his burden of proof, and I urge y'all to vote Con.

Over to Pro for his next arguments/rebuttals.
IceDragon

Pro

well for one god is real because how was the first human being made? and second its wrong to be gay because a family needs a woman and a man. The man because to teach them how to be strong and show tough love. the mother because to show love and affection. but if u have the same gender parents it mixes it up and doesn't set them up to be prepared for life and it teaches them the wrong things.
Debate Round No. 2
Tree_of_Death

Con

How was the first human being made? Evolution. How else?

You say that a family needs a woman and a man in order to teach them certain values. Your mother/father dichotomy needs some working on, though. Your gender roles in parenting are heavily reliant upon social constructs and stereotypes. That, however, doesn't matter, because we're not debating same-sex adoption. We're debating if being gay--having romantic feelings about one of your own gender--is wrong. Same-sex adoption or parenting has nothing to do with it.

Just out of curiosity, how does it teach children the wrong things and what does it teach them? I know plenty of gay couples with children who are very well-prepared for life.
IceDragon

Pro

are u a girl? because if u are then i already know why u are supporting them. but if your not that probably means that u are gay yourself. almost no guys like gay people and almost all girls do u think your supporting them but u probobly want a same sex relationship
Debate Round No. 3
Tree_of_Death

Con

No, I'm not a girl and I'm not gay.

Extend all points as Pro seems to have forfeited--my gender and sexuality are beside the point.
IceDragon

Pro

no its not so please tell me why u are defending them im very interested in why
Debate Round No. 4
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 4 weeks ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: pianodude2468// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Holy sh*t, could pro have debated any worse? I heard several claims. I'm sorry, but debates need to have claim, warrant, impact, behind every statement. You say that obviously since men can't reproduce together and have a family that it is wrong. Did you ever tell us why having families is the end all be all of humanity? Alternatively, they aren't adding to population growth. Ultimately, you are stupid. Sorry. (:

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn"t explain conduct, S&G or sources. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter engages in some personal attacks on the mental faculties of one of the debaters, which generally is misconduct on their part. The voter also appears to engage with the argument of Pro in terms of his own views of what the debate should have been rather than what the debate actually was. He is required to assess arguments made by both debaters, and yet he never explains how Con"s arguments netted him the debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by Tree_of_Death 1 month ago
Tree_of_Death
pianodude-reported you vote for insulting my opponent.
Posted by Lonely-Bird 1 month ago
Lonely-Bird
ice dragon wants to know why someone who is a straight male would support gay rights?

the question is almost ridiculous on its face. i support gay rights because gays are human beings. it is none of ice dragon's nor any other religious based person's business whether gays can marry or have equal protection under the law.
Posted by Lonely-Bird 1 month ago
Lonely-Bird
Agreed lacov. That argument is as ridiculous as stating a male cannot support women's rights.
Posted by Iacov 1 month ago
Iacov
Pro argues completely from the point of Christianity. Although there is nothing inherently wrong with this it is worth noting that not everyone (especially gay people) are not Christian. Another point I would like to address is why is it that pro assumes a guy must be gay to support gay rights I would like to see his statistics. I am a bisexual male but I do have many straight guy friends and our relationship is completely platonic.
Posted by Heirio 1 month ago
Heirio
Fair nuff.
Posted by whiteflame 1 month ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Heirio// Mod action: Removed<

4 points to Con (S&G, Argumen ts). Reasons for voting decision: Fairly obvious who won. Pro had bad grammar, Con didn't. Con gets point. Con refuted all of Pro's arguments. Pro didn't refute anything and it's a compliment to call what he put forward "arguments".

[*Reason for removal*] (1) S&G is insufficiently explained. The voter is required to explain their decision, not merely to re-iterate it. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter has to specifically assess arguments made by both debaters. Merely disparaging one side's points in general and stating that the other refuted them is insufficient.
************************************************************************
Posted by Lonely-Bird 1 month ago
Lonely-Bird
It lasted an hour? That long?
Posted by Tree_of_Death 1 month ago
Tree_of_Death
Maybe about an hour.
Posted by Heirio 1 month ago
Heirio
Out of curiosity how long did that debate last?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Heirio 1 month ago
Heirio
Tree_of_DeathIceDragonTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con used proper sentences and correct punctuation whereas Pro did not and frequently spoke informally with things such as "u" and the wrong use of "your". Points to Con. Pro made assertions about homosexuality being wrong but failed to bring up any proof. His arguments only consisted of claims, no evidence. Con didn't have the burden of proof here and pointed out that Pro needed to prove that God exists in order for his arguments to work and showed how he had not done so. Pro drifted from the debate topic, talking about gay adoption and not being gay. But even this argument is made up entirely of claims. Con points out how he is drifting and in response Pro drifts even more. Points to Con.