The Instigator
Jikpamu
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
EndarkenedRationalist
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Is the Bible right on sex and marriage?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
EndarkenedRationalist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/30/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 906 times Debate No: 59753
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Jikpamu

Pro

Yes -

1 Corinthians 6:18 (New International Version 2011)
1Co 6:18 Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.

http://www.cdc.gov...
Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the United States population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. At the end of 2010, an estimated 489,121 (56%) persons living with an HIV diagnosis in the United States were gay and bisexual men, or gay and bisexual men who also inject drugs.

So 2% of all having sex in America account for 56% of all HIV infections.

http://www.cdc.gov...
Consistent and correct use of male latex condoms can reduce (though not eliminate) the risk of STD transmission. Genital ulcer diseases and HPV infections can occur in both male and female genital areas that are covered or protected by a latex condom, as well as in areas that are not covered.

The Bible is right on sex and both you and your wife waiting until you are married to have sex. If only I could show pictures of Oral Herpes Simplex Type 2 in this debate but pictures are not allowed.

If you don't want a life taking life destroying marriage stopping STD then both you and your wife wait until you are married to have sex. Plain and Simple: the Bible is right.
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

I thank my opponent for providing me with an opportunity to debate and wish him the best of luck in the upcoming rounds!

My opponent has the full BoP is this debate. He must uphold that what the Bible says regarding sex and marriage is entirely accurate. I must negate his arguments.

My opponent's entire case here revolves around homsexuality and AIDS rates. It is true that gay man have the highest risk of AIDS infection. This entirely ignores homosexuality in women, however. In fact, the CDC reports that there are exactly 0 confirmed cases of HIV tranmission in female-on-female intercourse, making lesbian activity the least dangerous sexual method from the standpoint of sexually transmitted infections [1]. As the Bible condemns all homosexuality and not just gay men, my opponent's argument falls apart.

I would also like to point out that my opponent's source is misleading.

"Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the United States population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. At the end of 2010, an estimated 489,121 (56%) persons living with an HIV diagnosis in the United States were gay and bisexual men, or gay and bisexual men who also inject drugs."

Drug habits are also a leading cause of HIV/AIDS infection (sharing needles). This factors could easily be responsible for some of the infection statistics. Furthermore, using methods of protection, such as condoms, as my opponent admits, does reduce the risk of transmission. That my opponent mentions this only serves to help my case and undermine his. My opponent also ignores the HIV/AIDS virus in heterosexual relations. HIV is not a "gays only" virus.

Finally, my opponent claims that waiting until marriage somehow validates the Bible. How? Marriage is not a magical cure for HIV. If a man or woman has HIV before getting married (and could still entirely be a virgin - the virus can be passed down genetically), they will still have it after marriage, and they could still pass it on to their spouse. Marriage is not a protection from sexually transmitted diseases.

That's it for this round. I anticipate my opponent's response.


[1] http://www.gmhc.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Jikpamu

Pro

My entire case does not rest on homosexuality and since some gay and bisexual men inject drugs it may be hard to determine how they got HIV. It still indicates that being a gay man is very risky.

And Lesbian women cannot get STDs? How about Herpes or HPV from a bisexual relationship passed on to a gay one?

And regarding AIDS being passed down genetically then that is all the more reason to remain celibate: you and your wife so that if you don't already have AIDS/HIV then you won't give it to your kids who may want to get married some day.

And Marriage is the cure. When you marry you:

1) more likely you are saving yourself for marriage (I know it's not a guarantee) and more likely you are NOT being sexually promiscuous putting you and your spouse at risk for life destroying marriage stopping diseases.

2) You plan financially for marriage (most do). You are committing to a plan like a financial budget to take care of your spouse. You will better able to handle raising a child financially when you have a plan in place.

3) When you mean your vows in marriage before God, you will be less likely to break up causing instability and a lack of security in a relationship. Both your wife and your children love security in a marriage.

4) Just living together goes against all this Bible logic and Wisdom. Why do you think that God talked about the Institution of Marriage in Genesis Chapters 1 and 2 and Jesus reconfirmed it Mark 10:6-9?

*** With all the STDs out there today and the risk of an unplanned pregnancy, and the fact that condoms in many cases are not an effective measure, then why not wait until you are married to have sex? Gives you sometime to look forward to on your wedding night!!
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

I thank my opponent for his rapid response! Now onto his contentions.

My opponent claims his entire case does not rest on homosexuality (and sexually transmitted infections), yet he has not addressed anything else. So, yes, at this moment, his case does entirely rest on them.

"And Lesbian women cannot get STDs? How about Herpes or HPV from a bisexual relationship passed on to a gay one?"

This is a deliberate misrepresentation of what I said. I said, "the CDC reports that there are exactly 0 confirmed cases of HIV transmission in female-on-female intercourse." Nowhere did I say it was impossible.

Again, heterosexual contact remains a much larger source of STI transmission than lesbian contact. In fact, heterosexual relations were responsible for 84% of HIV infections in women in 2010 [1].

"And regarding AIDS being passed down genetically then that is all the more reason to remain celibate: you and your wife so that if you don't already have AIDS/HIV then you won't give it to your kids who may want to get married some day."

This is a "solution" that would only work if a) everyone who had HIV/AIDS already never had sex again, thereby eventually eliminating HIV from the gene pool, and b) all other methods of contracting HIV/AIDS were eliminated. Although HIV/AIDS is largely contracted through sex, it can also be 'caught' through being born to an infected parent, breast feeding, sharing medical equipment, blood transfusions, and even by being bitten by someone with HIV (yes, like a zombie) [2]. I shouldn't need to say why a) is absurd.

My opponent claims then, when one marries, one is more likely saving him or herself for marriage. This is blatantly untrue. In fact, according to a study by the National Survey of Family Growth and reported at the Guttmacher Institute, by age 44, 99% of respondents had had sex, and of those, 95% of them had had premarital sex [3].

"2) You plan financially for marriage (most do). You will better able to handle raising a child financially when you have a plan in place."

This is irrelevant. People who have premarital sex are just as capable of financial planning as those without. Unexpected pregnancy is a rare occurance, especially with methods of birth control.

" 3)When you mean your vows in marriage before God, you will be less likely to break up causing instability and a lack of security in a relationship."

Also untrue. In fact, the Barna Research Group found that atheists generally have a lower divorce rate than highly religious couples [4].

My opponent's last two paragraphs essentially boil down to a 'why not,' which is neither an acceptable nor convincing argument considering he has the BoP.

I'm out of characters now, so onto the next round!

[1] http://aids.gov...
[2] http://aids.gov...
[3] http://www.guttmacher.org...
[4] http://www.patheos.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Jikpamu

Pro

Let me approach this from a fresh view point:

Even the CDC agrees with the Bible that abstinence before marriage is best:

http://www.cdc.gov...

CDC"s Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) supports rigorous evaluation research and other projects to identify the types of programs and practices that can reduce sexual risk behaviors among youth:

DASH has supported the development and evaluation of All About Youth, a randomized, controlled trial testing two HIV/STD education programs for middle school students: ONE THAT EMPHASIZES SEXUAL ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE, and one that emphasizes abstinence in conjunction with skill-building activities for condom and contraceptive use.

Jikpamu: But I freely admit that without a wholehearted encompassing approach that what the CDC says will not be followed.

We need to as a nation (US):

1) Stop all the sex and porn in our media that is inundating our kids with messages contrary to the Bible.

2) Get back and repent to the God of our ancestors who founded this country: that same God of the Bible...

2 Chronicles 7:14 (NIV 2011) - if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

3) Teach abstinence before marriage in schools

4) Bring prayer and the Holy Bible back into our schools

*** The children now will be the leaders of tomorrow in 30 or 40 years from now. What kind of nation do you think we will become? Are things looking up for us as a nation or down? How are kids doing and learning in school? What about all the Mass Shootings? Drugs? Porn? Legalization of Drugs?

Jikpamu: I know I am a little bit off topic but what I am trying to say is that things have gotten worse not better as we have gotten farther and farther away from the Bible.
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

It is true that abstinence is the only way to eliminate the risk of getting an STI via sexual intercourse. This still says nothing about how marriage has any impact on STIs. An infected person will remain infected, marriage or no. However, in my opponent's same exact source, the CDC mentions decreasing unprotected sex and increasing condom usage as two of the most effective means of combating diseases.

Additionally, the Bible does NOT advocate for abstinence because of STIs. The Bible just promotes abstinence without any real reasoning other than devotion to God. The Bible holds that sexual acts are lustful and turn the spirit away from heaven and God.

1 Peter 2:11 KJV "Dear beloved, I beseech (you) as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul" [1].

1 Corinthians 6:19 KJV "What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost (which is) in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?" [1].

Therefore, in order for the Bible to right about sex, my opponent's argument should revolve around the spirituality and sanctity of the body, as the Bible does, and not STIs which people back then were almost assuredly more or less ignorant of.

" 1)Stop all the sex and porn in our media that is inundating our kids with messages contrary to the Bible."

That is a separate debate topic, but pornography has several beneficial effects, such as driving new technologies and forms of expression and providing a soothing and cathartic effect on viewers, which decreases sexist and violent feelings [2]. (The source here is like half of the allotted characters, so I will put it in the comments).

All of my opponent's other points are off-topic. The US is not a Christian country and most of the Founders were Deists, but that's irrelevant to the debate. Abstinence-only education actually leads to higher rates of premarital sex, and NOT ONE has been proven to delay sex for a significant time [3]. Prayer is not gone from schools - mandatory, teacher-led prayer is, as it should be, because those schools are public and need to be secular lest they violate the Constitution.

Finally, I will provide an argument, though I do not need to.

The Bible upholds sexist marriages. Women are commanded to submit to their husbands.

1 Corinthians 11:9 "Neither was the man created for the woman but the woman for the man."

Ephesians 5:22 "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also should wives submit to their husbands in everything."

We clearly see that, in order for the Bible to be right about marriage, women must be treated as subordinate to their husbands. This does not jive with the value of equality in relationships and is antithetical to what most pursue today.

I turn it over to my opponent.

[1] The Bible
[3] http://www.advocatesforyouth.org...
Debate Round No. 3
Jikpamu

Pro

Endarkened said:

1) Therefore, in order for the Bible to right about sex, my opponent's argument should revolve around the spirituality and sanctity of the body, as the Bible does, and not STIs which people back then were almost assuredly more or less ignorant of.

Jikpamu) STDs/STIs are not about the sanctity of the body? Ever see what Herpes Simplex Type 2 does to the mouth? or HPV to a woman?

2) pornography has several beneficial effects, such as driving new technologies and forms of expression and providing a soothing and cathartic effect on viewers, which decreases sexist and violent feelings

Jikpamu) Porn is like a drug: you eventually want more over time as your body develops a greater dependency on it. You go from looking at soft porn to hard porn to eventually acting out. At the very least it is the cause of many divorces when the wives don't appreciate being treated like an object with a husband who visually has another woman in his mind during sex with his wife. It can also lead to impotence in a man whose wife won't act out what he sees online or in film.

3) The US is not a Christian country and most of the Founders were Deists

Jikpamu) I would encourage Endarkned to visit President George Washington's tomb at Mt Vernon. On a plaque nearby his grave is the President's favorite verse:

John 11:25-26 (King James Version)
Jn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
Jn 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Could a President get elected in this country if he/she did not profess that Jesus Christ is his/her Messiah? Name all the Presidents that claimed Atheism as their religion or another religion than Christianity.

4) The Bible upholds sexist marriages.

Jikpamu) 1 Corinthians 7:4 (New International Version 2011)
1Co 7:4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.

Ephesians 5:25 (New International Version 2011)
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her

Colossians 3:19 (New International Version 2011)
Col 3:19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.

5) We clearly see that, in order for the Bible to be right about marriage, women must be treated as subordinate to their husbands.

Jikpamu) Is there a problem with the man being the head of the household so long as he treats his wife with respect and love?
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

"Jikpamu) STDs/STIs are not about the sanctity of the body? Ever see what Herpes Simplex Type 2 does to the mouth? or HPV to a woman?"

I was not aware God judged the sanctity of the body by physical appearance alone. So ugly people can't be devout?

"Jikpamu) Porn is like a drug: you eventually want more over time as your body develops a greater dependency on it... It can also lead to impotence in a man whose wife won't act out what he sees online or in film."

Not only is there nothing to prove any of this, but it's also largely irrelevant to the debate at hand.

Jikpamu) I would encourage Endarkned to visit President George Washington's tomb at Mt Vernon. On a plaque nearby his grave is the President's favorite verse:

Again irrelevant to the debate, though I would happily debate it with you.
However, Washington:
Never once took communion
Uttered no prayers to Christ on his deathbed
And, as noted by historian Barry Schwartz, was not even a Christian [1].
And of course, there's the Treaty of Tripoli, which says the "US was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."

Could a President get elected in this country if he/she did not profess that Jesus Christ is his/her Messiah? Name all the Presidents that claimed Atheism as their religion or another religion than Christianity."

And isn't that absolutely tragic? After all, the Constitution says "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office..." (Article VI, Section III). That most Americans would only vote for Christian speaks more to intolerance and bigotry than any founding values.

Also, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, and Adams were all non-Christians [1].

It's also irrelevant.

So you entirely concede my argument about the Bible upholding sexist marriages, meaning sexist marriages are correct and equal ones are not? I'm just pointing this out to the voters.

On marriage, the Bible also prohibits divorce (save for sexual immorality). The Bible fails to realise that sometimes matters just don't work out and people don't always stay in love.

Luke 16:18 "Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery."

Matthew 19:6 "So they are no longer two but one flesh. What God has joined together, let no man separate."

Forcing couples who do not love each other to stay together can damage their relationship by breeding resentment, anger, and possibly even hatred. It could even cause psychological damage. Imagine a child growing up in a home with parents who do not love one another.

To sum up: if we accept the Bible as right in all marriage, women must be inferior to men and must stay with them regardless of being loved or not. This negates my opponent's rebuttal about a man needing to love and respect his wife. If he abuses or mistreats her, the Bible forbids her to divorce or leave him. The ONLY allowance for divorce is sexual immorality. Thus this negate's my opponent's rebuttal.

[1] http://freethought.mbdojo.com...
Debate Round No. 4
Jikpamu

Pro

Jikpamu wishes to tackle this one point before closing:

2) Endarkened said: "pornography has several beneficial effects, such as driving new technologies and forms of expression and providing a soothing and cathartic effect on viewers, which decreases sexist and violent feelings"

Jikpamu said: "Porn is like a drug: you eventually want more over time as your body develops a greater dependency on it. You go from looking at soft porn to hard porn to eventually acting out. At the very least it is the cause of many divorces when the wives don't appreciate being treated like an object with a husband who visually has another woman in his mind during sex with his wife. It can also lead to impotence in a man whose wife won't act out what he sees online or in film."

Endarkened said: "Not only is there nothing to prove any of this, but it's also largely irrelevant to the debate at hand. "

Jikpamu says: Ted Bundy admitted to what I said about Porn being like a drug. He was executed in 1989 just prior to the internet becoming mainstream. He had an interview with Dr. James Dobson from Focus on the Family.

I, Jikpamu, myself was addicted to pornography before the age of 10 for about 35 years prior to me coming back to Christ, repenting, and turning from my sin of looking at and lusting at porn. You start with soft core porn, then move to hard core, then eventually act out your desires. It did like I said cause problems with my wife. It did make me (I'm ashamed to say this) impotent because my wife was refusing to gratify my perverted desires.

I have been sober from porn and lusting after anyone except my wife for 14 months now. My relationship with my wife has improved tremendously thanks to my following the Bible, God's Word.

(AND) @Endarkened from Jikpamu - "If you think I am lying then google 'Criterion of Embarrassment'":

Criterion of Embarrassment (Google Definitions): The criterion of embarrassment is a critical analysis of historical accounts in which accounts embarrassing to the author are presumed to be true because the author would have no reason to invent an embarrassing account about himself.

The EVIDENCE AGAINST PORNOGRAPHY is overwhelming - it is terrible for you and will wreck your marriage. It will cause you to treat women as objects.

Now my closing statement:

Following Jesus and the Bible is the only correct way to live your life in any matter. The Bible is filled with truth. How do you know what God expects of you if you don't read the Bible daily? Do you know that if you read 4 Chapters a day in the Bible then you will complete it in 10 months time.

God's commandments and precepts are both Life-Saving and Life-Giving. You all reading this would be wise to follow the Bible and do what it says. Worship the Lord from the Bible and only Him should you serve. Put no confidence in man/woman. They (man/woman) will fail you. Go by what the Bible says...

Your turn Endarkened...
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

My opponent regrettably used this round to more or less derail the debate. Pornography is at best a minor detail in the resolution, and even if I conceded it right now and said yes, pornography is harmful, it would in no way prove the Bible correct about sex and marriage. However, I do not concede that detail anyway.

This is the last round. My opponent has introduced an entirely new case against pornography, and it would be unfair of me to respond in kind, as he could not respond to it. I will simply point out that his evidence is anecdotal - I am happy for my opponent in that he decided not to watch porn anymore, and that he now has a happy relationship, but his experiences do not speak for everyone. He also commits the slippery slope fallacy with this sentence:

"You start with soft core porn, then move to hard core, then eventually act out your desires."

In fact, my source from earlier went against this idea, arguing that pornography produces a cathartic effect and makes people less sexist, less violent, and less willing to act out their desires. However, as this was a logical fallacy anyway, it refutes itself.


Even my opponent's closing statements do not relate to the debate at hand. Here is why the voters should vote CON.

My opponent failed to fulfill his burden of proof and prove the Bible correct in matters related to sex and marriage.

I have successfully refuted my opponent's points regarding homsexuality and AIDS to the point where he dropped them.

My opponent never responded to my argument about divorce. We must conclude he drops this point.

My opponent conceded my argument about unequal marriages.

My opponent completely dropped my points regarding the Bible's reasons for being against premarital sex versus the CDC's (spirituality versus HIV).

My opponent ignored my argument that atheists generally have lower divorce rates than highly religious couples.

My opponent could not refute my points about lesbian AIDS/HIV rates.

I would like to thank my opponent again for providing this wonderful opportunity to debate! I wish him well in the future, and I urge the voters to vote CON in negation of the resolution.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Jikpamu 2 years ago
Jikpamu
Ok Firelife, thanks...

But is Pornography not about visualized sex? Even Jesus spoke to this:

Matthew 5:28 (New International Version 2011)
Mt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

And looking at pornography not only is sexual immorality but will also lead one further into it.
Posted by Firelife 2 years ago
Firelife
Jik your argument started deecewnt but you went way off course
Posted by Jikpamu 2 years ago
Jikpamu
As in "Correct" : )
Posted by QandA 2 years ago
QandA
Right in what sense?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
JikpamuEndarkenedRationalistTied
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: Con destroyed Pro on homosexuality (lesbians, condoms), marriage (atheists, abstinence only), and all irrelevant points.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
JikpamuEndarkenedRationalistTied
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: the debate got confusing because of pro's sudden mention of pornography, but con made excellent points with the fact that lesbians got no infections and that homos were actually not wrong. And the unequal marriage point was very good.