The Instigator
PickUp_Artist
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
hect
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Nobody Can be Born Gay it is a Choice

Do you like this debate?NoYes+6
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...
hect
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/12/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,154 times Debate No: 71612
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (19)
Votes (2)

 

PickUp_Artist

Pro

Humans cannot be born gay it is a choice. Your brain is naturally influenced to lust after your opposite gender. If being born gay was true it would have to consider being a mental disorder.
hect

Con

This is going to be easy lol
I shall first refute my opponent's arguments many there may be.
My opponent claims we naturally lust the other sex, what about asexual people whom have no sexual desires at all and in 2004 the British population was 1% asexual (1). So clearly we don't naturally lust for the other sex.
My opponent then went on to say " If being born gay was true it would have to consider being a mental disorder", like this is some kind of argument. Whilst I certainly do not agree with the statement my opponent has taken a step back here as he concedes that one may infact be born gay with a mental disorder but nonetheless still born gay, thus this argument puts my opponent in a worse position than he started in.

To start my argument I would ask my opponent the common question in the gay debate, when did you choose to be straight?

Now on to the science there is something the scientific community has recognised lately and it is called the 'gay gene' Research conducted by the NorthShore Research Institute among many other studies in the US found clear links between male sexual orientation and two specific regions of the human genome, with lead scientist Alan Sanders declaring that the work "erodes the notion that sexual orientation is a choice"(2). This was also the largest ever study conducted on the matter.

Homosexuality is well known but we also know the behaviour is extremely common across the animal kingdom, from insects to mammals, as of 1999, about 500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, have been documented engaging in same-sex behaviors. According to the organizers of the 2006 Against Nature? exhibit, it has been observed in 1,500 species; thus proving that homosexuality is indeed just a fact of nature and thus natural (3).

Ladies and gentlemen brothers and sisters these are my opening arguments, not many I know but it is still more than enough prove that homosexuality is not a choice. I would love to see what my opponent is gong to argue now I doubt anything good or anything at all.

reference:
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(2)http://www.independent.co.uk...
(3) http://www.bbc.com...
Debate Round No. 1
PickUp_Artist

Pro

First off calm down the whole world isn't watching the debate and second you are trying to tear apart my argument and twist my words. You statement on asexual people is irrelevant due to the fact that obviously a person being asexual was not being referred to my statement "Your brain is naturally influenced to lust after your opposite gender."

My statement on being gay should consider being a mental disorder we be to the fact that mental health experts see abnormal thoughts, feelings, or behaviors as symptoms of a mental disorder.

(Corinthians 9:9-10) Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

The sin of homosexuality is listed right next to theft. Just as there is no genetic excuse for stealing, there is no genetic excuse for homosexuality. Environment, culture, and choice make one a thief, and the same factors make one a homosexual.

Genes do not guarantee everything, there are many natural influences as well as epigenetics which can turn off certain genes. Genes merely increase the likelihood of being gay. Some twins can have the exact same genes but can have different sex orientations.

Rarely an animal is only homosexual, majority of all animals individuals that have homosexual behavior also have some heterosexual behavior.

http://guardianlv.com...
hect

Con

I shall argue in the same order as previous.

What do you mean my asexual argument is irrelevant your argument clearly referred to the fact that humans brains(implying all) are naturally influenced to lust the opposite sex, I then refuted this with obvious evidence, and you say it doesn't count? I'm sorry but that's not how a debate works. However my opponent may say he didn't imply all If that is then the position he wants to take than his entire 'brain naturally to lust' argument in reference to homosexuality collapses on itself as if one's 'brain' can be can be asexual it would follow that one's 'brain' can be homosexual.

Great bible references, because we all know this book should be the moral compass for humanity, the very same book that gives consent to slave owning, slave beating, raping virgins, stoning women, general acts of genocide, supports xenophobia and racism the list goes on. Obviously my opponent wants us to live back in the first century. I'm sorry this is the 21st century and we are having a 21st century discussion. Also this isnt a religious debate and as far as I'm concerned your gods not real so that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

I'm sorry gense still have a huge influence on the way the human works and as I said with a reference scientist Alan Sanders declaring that the work "erodes the notion that sexual orientation is a choice".

"majority of all animals individuals that have homosexual behavior also have some heterosexual behavior." So you just admitted that some animals still engage in natural homosexual acts, again putting my opponent a steep behind in his arguments.

Again I must ask my opponent when he sat down and decided to be straight, I know I never did I just am straight and if you the voters and opponent didnt choose to be straight then obviously there is no 'choice'. Choice by definition is "an act of choosing between two or more possibilities" (1), thus the option to be gay or straight must be one that is consciously made every time you think about sex with a certain gender.

I find it painfully obvious that being gay is not a choice.

(1) https://www.google.com.au...
Debate Round No. 2
PickUp_Artist

Pro

The fact that an animal can be homosexual just shows that you know a bit about nature. Just because an animal is engaged in homosexual acts does not mean you are born gay. It just means an animal wants to have sex regardless of the gender it is having sex with. The animal is being bisexual instead of homosexual. Nature does not support animals being only homosexual. If you are saying that homosexuality is based on genes, all homosexuals would be bisexual.

It is impossible that genes erode the notion of a choice if two people with identical genes don't have the same sex orientation 100% of the time. Genes can increase the likelihood of someone being gay but they do not make the person gay, if they made the person gay then everyone with that gene would be gay.

Affecting something does not mean you have complete control over it. Genes can"t control behavior completely. Genes regulate the production of amino acids, which combine to form proteins. The existence or absence of a protein can have an effect on things like alcohol tolerance or mood.

You cannot be born gay all because of a 'gay gene'. Let's take the alcohol gene for example. If someone was born with it they are not automatically going to be born an alcoholic. You are influenced by it. If you come from a culture where alcohol consumption is forbidden, it will be difficult for you to become an alcoholic, no matter how your body metabolizes alcohol.

A hypothetical child who has the supposed gay gene, it didn't make them gay because before the child had sexual impulses they knew that girls go with boys so their body found the info to be contradicting and dismissed the effect of the gay gene.

Biological process just influences the mind. The mind can override biological processes.

I chose to be straight when I knew that boys are suppose to go with girls, not boys and boys or girls and girls. That is how my parents raised me. Even if I had this 'gay gene' as a child and it was influencing me. My mind did not know of men and men or women with women. Only man and women. There for my mind knew it didn't make sense, dismissed the gay gene and right there I chose to be straight.
hect

Con

My opponent has conceded that genes do play a role in the outcome of homosexuality with " Genes can increase the likelihood of someone being gay" thus if something outside of our free will which determines choice affects us and our sexual orientation, then how can my opponent argue it is a choice. My opponent has admitted that our free will can be affected by our genes this obviously leads to a conclusion that the desire for homosexual relations is not a purely based on choice.

The genetic predisposition to addiction or the 'addiction gene' works the same way as the gay gene If a child has the addiction gene they are 8 times more likely to develop an addiction(1). Just like the gay gene if you have it you are much more likely to be gay. In relation to my opponents alcohol point if one never comes into contact with alcohol even with the addiction gene one can not become an alcoholic this is true(1) but it only hinders my opponents argument. As just like the addiction gene if a male with the gay gene never comes into contact with another male how can he be gay? The homosexuality still exists just as the addiction there is yet though no desire to act it out as one does not know what it is they desire. However no such hypothetical situation exists and unlike those with the addiction gene whom may never taste alcohol thus never 'trigger' the addiction males will always come into contact with other males thus 'triggering' the homosexual response from the gay gene. Again reaffirming the fact that homosexuality is not a choice.

On my opponents last point this is known as the 'Anecdotal fallacy' and should be dismissed as evidence. Also you say your parents raised you to be straight, I have to ask where is your choice in that?

I feel it obvious that I have the stronger case and have used much more credible arguments and evidence to support my claims unlike my opponent who used only one reference as evidence and presented no real arguments to refute the choice except for his biblical verse which was easily dismissed.

I however used factual evidence and several different sound arguments which all lead to the one conclusion homosexuality is not a choice.
Thank you

reference:
1. http://www.addictionsandrecovery.org...
Debate Round No. 3
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Vamike 1 year ago
Vamike
The brain is very complex. I am left handed. Did I decide to be left handed? I have blond hair and blue eyes. Did I decide this or was it a function of genetics? When we can't explain or understand we default to our bias.
Posted by bluesteel 1 year ago
bluesteel
====================================================================
>Reported vote: 430miletime // REMOVED<

7 points to Pro. {RFD = Reasons for voting decision: The con side needs to stop using wikipedia as a source. There is no gay gene. Being straight and gay is a choice. The way you are tough changes the way you think and become.}

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Failure to explain S&G and conduct. (2) The reason for awarding arguments seems to merely be a recitation of the user's personal views, not an argument made in the debate.
=====================================================================
Posted by PickUp_Artist 1 year ago
PickUp_Artist
I didn't say that right... I meant in the first sentence that people are "born" gay and people and people are born straight right? People who are straight can choose to be gay and people who are gay can't choose to be straight?
Posted by PickUp_Artist 1 year ago
PickUp_Artist
Haha yeah but think about it people basically say that you are born gay. People are born straight. Some people who are straight can choose to be gay, but people who are gay can't choose to be straight?
Posted by Berend 1 year ago
Berend
PickUp_Artist
"People can choose to be gay. Take prisoners for example. Some of them go in straight and come out gay."

OK Ben Carson, calm down. No that is not true and is a baseless claim.
Posted by Berend 1 year ago
Berend
Am I the only one seeing the contradiction in pro's first post?
Posted by Mathgeekjoe 1 year ago
Mathgeekjoe
"My opponent has conceded that genes do play a role in the outcome of homosexuality with " Genes can increase the likelihood of someone being gay" thus if something outside of our free will which determines choice affects us and our sexual orientation, then how can my opponent argue it is a choice. My opponent has admitted that our free will can be affected by our genes this obviously leads to a conclusion that the desire for homosexual relations is not a purely based on choice."

Hect, your counter argument here is flawed. I can show how with an example. If I take an extremely large sample and ask people a question, lets say 50% say yes, 50% say no. Then I take another large sample of people who were not in the first sample, and I ask them the same question but I say they will pay them 1000 dollars if they say yes. Would you not expect more than 50% to say yes? But, since there is something outside free will influencing whether their choice, is the question I ask them a choice?

Also you are contradicting yourself, "...this obviously leads to a conclusion that the desire for homosexual relations is not a purely based on choice." so you are saying it is not "purely" based on choice. So you are saying it is still a choice. Doesn't that support the Pro?
Posted by PickUp_Artist 1 year ago
PickUp_Artist
People can choose to be gay. Take prisoners for example. Some of them go in straight and come out gay.
Posted by PickUp_Artist 1 year ago
PickUp_Artist
Yeah guys you choice to be gay...
Posted by hect 1 year ago
hect
omg... wow your thick... I'm con im saying being born gay is not a choice, so then when I ask someone when they choose to be straight what it really means is there is no choice because they didn't choice to be straight and if one does not choice to be straight how can one choice to be gay... I don't know how I can make it clearer than that
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Berend 1 year ago
Berend
PickUp_ArtisthectTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: The bible is not reliable source, Con's are better in any case. Pro's conduct was horrible and quite childish. Con backed his rhetoric with sources and even brought in science and basic common sense, showing his argument to be better in convincing.
Vote Placed by Bennett91 1 year ago
Bennett91
PickUp_ArtisthectTied
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 tacitly acknowledges that gay is not a choice when he talks about genetics. He says that a person may not be gay even if they have the gay gene and that environmental factors play a role. This just shows how if both genes and environment line up sexuality isn't a choice. Also in general Con had better arguments and addressed Pro's contentions.