Resolve: The Issue of Homosexuality.
Having debated this issue before, and under similar circumstances, I’ve decided to formally challenge BlackHomophobicAtheists, whose previous comments on the issue incited me to debate with him.
We’ll be debating wheatear or not society should accept homosexuality. I’ll be taking the pro stance, asserting that society should accept homosexuality because it does nothing to harm it. My opponent, should he accept, will be arguing the opposite.
Since this debate is somewhat eccentric, both parties must share the bop, meaning we both must prove our points. My opponent may make any definitions, so long as they are fully accredited and cited.
Let’s keep this civil but impassioned!
The debate structure is as follows:
Round 1: Acceptance, Definitions, and Opening Arguments.
Opening Statements: Homosexuality does nothing to harm society. Unlike incest and bestiality, homosexuality is something you are inherently born with, meaning it should not be viewed as abominable. Aside from religious arguments, there are no sufficient reasons to not accept homosexuality. This debate will address three important issues of homosexuality. The first is gay marriage, which I will simply argue that there is no sufficient reason to deny homosexuals the right to marriage. The second will be homosexuals as parenthood, where I’ll provide sufficient evidence to prove that homosexuals are equally affective parents. The last question is more general, asking whether homosexuality should be accepted by society. I’ll use evidence from both my first two arguments, as well as additional arguments, to prove that homosexuals should no longer be victims to the continued persecution they experience. As a homosexual myself, I promise to be fervent in proving my assertions. I hope my opponent will do the same. Best of luck to him as we begin our debate!
"Homosexuality does nothing to harm society"
That's false. According to the center of disease control, Gays triggered the HIV epidemic in America and possibly among other countries as well. Gays Brought back syphilis after it was nearly eliminated. In other words, gay literally stopped a deadly STD from being eliminated.
"Unlike incest and bestiality, homosexuality is something you are inherently born with"
First of all, a study by Lisa diamond shows many gays were not born gay. One of the largest twin studies in Sweden shows the majority of gays became gay because of environmental factors, not genetics.
Homosexuality is worse than incest because incestuous people seem to not have a problem with practicing safe sex. Aso, gays have the highest rates of deadly STDs than any other group on earth
"meaning it should not be viewed as abominable. Aside from religious arguments, there are no sufficient reasons to not accept homosexuality"
The health issues regarding homosexuality shows the human anatomy simply does not sit well with homosexual behavior because the human anatomy did not evolve to accommodate homosexual behavior. Better yet, the human anatomy seems to punish humans for practicing homosexual behavior. in other words, the human anatomy naturally responds negatively of homosexual behavior.
. "This debate will address three important issues of homosexuality. The first is gay marriage, which I will simply argue that there is no sufficient reason to deny homosexuals the right to marriage.
First of all, you would have to prove that gay marriage is a right considering other types of marriages aren't right including
incestuouous marriage and polygame.
"The second will be homosexuals as parenthood, where I"ll provide sufficient evidence to prove that homosexuals are equally affective parents".
Thats irrelevant because it does not change the fact that the human anatomy does not sit well with homosexual behavior.
The last question is more general, asking whether homosexuality "should be accepted by society"
Any behavior that commonly triggers deadly STD epidemics should not be accepted as a healthy behavior
Thanks to my opponent for accepting this debate. For the sake of organization, I’ll save all my rebuttals for the final round.
Round 2: Gay Marriage.
Since my opponent asks me to prove why gay marriage is right and incestuous marriage and polygamy are not, I’ll address this first.
Incestuous marriage is immoral because procreation leads to birth defects.
Polygamous marriages are not encouraged for a social reasons. According to an article by Slate Magazine, history suggest that it [polygamous marriage] is [unhealthy]. They quote, “A new study out of the University of British Columbia documents how societies have systematically evolved away from polygamy because of the social problems it causes. (…) Women are usually thought of as the primary victims of polygynous marriages, but as cultural anthropologist Joe Henrich documents, the institution also causes problems for the young, low-status males denied wives by older, wealthy men who have hoarded all the women. And those young men create problems for everybody.” 
The article goes on further to describe, “Polygamy may actually exacerbate inequities in wealth and gender that hurt societies, even if the institution itself appears neutral. Crime and chaos are threatening. Christianity may have brought monogamy to Europe and many other places, but those cultures succeeded because monogamy happened to suit them. In other words, as far as social evolution is concerned, the best form of marriage for a given society isn’t really about what’s moral, but what works.” 
So, polygamous and incestuous marriages are literally unhealthy. Now, my opponent will undoubtedly argue that gay marriage is unhealthy because it glorifies homosexual behavior, which leads to AIDS. This assertion is false for two reasons. 1.) In many cases, homosexual behavior does not lead to AIDS. 2.) Marriage between two homosexuals makes it less likely for them to spread AIDS, making it healthier for society.
Since I’ve addressed my opponents demands, I’ll now provide my own reasoning for why there is no sufficient argument against gay marriage.
1.) Gay marriage does nothing to harm society.
2.) Gay marriage actually helps society.
3.) Denying homosexuals marriage is morally wrong.
Point 1: Many people argue against gay marriage because they feel it violates the sanctity of marriage. However, they cannot provide one instance in which it actually harms someone. Gay marriage may be offensive to many, but it’s denial is equally offensive to others, making that argument moot. Since gay marriage does not hinder society in any way, it should not be banned.
Point 2: While many will contest that gay marriage does harm to society, there’s little evidence to prove that assertion. HOWEVER, there is plenty of evidence to prove the opposite. Gay marriage is financially beneficial to society. According to gaymarriage.procon.org, “Gay marriages can bring financial gain to federal, state, and local governments and can help boost the economy. Government revenue from marriage comes from marriage licenses, higher income taxes in some circumstances (the so-called "marriage penalty"), and decreases in costs for state benefit programs.”  The site goes onto to address the fact that it’s ban actually causes harm. It states, “Marriage provides both physical and psychological health benefits, and banning gay marriage increases rates of psychological disorders.” 
Point 3: The last point in which gay marriage should be accepted is the mere fact that denying us marriage is morally wrong. In a debate I took part in earlier, I stated, “It’s important to understand that anyone who condones any violations of someone’s basic human rights is condoning bigotry.” Coninuing this theory, we may once again look at gaymarriage.procon.org, which states, “Denying some people the option to marry is discriminatory and creates a second class of citizens.” 
Having finished my arguments for gay marriage, I turn the debate over to my opponent!
According to a popular argument in favor of gay marriage, procreation and reproduction are not mandatory for marriage. Also, your claim does not apply to infertile, incestuous couples or incestuous couples who wear condoms.
Also, your argument does not apply to incestuous couples who choose to adopt.
Unlike gays, incestuous people never triggered a STD epidemic in which resulted in millions of deaths. Therefore, it's fair to say that homosexuality is worse than incest
Google "first aids report 1982 nbc YouTube "
Syphilis epidemic among gay men (Gail Bolan 2015)
Concerning polygamy, nothing about polygamy is worse than Contracting deadly STDs
A study from CDC shows the majority of HIV infections among gays occur in serious gay relationships in which obviously includes gay marriages. Therefore, gay marriage is increasing deadly stds among gays. There is no other way to look at it. Nothing about polygamy or incest is that bad.
Please copy, paste and Google the following quote
"The researchers noted that gay men account for nearly 70 percent of all new HIV/AIDS diagnoses among adolescents and young adults in the United States. A recent study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also found that the majority of new HIV infections occur within committed relationships"
Compared to incest and polygamy, homosexuals have been stigmatized the most.
The reason why homosexuality has been stigmatized the most is because homosexuality is the worst
'Evolutionary origins of stigmatization: the functions of social exclusion'
Here's a quote from the study
" a set of distinct psychological systems designed by natural selection to solve specific problems associated with sociality. In particular, the authors suggest that human beings possess cognitive adaptations designed to cause them to avoid poor social exchange partners, join cooperative groups (for purposes of between-group competition and exploitation), and avoid contact with those who are differentially likely to carry communicable pathogens."
By the way, pathogens are biological agents that causes disease
In 2010, gays made up 72% of all new HIV infections
> > In 2013, gays made up 81% of all new HIV infections
> > http://www.cdc.gov...
> > In 2012, gays made up 84% of syphilis cases.
> > In 2013, gays made up 91% of syphilis cases
> > http://www.m.webmd.com...
> > Study: Biology Leaves gay men highly vulnerable to HIV
> > " According to Unaids, Hiv is more common among gay men in all areas of the world including Africa"
> > http://health.usnews.com...
> > Shigella outbreak among gay and bisexual men
> > http://www.cdc.gov...
> > New drug resistant gonorrhea striking gay men
> > http://dailyxtra.com...
> > New Deadly meningitis striking gay men
> > http://americablog.com...
> > Hepatitis C rising among gay men
> > http://www.natap.org...
> > New flesh eating bacterial strain striking gay men
> > http://www.nytimes.com...
> > A rare disease, (Lymphograunuloma venereum) striking gay men
> > http://psychcentral.com...
> > A rare parasitic disease striking gay men
> > http://www.sciencedaily.com...
> > Sexually active Gay teens at a high risk of hpv. In other words, when gay teens act on their homosexual behavior, it's not good for them.
> > http://america.aljazeera.com...
> > High rates of hpv among gay men
> > http://mobile.aidsmap.com...
> > Anal cancer rising among gay men
> > http://www.m.webmd.com...
> > Study shows most women who are infected with hiv contracted it from a bisexual man
> > http://www.hivplusmag.com...
> > .
Round 3: Homosexuality and Parenthood. My opponent fails to realize that homosexuality and parenthood does have pertinence in this debate because it is an example of homosexuality actively contributing to society in a positive fashion. Since I’ve argued this exact topic before, I’ll cannibalize off of the debate by quoting myself.
According to research done by the Canadian Psychological Association their, “… review of the psychological research led us to conclude that the children of same-sex parents do not differ from the children of heterosexual parents in terms of their psychosocial development, their gender development and their gender identity.”  The article goes on further to state, “As the CPA stated in 2003, the stressors encountered by gay and lesbian parents and their children are more likely the result of the way in which society treats them than because of any deficiencies in fitness to parent.” 
Supplemental evidence does not stop there. In their conclusion of “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families” The Australian Psychological Society states, “The research indicates that parenting practices and children’s outcomes in families parented by lesbian and gay parents are likely to be at least as favorable as those in families of heterosexual parents, despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.” 
Another study (How Does the Gender of Parent Matter?) asserts, “Claims that children need both a mother and father presume that women and men parent differently in ways crucial to development but generally rely on studies that conflate gender with other family structure variables.” 
Lastly, there is the compelling brief of The American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, and The American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as Amici Curiae in support of Plaintiff-Appellees. (Perry v. Schwarzenegger). Under argument IV, part B literally states, “There is no scientific basis for concluding that gay and lesbian parents are any less fit or capable than heterosexual parents, or that their children are any less psychologically healthy and well adjusted.” 
I’ve taken the liberty of selecting a few quotes from the brief that I feel support my argument immensely.
“Although it is sometimes asserted in policy debates that heterosexual couples are inherently better parents than same-sex couples, or that the children of lesbian or gay parents fare worse than children raised by heterosexual parents, those assertions find no support in the scientific research literature.”
“Indeed, the scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents.”
“Most research on this topic has focused on lesbian mothers and refutes the stereotype that lesbian parents are not as child oriented or maternal as non-lesbian mothers. Researchers have concluded that heterosexual and lesbian mothers do not differ in their parenting ability”
“Turning to the children of gay parents, researchers reviewing the scientific literature conclude that studies provide no evidence that psychological adjustment among lesbians, gay men, their children, or other family members is impaired in any significant way and that every relevant study to date shows that parental sexual orientation per se has no measurable effect on the quality of parent-child relationships or on children’s mental health or social adjustment.”
“Nor does empirical research support the misconception that having a homosexual parent has a deleterious effect on children’s gender identity (i.e. one’s psychological sense of being male or female) development.”
In conclusion, there is plethora of convincing and accredited evidence that shows one’s orientation does not affect a child’s development, whatsoever. This also leads most to believe that any arguments against gay marriage on the basis of parenthood are moot as well.
This leads me to assert that homosexuals contribute to society by offering additional opportunities for children in need of an adoptive family. Since homosexuals have been proven to be equally sufficient parents, they contribute to society by raising children.
I now turn the argument over to my opponent. I hope he is well prepared.
"My opponent fails to realize that homosexuality and parenthood does have pertinence in this debate because it is an example of homosexuality actively contributing to society in a positive fashion. Since I’ve argued this exact topic before, I’ll cannibalize off of the debate by quoting myself"
My opponent fails to realize that good parenting doesn't change the fact that homosexuality is a high health risk and homosexuality commonly triggers std epidemics.
My opponent is using a tricky, deceitful tactic to lure the voters away from focusing on the core reason why homosexuality is bad for humans.
1. Incestuous couples could be great parents.
2. Polygamous families could be great parents
3. Murderers could be great parents
4. People who have sex with animals could be great parents
My point is, being good parents doesn't change the human anatomy to sit well with high health risk behaviors.
Gays who are good parents couldn't stop gays from triggering a syphilis epidemic after it was nearly eliminated.
Homosexuality is a public health hazard. Show me a study that shows gay parenting stops std epidemics among gays? You can't because it doesn't .
Round 4. Homosexuality and Society
Since the past 2 rounds haven’t been structured to address the issue of homosexuality and STD’s, I haven’t taken the time to address it. Since this round is far broader, instead of providing my normal arguments, I’ll use this space to specifically address my opponents misinformed argument.
There are 5 reasons why my opponents argument should be ignored.
1. It does not address all homosexuals.
2. It does not address any lesbians (female homosexuals)
3. It’s a slippery slope argument that leads to multiple questions.
4. It’s an insufficient argument that does not take into consideration that AIDS is now very much controllable.
5 His arguments deviate from the original structure of the debate.
In conclusion, my opponent’s arguments fails to address why all homosexuals should not be accepted because his arguments do not include all homosexuals. His arguments stigmatize all homosexuals because of the AIDS epidemic. However, his arguments fail to address any homosexuals who did not take part in the AIDS epidemic. Also, one can argue that the millions of people who died of AIDS died because the government failed to address the issue, not because they had AIDS. Since AIDS has become a major medical priority, far fewer people have died.
To make a long story short… my opponents one argument is insufficient in addressing why people should not accept homosexuality.
That’s it for now. I’ll see you in the final round!
"It does not address all homosexuals"
Lung cancer doesn't address all smokers but smoking is still a high health risk behavior. The same thing goes for incest, homosexuality, prostitution, ect. Using my opponents logic, nicotine addiction, prostitution, not wearing a seatbelt, and homosexuality should all be embraced and accepted because the problems with those behaviors doesn't affect every single person who participates in them. My argument is, homosexuality is a high health risk behavior. My opponent doesn't seem to know the definition of 'high health risk behavior'
" It does not address any lesbians (female homosexuals)"
Homosexuality among women is also a high health risk behavior
1. Lesbians have increased risk of bacterial vaginosis
Prevalence of bacterial vaginosis in lesbians and heterosexual women in a community setting. (Amy L Evans, Andrew J Scally, [...], and Janet D Wilson)
2. Lesbians have higher rates of breast cancer
Breast cancer in lesbians and bisexual women: systematic review of incidence, prevalence and risk studies
Catherine Meads and David Moore
3. 75% of lesbians are obese or overweight
"According to the study, “It is now well-established that women of minority sexual orientation are disproportionately affected by the obesity epidemic, with nearly three-quarters of adult lesbians overweight or obese"
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com...
4. lesbians have a higher risk of developing ovarian cancer
A full term pregnancy reduces ovarian cancer
lesbians are less likely to get pregnant
Hormonal prevention of breast cancer: Mimicking the protective effect of pregnancy
Raphael C. Guzman, Jason Yang, [...], and Satyabrata Nandi
" It’s a slippery slope argument that leads to multiple questions"
My opponent obviously doesn't know the definition of a slippery slope.
I never claimed embracing or accepting homosexuality will lead to high health risk behaviors. My point is, embracing high health risk behaviors downplays good health by default
"The first, and most important is why stop at homosexuality"
This is a Tu quo que fallacy and fallacies don't win arguments
"Since homosexuals are prone to dying of AIDS, why not discriminate morbidly obese people"
This is a Faulty analogy. first of all, being overweight is not a behavior. Unlike homosexuals, most overweight people are not in denial about the health issues that comes with being overweight. Aso, there are all kinds of weight loss programs. overweight people are not calling people bigots for that
"who are prone to have diabetes?"
This is another faulty analogy. Diabetes is not a behavior and unlike homosexuals, diabetics arent in denial about the health problems that comes with being a diabetic
"does not take into consideration that AIDS is now very much controllable"
Again, this is a perfect example of having very low health standards. People who are HIV positive need drug treatments to keep them alive. that is terrible
"His arguments deviate from the original structure of the debate"
The original structure of the debate was set up to lure the voters away from homosexuality's main problem in which is the fact that homosexual behavior is a health hazard and a threat to public health.
In conclusion, my opponent's argument is full of fallacies and deceit. Every single one of his claims were either misleading and or Fallacious. The bottom line is, embracing or accepting a behavior that is clearly a high health risk during the information age is pathetic, Immoral, and very unhealthy. also, it's sends children the wrong message in which is its perfectly fine to embrace high health risk behaviors.
Thanks to my opponent for a very interesting and indeed unique debate. Since this is the final round, I’ll refrain from posting any new arguments, and, instead, will directly address his assertions. Since a pressing issue has come up, I’m afraid my responses will be brief.
“Unlike homosexuals, most overweight people are not in denial about the health issues that comes with being overweight. Aso, there are all kinds of weight loss programs. overweight people are not calling people bigots for that” My opponent has failed to address the fact that many homosexuals, including myself, are aware of the health risks our “behavior” is prone to. For that reason we take preventive measures. (i.e. wear condoms, get blood tests, et. al.) When he says there are all kinds of weight loss programs, I can make the analogy that there are all kinds of medication for STDS. Lastly, my opponent makes the faulty claim that obese people do not call people objecting their behavior has bigots. Because, in many cases they do. And, in many cases, they, like homosexuals are right.
“The original structure of the debate was set up to lure the voters away from homosexuality's main problem in which is the fact that homosexual behavior is a health hazard and a threat to public health.” My opponent is incorrect. The structure of the debate was to address multiple issues of homosexuality. He did not. If he has addressed both marriage and adoption, THEN made his arguments on the STD epidemic in the fourth round, he would not have ignored the structure of the debate.
My opponent has made one argument against homosexuality, asserting that it is a health risk factor. However, he fails to address that heterosexual behavior can also be a health risk, according to his arguments. While homosexuals may be hold the mass percentage of documented AIDS cases, heterosexuals 1.) are prone to AIDS as well, and 2.) are prone to a plethora of other STDS.
To make a long story short, my opponents arguments do not justify the denial of acceptance of homosexuality. They are merely used as an excuse to continue to support open bigotry.
I have argued two cases in which homosexuals actively contribute to society, asserting that they operate on a very similar basis as heterosexuals. Since my opponent has made insufficient arguments against my assertion and has blatantly avoided the structure of the debate he agreed upon, you should ignore his assertions and vote PRO!
"My opponent has failed to address the fact that many homosexuals, including myself, are aware of the health risks our “behavior” is prone to. For that reason we take preventive measures. (i.e. wear condoms, get blood tests, et. al.) "
My opponent is painting an unrealistic picture of gays to deceive the voters.
Unprotected Sex On the Rise Among U.S. Gay Men, CDC Says
SOURCES: Bruce Hirsch, M.D., attending physician, division of infectious diseases, North Shore University Hospital, Manasset, N.Y.; U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, news release, Nov. 27, 2013
Unprotected sex leads to rise in gay men in UK contracting HIV
"The study was carried out by researchers from University College London, the Health Protection Agency (HPA) and other research centres in the UK and Denmark, and was funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)"
"My opponent is incorrect. The structure of the debate was to address multiple issues of homosexuality"
My opponent used a subjective word (issue). A homosexual issue to him may not be a homosexual issue for me.
My opponent's idea of a "homosexual issue" is positive such as 'gay parents are good parents ' because my opponent is trying to refrain from any negative information about gays even if it's as serious as an HIV epidemic.
For most people, a HIV and syphilis epidemic is clearly an issue. Better yet, it is the most serious issue of gays.
"If he has addressed both marriage and adoption, THEN made his arguments on the STD epidemic in the fourth round, he would not have ignored the structure of the debate"
Once again, my opponent is trying to deceive the voters .
Here's MY quote from round 2
"A study from CDC shows the majority of HIV infections among gays occur in serious gay relationships in which obviously includes gay marriages. Therefore, gay marriage is increasing deadly stds among gays. There is no other way to look at it"
That was clearly an argument against gay marriage
"My opponent has made one argument against homosexuality, asserting that it is a health risk factor"
My opponent seems to be downplaying my 'health risk factor' argument as if health its not THE most important. STD epidemics are a HUGE problem
"he fails to address that heterosexual behavior can also be a health risk"
A study shows HIV is decreasing among every group with the exception of gay/bi men
"Declines were seen in the rates for men, women, whites, blacks, Hispanics, heterosexuals, injection drug users and most age groups. The only group in which diagnoses increased was gay and bisexual men, the study found"
"I have argued two cases in which homosexuals actively contribute to society, asserting that they operate on a very similar basis as heterosexuals"
"To make a long story short, my opponents arguments do not justify the denial of acceptance of homosexuality"
the action or process of being received as adequate or suitable.
The reason why gays have such high std rates Is because the human anatomy does not sit well with homosexual behavior. In other words Homosexual behavior Is not suitable for the human anatomy. Therefore, my argument justifies why this high health risk should not be accepted.
In the name of health, no society should accept a behavior that Commonly triggers STD epidemics and greatly increase the risk of diseases such as anal cancer. My opponent wants homosexuality to get pass on commonly triggering and spreading DEADLY std epidemics all because some gays are good parents. Using my opponents logic, every high health risk behavior should be accepted If the group contributes other things to society. That includes incest, bestiality, pedophilia, and Illegal substance abuse. So if Incest couples contribute to society, then incest should be accepted according to my opponent's logic.
Study: Biology Leaves gay men highly vulnerable to HIV
According to Unaids, Hiv is more common among gay men in all areas of the world including Africa"
Shigella outbreak among gay and bisexual men
New drug resistant gonorrhea striking gay men
New Deadly meningitis striking gay men
Hepatitis C rising among gay men
New flesh eating bacterial strain striking gay men
A rare disease, (Lymphograunuloma venereum) striking gay men
A rare parasitic disease striking gay men
Sexually active Gay teens at a high risk of hpv. In other words, when gay teens act on their homosexual behavior, it's not good for them.
> > > > http://america.aljazeera.com...
High rates of hpv among gay men
Anal cancer rising among gay men
Study shows most women who are infected with hiv contracted it from a bisexual man