The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

There should be laws in every state defending homosexuals for being fired for their sexuality.

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/23/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 477 times Debate No: 60851
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




In 29 states in the US, it is legal to fire people for being gay.

Here are some examples:

If these people are not protected by laws against it, it can lead to struggling as an unemployed person, which isn't justified if they were fired for just being gay. This is awful homophobia, and it needs to be prevented in some way.

Just join and state your argument if you want to debate it


I accept this debate. I await your response.
Debate Round No. 1


Okay, thanks for accepting, let's get started :)

First of all, being gay is not "unnatural". In fact, homosexuality is present in over 450 different species. If you think that it's unnatural, just keep your opinion to yourself and don't try to destroy other people's happiness.

If a gay person is fired from their job, for a ludicrous reason like being gay, it's possible that they will struggle to find a job. If they are supporting anyone, such as siblings, children, parents, etc, they will be hurt as well. I can't wrap my head around the fact that some people would not care about that, or think that they would deserve it, as they are just human beings too. Or it could even hurt the business that they used to belong to.

If we don't have laws in place against that, all of those consequences could occur. Equality is a big part of America, and we should try to enforce it as much as possible, don't you think?


It's funny, I agree with the overwhelming majority of what you said. Homosexuality is a trait that is common in species from penguins To elephants to humans. And even if it is a "choice" the people have the right to engage in any kind of consensual relationship or sexual activity that they wish to engage in. So we have no disagreements there.

So where do we disagree? Well I think the disagreement lies in whether or not an employer has the right to fire his employees for their sexual orientation. Bear in mind that I HATE the notion that someone would do something so stupid as to fire someone over something as inconsequential as who that person is attracted to. I'm against discriminating against people for superficial reasons in general, whether it is race, sexual preference, hair color or gender etc. But if you own a company, you have the right to hire and fire anyone for any reason. In the same way the employee has the right to quit or work for anyone for any reason. It is morally wrong to use force against non-violent people to force them to associate with people they would rather not accociate with.
And secondly laws are words on paper. They have no magical properties to make a formerly homophobic person non homophobic. The perverbial " gun in the room" is still there.
Debate Round No. 2


Okay I was actually not expecting you to agree with me on anything. But yeah, and I especially like what you said about even if it's a choice, it's okay, because people tend to bash on sexual experimentation often.

And that's also good, most of that second paragraph. But quitting and firing someone are very different. If you find out that your boss is gay and you quit, you probably have considered the consequences, as well as other job options. Fine. If you are fired by your boss for being gay, it's a whole other situation. You could be struggling for work, just because of the discrimination that America tries so hard to avoid. I think that we should at least try to protect people from going through that. (note: If an employer fires a gay employee based on work quality, not sexuality, it's totally fine there)

And what do you mean, "by force"? I don't think that the police are going to burst in with their guns drawn as soon as they find out that a worker has been fired due to superficial reasons, they are sure to use other methods first.

Of course, laws can't change a homophobic person if they continue to be so close minded, but they can at least they can protect homosexuals (or bisexuals, even) from aggressive or unjust homophobic behavior.

What would this law hurt, exactly? I see it doing much more help than harm.


roark555 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by LogicalLunatic 2 years ago
Not in all cases, though. For instance, let's say that you serve as pastor of a church. The Bible lists some specific qualifications for a pastor, and being a homosexual would disqualify you from being a pastor, if the Elders of the church cared about what the Bible said.
So, let's say that about 3 years into your pastorhood the congregation discovers that you are gay. Laws forbidding them from removing you as pastor for this would be a violation of their religious beliefs.
See what I mean?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by LostintheEcho1498 2 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was the only one with sources and con conceded.