The Instigator
155401didio
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Jack212
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

being gay has to do with genes

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 2 votes the winner is...
Jack212
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/20/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 547 times Debate No: 46356
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

155401didio

Pro

Being gay is not a choice it in fact has to do with genetics, it is not their fault.

Anybody want to argue?
Jack212

Con

Sure, I'll argue. As you haven't said "first round is acceptance", I'll start by making my argument.

1. Technically, the statement "being gay has to do with genes" is correct. Being gay is caused by genes, just as being bossy, loving chocolate, walking your dog and debating on internet sites are all caused by genes. Genes govern every aspect of human behaviour, because they code for the hormones that make us think and feel the way we do. The problem with your statement is that it doesn't actually tell us anything.

2. You claim that being gay is not a choice. Some gay/bi people may feel that way, but not all. Sexual preference is mostly determined by environment and experience, which makes personal choice a huge factor. Several obvious examples of this:

- Paedophiles: Many paedophiles were sexually abused as children and came to associate child sexual abuse with sexual gratification, whilst scorning the idea of having sex with an adult.

- Rape Victims: Rape can instill a fear of men to its victims. If this happens when the girl is still coming to terms with sex and relationships, she may develop attraction towards girls because they're the only available source of love and support.

- Prison Inmates: With no women available, many otherwise-heterosexual inmates resort to same-sex relationships.

- College Girls: Alcohol + Peer Pressure => Same-sex experimentation.

- Married Gays: Back when being gay was taboo and IVF non-existent, gay people would marry opposite-sex partners and have children with them just like everybody else. And there are some gay men who sleep with their female friends because that's what she wants, and the emotional closeness becomes more important than the incompatible sexual orientations, thus resulting in the same scenario.

3. The Kinsey Scale ( http://en.wikipedia.org... ).

The terms "straight", "gay" and "bi" are exclusive and therefore misleading. The Kinsey Scale provides a more accurate representation of human sexuality, using 8 ordered categories:

0 - Exclusively heterosexual. Does not engage in "gay" acts at all.

1 - Primarily heterosexual. They probably won't do gay stuff unless they're drunk.

2 - Mostly heterosexual. They're straight, unless the other person is really, really hot.

3 - Bisexual. They have no gender preference.

4 - Mostly homosexual. Inversion of 2.

5 - Primarily homosexual. Inversion of 1.

6 - Exclusively homosexual. Inversion of 0.

X - Asexual. Does not engage in sex at all.

People move through these categories throughout their lives. For example:

Bob is really macho during high school, and is a staunch 0.

Bob gets raped and begins to question his own masculinity, but still wants to be a 0.

Bob gets really drunk to drown his sorrows and ends up in bed with John, making him a 1.

Bob loses his self-esteem and sleeps with any guy who asks, becoming a 3.

Bob is depressed and ends up in therapy. Bob realises that he doesn't actually like guys, and works with his therapist to curb his sex and alcohol addiction, restoring him to a 1.

Bob joins a fundamentalist church and marries a pretty girl, with whom he is exclusive, making him a 0 again.

4. Nobody has ever found a "gay gene". The very idea that a single gene could control sexual orientation is ridiculous.

Conclusion: Human sexuality is not black and white. There are numerous factors, most of them psychological, and our preferences change as we do. Sometimes our fantasy selves and real selves have different orientations: one could fantasize about members of the same sex, yet prefer the opposite sex in real life (because fantasy and real life are very different). To claim that "being gay is not a choice" is both a very limited worldview and a highly inaccurate one.
Debate Round No. 1
155401didio

Pro

I don't disagree with you, but i think you missed my point. Im not saying that you cant choose to be gay i worded my argument wrong, i believe that you can be born naturally gay. But i also believe you are correct with your statement to. I am just saying that i believe in human rights(even if they did choose it) i believe the have the right to get married, because it doesn't affect anybody.
Jack212

Con

"I don't disagree with you, but i think you missed my point. Im not saying that you cant choose to be gay i worded my argument wrong, i believe that you can be born naturally gay. But i also believe you are correct with your statement to." - You

So we're not actually debating anything here.

"I am just saying that i believe in human rights(even if they did choose it) i believe the have the right to get married, because it doesn't affect anybody." - You

Good for you, but none of this is relevant.

If you're not making an argument, can we please wrap this up?
Debate Round No. 2
155401didio

Pro

"Nobody has ever found a "gay gene". The very idea that a single gene could control sexual orientation is ridiculous."
scientific studies show that being gay has to do with genetics. But im not saying people cant choose it either. scientists believe the sexual orientation has to do with genetics, hormonal and social factors. Have you ever heard of the twin studies? Being gay has to do with genetics with out a doubt but its not the only factor.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Jack212

Con

Yeah, I said SINGLE gene. There would be many unrelated genes all playing a part.
Debate Round No. 3
155401didio

Pro

155401didio forfeited this round.
Jack212

Con

Please note that my opponent forfeited the round.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by marinaspins 3 years ago
marinaspins
gotta go with Jack212 here...
Posted by saxman 3 years ago
saxman
There are a lot of testimonies from people that were once gay, then became straight, and the other way around. This really hurts the "you were born with it" idea. People can choose. Sometimes they just cannot see past a particular problem.
Posted by Jonbonbon 3 years ago
Jonbonbon
Didio, you must be new here
Posted by Jack212 3 years ago
Jack212
@ FuzzyCatPotato

The "gay gene" would probably be the same as the "straight gene". It would be a gene that makes you attracted to other people, and other factors would determine preference.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 3 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
I'd say that you probably cannot find a "gay gene". But sexual orientation is very often not determined by a person's conscious thoughts, but instead their subconscious desires and upbringing. Not sure if this is what didio meant, but that's my position.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
155401didioJack212Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I can't believe that Con made such an incredibly stupid argument, in that Con actually conceded the debate in his/her opening argument: "Technically, the statement "being gay has to do with genes" is correct." I mean, Pro didn't even come close to addressing his/her burden of proof, yet Con just handed the win over with that single statement. No doubt there will be votes that look over this incredibly blunder (KrazzyPlayer, I've seen plenty of your votes, and they are terrible), judging purely on the amount written. But, in regards to the resolution, Con conceded. Conduct to Con for Pro's forfeit. Sources used (Wikipedia) weren't used in a way which should award points.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
155401didioJack212Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were better. Pro lost conduct for forfeiting a round.