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

bisexuality is immoral in both males and females

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/13/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,203 times Debate No: 30231
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)




first off i am for the con side of this debate
rules you must prove to me why it is immoral please no religion in this debate thanx <3 ;) the reason i am doing this is because males think that when a girl such as myself is bisexual its so hot but when a guy is bisexual its a different story i think that the is no opinion for thinking bisexuality in both genders is attractive. so i made up this debate for my opponent to prove to me why being bisexual is wrong for both genders. i wish you the best of luck ;)


The argument I am using in this debate relies on Natural Law theory. Natural law theory seeks to explain facts about what is the proper functioning for rational beings. When I speak of natural, I am arguing what the proper function for; in this case, a sexual organ is used for. Unnatural explains what is not the proper purpose of the given organ. So, natural means

In everyday life, there are good things and bad things. Human beings have certain functions and capabilities that are proper to those wanting to live healthy human lives. Hearts, for example, pump blood around the body, eyes see, and sexual organs are used (in sex) to reproduce. When proper functioning is changed, either through disease or lifestyle choice, the person is considered unhealthy. Harm is rooted in the concept of good; we cannot say something is damaged unless we understand its proper functioning. Natural Law theory states those aware of the Natural Law and choose to break the law is committing an immoral action. As humans are aware of their actions, and the Natural Laws, when we choose to deviate from our proper functioning have decided to commit an immoral act.

But then begs the question, what is sex for? When we think of sex, we know this usually involves stimulation of two organs: the penis and the vagina. But why are these organs about sex, and not others? My opponent and others may claim sex is an act of pleasure. But if this is true, then drinking soda and eating food could be pleasure acts. But although eating often does have a sense of pleasure, which is not its sole purpose. The main purpose of eating is to nourish the body, to keep us alive. It can also be argued sex creates the greatest amount of pleasure, which is why only these organs are used for sex. But if pleasure is sex, then scratching my head is also sex: it is only a different degree of pleasure. So, we cannot define sex as pleasure, it simply does not work. Sex merely has a side effect of pleasure. The main purpose of sex comes down to one thing: procreation and creating children. From an evolutionary perspective, sex is to create babies in order to propagate society. Heterosexual sex is best suited to this goal.

Now, there is a second objective to sex. Sex is not only a coming together of bodies, as rational creatures we must also have the sense of union and love. Sex also, then, forms a loving union which neither person could have accomplished alone.

From these two points, we now understand sexual flourishing. Sex is about procreation and bodily union, good sex meets this standard, and bad sex fails to meet these standards.

I would like to clarify: I am not saying pleasure plays no role in sex. Indeed, it actually plays a large role in sex. But it is subordinate to reproduction. Pleasure enhances sex making the action more enjoyable. Tasty foods also make eating more enjoyable, but neither is the function of those actions. For sex to be moral, its pleasure must be related to reproduction.

So, how does this relate to homosexuality? Since rational human behavior creates a standard of moral goodness, it determines what is a morally acceptable action. It is wrong to misuse bodily faculties. Therefore, all morally acceptable sex must at least meet this requirement. Homosexuals intentionally misuse these faculties, and, therefore, are committing immoral acts.


1. It is immoral to actively use a faculty against its proper function.

2. Homosexual acts actively use our sexual faculties against their proper function.

3. Therefore, homosexual acts are immoral.

This applies to both sexes.

Thank you.


I used this as my sole and overall reference.

Debate Round No. 1


why wouild i be considered unhealthy for my lifestyle its all the same it still goes in a hole just a different one. its technically abstaining from vaginal intercoarse.


I am not saying homosexual behavior is unhealthy, though evidence does indicate that point [1]. I am saying homosexuals are breaking the natural law by misusing their sexual organs. My opponent says all he is doing is abstaining from vaginal intercourse and instead is using other methods, but that is the point: sex is meant, by natural law, to be penis to vagina. So he has admitted he has misused his sexual powers. He has yet to refute my contention, and has not shown why misusing a natutal faculty is not bad. Therefore, until he does so, he loses the debate. Vote pro.

Debate Round No. 2


ockcatdaddy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Lordknukle 3 years ago
How do you define "natural use?" Virtually all species capable of sexual reproduction are capable of homosexual acts. Are you then defining "natural use" as the use of an organ that is used most often, thus somehow making an attempt at leaping from a statistical designation to a moral designation? That's just sad.
Posted by lit.wakefield 3 years ago
I must admit, Con is doing pitifully and will probably lose.
Posted by lit.wakefield 3 years ago
I must admit, Con is doing pitifully and will probably lose.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 3 years ago
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: F.F. (The only way to win a debate like this on DDO)
Vote Placed by lit.wakefield 3 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 Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro because Con forfeited a round. Arguments clearly go to Pro, and Pro was the only one who used sources.