The Instigator
155401didio
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Topkek
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

gay marriage is not bad

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...
Topkek
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/19/2014 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 761 times Debate No: 46288
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

155401didio

Pro

Can someone here actually give me a valid argument to why being gay is bad?
Topkek

Con

Gay and Bisexual men who engage in regular sexual activity with other men (referred to as MSM) account for nearly half of the people living with HIV or AIDS in the US, which is some 580,000 of the 1.2 million with HIV in 2009. Furthermore, they accounted for 61% of all new HIV infections in that year as well. They account for only 4% of the US population, yet have such a disproportionately high rate of carrying these STIs. They are even more likely to be infected with HIV than drug users who share needles.

http://www.cdc.gov... (I used to have a full link to the entire CDC report but they seem to have moved it, so you might have to dig around a little to find all the relevant statistics. If they've removed from the CDC website try Google, or simply disregard what I said as unproven.)

To add to that, a relatively new but rising "subculture" within the gay club scene actually encourages STI infection, colloquially known as "bug chasing". Although there's barely enough data to indicate whether "bug chasers" make up more than simply a minority of all gay males, it is still an alarming trend that has only been found in LGBT communities.

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

The above is probably the most compelling and rational argument against homosexuality, though not necessarily a counter to gay marriage specifically.

Other arguments you might also use but are less easily backed by evidence could be:

* It creates disunity within society. A sexually homogeneous society would seem ideal in order to prevent conflicts, which we see often enough in Western society when it comes to dealing with homosexuality.
* Homosexual couples are a genetic dead end. They cannot reproduce, and the ones that decide to use surrogate mothers/ sperm donors are only a minority within the currently active gay marriages in countries such as Canada. And before you say it, no, the planet is not suffering under an overpopulation crisis; it is more of a population distribution crisis. Most highly developed, highly educated nations are actually suffering an underpopulation crisis due to low natural birth rates, which explains why they have to turn to mass immigration to fill up gaps in their labour force. Unfortunately, mass immigration brings its own problems, ranging from a depression of wages, to cultural clashes, to imbalances in sectors of the labour force, etc.

That's all I can think of in the back of my head.
Debate Round No. 1
155401didio

Pro

ok first of all you don't just get aids because you are gay it comes from anal sex which heterosexual people do to in fact, a survey, released last year, showed that 38.2 percent of men between 20 and 39 and 32.6 percent of women ages 18 to 44 engage in heterosexual anal sex. second people miss the point gay people are not in love for sex they really do love each other
in fact studies show that 25% of gay men have anal sex so looks like heterosexual people do it more. And another thing you say that they cant reproduce and you act like its a problem, trust me dude we don't have a shortage on people on this planet.
Topkek

Con

First off, I'd like you to cite your sources please. Only 25% of gay men have anal sex? Seriously? That is the most ludicrous thing ever read. What sort of sex is left for sexually active homosexual couples to have if they don't have penetrative sex? Even disregarding the lack of citation I can tell that "fact" is absolute bull.

Yes I know heterosexuals have anal sex too, that isn't the point. It's the fact that homosexuals exclusively have anal sex, whilst heterosexual couples have it much, much less frequently. According to your survey, which is still lacking proper citation, around ~35% of men and women "engage in heterosexual anal sex". But it isn't clear if that simply means they've tried anal sex before, or if they have anal sex regularly. Most likely, it seems that it counts couples who've done it once or twice. On the other hand, gay men have anal sex far more often. You don't even need a study to prove that, it's like trying to survey the % of straight marriages that have consummated their relationship.

My point was never that being homosexual guaranteed STIs. But you cannot argue against the statistics, which show that HIV/AIDS spreads within male homosexuals at a magnitude far greater than heterosexuals. That is the point I am making.

And finally, again you miss my point on the population distribution issue. We don't necessarily have a shortage of people on Earth, but we do in developed nations in the West, which also happens to hold a far larger portion of the world's openly gay people.
Debate Round No. 2
155401didio

Pro

http://healthland.time.com...

"And finally, again you miss my point on the population distribution issue. We don't necessarily have a shortage of people on Earth, but we do in developed nations in the West, which also happens to hold a far larger portion of the world's openly gay people." trust me dude that argument doesn't make sense. Gay people don't effect you i don't understand why people are so against it and you seem to be pretty freaked out by the whole HIV thing well dont have sex with gay men then.
Topkek

Con

Did you get the wrong source? It makes no mention of your statement earlier that only 25% of gay men have anal sex. I'm just going to assume you pulled that one out of your a** then.

You also haven't explained to me why my argument doesn't make sense, other than simply stating it doesn't. You have to back up your points with a reasonable explanation.

The notion that HIV will simply be contained within the gay community is ludicrous. The source that you provided just now show that bisexual men are more likely to carry or be infected with HIV/AIDS. As that disease spreads around gay males, they also spread it to bisexual men too. This would undoubtedly spread to bisexual women too once they come in sexual contact with bisexual men, and eventually affect people like me who date women. So there's a real risk of infection for even straight people. See where I'm going? HIV isn't going to be magically quarantined within gay males only; it can easily spread to other people of different sexual orientations. Not to mention that HIV/AIDS treatment comes at a cost to healthcare facilities and taxpayers like you and me.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by 2Sense 2 years ago
2Sense
I don't think anyone won here. The topic was regarding gay marriage, not homosexuality and HIV.
Posted by Finalfan 3 years ago
Finalfan
Am I the only one who learned that you can get Aids from vaginal sex as well?
Posted by chuang8 3 years ago
chuang8
I think pro is right this is my opinion. It doesn't have to do with if I get sick or anything. If I really care for tht guy and you're a guy, u luv him he luvs u, it's well it's your choice I mean he could be your soulmate take a chance on him ivy really love him I would do anything to be his and his yours.
Posted by Pulchritudinous 3 years ago
Pulchritudinous
You get aids from anal sex, it has nothing to do with homosexuality.
Posted by 155401didio 3 years ago
155401didio
if you can convince me than go ahead
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
Can I use religion?
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
No, they cant.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
155401didioTopkekTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Most of the debate involved arguing irrelevancies, such as HIV and homosexuals. The strongest, relevant arguments, that came from Con, were the starred ones from his/her first round. Pro responded to the latter of the starred arguments surprisingly strongly: "And another thing you say that they cant reproduce and you act like its a problem, trust me dude we don't have a shortage on people on this planet." It was a pity this wasn't fleshed out, because it could have easily crushed Con's argument here, enough to perhaps win the debate. Otherwise, Con made far more convincing arguments on the irrelevant topics, and since Pro responded by assuming that they were relevant, arguments go to Con. The sources in this debate were either poor or irrelevant. S&G goes to Con for clearer English.
Vote Placed by Finalfan 3 years ago
Finalfan
155401didioTopkekTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Pro failed in so many way's to win one of the easiest topics to dominate! I have never voted against Gay marriage defence but this was a disaster