The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Youraverageunicorn
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

homosexuality equals a genetic disorder

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 1 vote the winner is...
Youraverageunicorn
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/24/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 465 times Debate No: 103656
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (1)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

homosexuality is a genetic disorder

i'm not arguing it is or is not natural, cause you could argue it's the way nature made em. but if homos were functioning they way they were suppose to, they would be attracted to the opposite sex. people with down syndrome dont pretend they aren't disordered. anaology applies to homos. look at their genitals, that indicates they are suppose to mate with the opposite sex and implies be attracted.
Youraverageunicorn

Con

A genetic disorder.... let's define that.

"A genetic disorder is a genetic problem caused by one or more abnormalities in the genome, especially a condition that is present from birth (congenital). Most genetic disorders are quite rare and affect one person in every several thousands or millions."

A lot of people are always questioning their sexuality. Some people even think they're attracted to women before even finding out that they're actually gay. You are born with a genetic disorder. We are scared with what we don't understand.
Blue eyes weren't even a thing until approximately 7,000 years ago. Would you call that a genetic disorder? No. But it's possibly as common as homosexuality.
I found out I was bi sexual about a year ago. I didn't know I was until I found myself attracted to a girl and then later got together with her, finding out that I liked it. I am 13 now and can still say that I'm happy with that. Does that mean I have a genetic disorder? If you're born with a genetic disorder, people find out that you have it and it's usually noticeable. Love is something that you feel not something that's necessarily visible unlike actual genetic disorders.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

eye color is just a variance of traits. homosexuality is not. or, since you probably disagree, how is it that people with down syndrome dont try to act as if they are not disordered? homosexuality by design is against the design of the person, which means it's disordered.
Youraverageunicorn

Con

that's just a big bowl of word salad. People can automatically look at people with the downs and know in their head they have down syndrome. people don't do that with the queer community unless they're acting stereotypical.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i'm sure there are better examples than down syndrome. here is a list of them...
https://www.genome.gov...

just because you dont see the disorder on their body doesn't mean their hormones and other things aren't working the way they are suppose to.

also how do you respond to the fact that males have pensies and females vagina's that by design go together? and of course buttholes aren meant for excretion and not sex acts. so you can see that there is indeed a visible indication of hte disorder in at least some way.
Youraverageunicorn

Con

It's sad that people look at love just as other ways to have sex or so you do at least.
Love is meant to feel with your heart not physically. Imagine someone who is paralyzed and cannot have sex but they fall in love with someone of the opposite gender. They can't have sex. But that doesn't mean they can't love each other. Love isn't about reproduction. People don't get together to have babies they get together because they want to be with each other.

If you have a genetic disorder it can prevent you in someway. You can still have a baby just not with your partner which is okay. Your claims are based off of just saying because they can't reproduce with their partner, it's a genetic disorder. It's sickening to hear that people think as love as just another thing to have children.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 4 months ago
Youraverageunicorn
actually, homosexuality or the LGBTQ in general could possibly be genetic. But definitely not a disorder. I personally doubt that it is but it's possible. My stepmom is looking into it an believe it could possibly be genetic.
Posted by JimShady 4 months ago
JimShady
test test ($208;|27;)
Posted by DNehlsen 4 months ago
DNehlsen
@Defro - Homosexuality isn't genetic though, so I don't see how that theory really makes sense.
Posted by Defro 4 months ago
Defro
@pourma

I've had debates about homosexuality and biology, and there are theories that homosexuality actually plays a crucial biological role.

Basically, scientists discovered a natural phenomenon in many species. For example, some bears will purposely and deliberately avoid mating even though they have had plenty of opportunities. The reason for this is because later on they become the parent of a cub whose parent has died, so that the cub would be able to survive without its parents and be able to reproduce once it's older and pass its genes on to the next generation.

Also, many other species of animals will have similar functions so that they don't overpopulate.

The human population is undoubtedly growing too large and too fast. There is a theory that because of this, homosexuality appeared as an evolutionary way to slow down the population growth.

The theory is backed up by some evidence, although with the current research they have on it, it is not very plausible.
Posted by Defro 4 months ago
Defro
@pourma

I've had debates about homosexuality and biology, and there are theories that homosexuality actually plays a crucial biological role.

Basically, scientists discovered a natural phenomenon in many species. For example, some bears will purposely and deliberately avoid mating even though they have had plenty of opportunities. The reason for this is because later on they become the parent of a cub whose parent has died, so that the cub would be able to survive without its parents and be able to reproduce once it's older and pass its genes on to the next generation.

Also, many other species of animals will have similar functions so that they don't overpopulate.

The human population is undoubtedly growing too large and too fast. There is a theory that because of this, homosexuality appeared as an evolutionary way to slow down the population growth.

The theory is backed up by some evidence, although with the current research they have on it, it is not very plausible.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 4 months ago
Youraverageunicorn
this includes the person I had debated against,

the point of this debate is to prove whether or not being attracted to the same gender is a genetic disorder. not whether or not it's possible to reproduce. so don't comment on things like that if you don't understand the argument.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 4 months ago
Youraverageunicorn
sexual intercourse can still be done and the point of attraction isn't to have reproduction. what if you didn't even want to have a family? that's thinking far off the topic of love. you can still adopt. the point of reproduction is to bring a new human into your life with some of the same characters as you, not to make love. once again, this topic is based off of the queer community. not whether or not you can reproduce with someone the same sex as you.
Posted by pourma 4 months ago
pourma
I am Bi as well, however I would have to disagree with multiple things you have said. The point of sex is to make babies. Thus homosexual relations are counter productive to that basic biological goal.

I also believe that love, which is nothing but hormones, dopamine and other biochemical reactions that take place in order for a human to find a biological mate and have babies.

Let's look at how it could come to be, and how naturally homosexuality branched off.

Love developed in the same way other animals 'attraction' developed initially. Over time the species learnt what traits lead to healthy children. This lead to certain people getting more mates than others due to humans vast amount of visual features to separate us on.

Early humans develop love as a way for humans to stay together, and thus a higher chance of having more children. This can be identified by the fact love can even come from arranged marriages (people have self testified). It is also known that fond memories of someone can help foster love, what better way to have memories than to be with someone a long time right.

Now past this, and looking at intercourse itself. Humans have evolved to derive great pleasure of sexual intercourse. This seems to be unlike most other animals. An argument for this is that as humans got more intelligent we realised that children were a drain, so we got greater and greater sexual urges and pleasure from the act to help contribute.

Now from all this, we can see that homosexuality comes about due to these naturally evolved features. Love exists to attach us to someone else, even if they are not the best match. Sexual pleasure exists to trick us into having children (the same way canines have a knot that stop the female escaping or the male pulling out).
Posted by pourma 4 months ago
pourma
I am Bi as well, however I would have to disagree with multiple things you have said. The point of sex is to make babies. Thus homosexual relations are counter productive to that basic biological goal.

I also believe that love, which is nothing but hormones, dopamine and other biochemical reactions that take place in order for a human to find a biological mate and have babies.

Let's look at how it could come to be, and how naturally homosexuality branched off.

Love developed in the same way other animals 'attraction' developed initially. Over time the species learnt what traits lead to healthy children. This lead to certain people getting more mates than others due to humans vast amount of visual features to separate us on.

Early humans develop love as a way for humans to stay together, and thus a higher chance of having more children. This can be identified by the fact love can even come from arranged marriages (people have self testified). It is also known that fond memories of someone can help foster love, what better way to have memories than to be with someone a long time right.

Now past this, and looking at intercourse itself. Humans have evolved to derive great pleasure of sexual intercourse. This seems to be unlike most other animals. An argument for this is that as humans got more intelligent we realised that children were a drain, so we got greater and greater sexual urges and pleasure from the act to help contribute.

Now from all this, we can see that homosexuality comes about due to these naturally evolved features. Love exists to attach us to someone else, even if they are not the best match. Sexual pleasure exists to trick us into having children (the same way canines have a knot that stop the female escaping or the male pulling out).

We can come to the conclusion that:
Gay people love the same sex despite their unbiological match and also gain pleasure from it due to sexual arousal. Homosexuality imo is the side effect of an inte
Posted by pourma 4 months ago
pourma
I am Bi as well, however I would have to disagree with multiple things you have said. The point of sex is to make babies. Thus homosexual relations are counter productive to that basic biological goal.

I also believe that love, which is nothing but hormones, dopamine and other biochemical reactions that take place in order for a human to find a biological mate and have babies.

Let's look at how it could come to be, and how naturally homosexuality branched off.

Love developed in the same way other animals 'attraction' developed initially. Over time the species learnt what traits lead to healthy children. This lead to certain people getting more mates than others due to humans vast amount of visual features to separate us on.

Early humans develop love as a way for humans to stay together, and thus a higher chance of having more children. This can be identified by the fact love can even come from arranged marriages (people have self testified). It is also known that fond memories of someone can help foster love, what better way to have memories than to be with someone a long time right.

Now past this, and looking at intercourse itself. Humans have evolved to derive great pleasure of sexual intercourse. This seems to be unlike most other animals. An argument for this is that as humans got more intelligent we realised that children were a drain, so we got greater and greater sexual urges and pleasure from the act to help contribute.

Now from all this, we can see that homosexuality comes about due to these naturally evolved features. Love exists to attach us to someone else, even if they are not the best match. Sexual pleasure exists to trick us into having children (the same way canines have a knot that stop the female escaping or the male pulling out).

We can come to the conclusion that:
Gay people love the same sex despite their unbiological match and also gain pleasure from it due to sexual arousal. Homosexuality imo is the side effect of an inte
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Defro 4 months ago
Defro
dairygirl4u2cYouraverageunicornTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: The way I see it, the resolution is a syllogism, therefore Pro had the burden of proof for two claims. The first claim was that homosexuality is a disorder. The second claim is that homosexuality is genetic. Pro focused only on the argument that homosexuality is a disorder, but had no evidence to back up the claim that homosexuality is genetic. Furthermore, Pro's arguments did not support her claim very well. Pro didn't fulfill her burden of proof, therefore loses argument points. However, Con did a poor job as well. In Round 1, he committed an anecdotal fallacy and proceeded to ask loaded questions like "Does that mean I have a genetic disorder?", which isn't even related to the topic since he said he is bisexual, not homosexual. Con's first sentence in the last round sounded like Ad Hominem, therefore he loses points in conduct. No points were awarded for sources, as Con didn't cite any and Pro's only source was meaningless. Both contenders had acceptable spelling and grammar.