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

is homosexuality wrong from a non religious stand point?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/12/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 549 times Debate No: 63117
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Yes because it goes against darwinian evolution


Sirs, to begin and also relieve everyone of the need to guess,
may I state I am not gay and would class myself as an anti-religious theist.

No, because it clearly exists in the physical world.
And if it exists it is perfect - how could it be anything else.
In this way, all information is neutral.
If you want to take a position to say whether it is wrong or right
regardless of what standpoint you use , becomes a subjective issue
which must then rely of imagination -the lowest form of knowledge.
It is not truth. It is not to be relied upon. If it were we would all think the same
about everything.

But let us swing back to why you asked this question.
I can appreciate your argument and the need to want to ask this question.
It is interesting to me because I was trained in molecular microbiology.
One special area of interest to me is evolution.
You are saying "Yes because of evolution based on the fact that such couplings are fruitless
and therefore not useful or not productive, as in machine efficiency?
Therefore they are not intended by evolution, thus therefore wrong?
Just so we can be clear, do tell and thanks for the debate.
Debate Round No. 1


The fact is that its useless waist of energy and a non natrual phenominon which occuors by an inbalance in hormones which should evantually die out in a survival of the fittest situation but because oa more equal chance of procreaton it will probably continue unless there is a dramtic change but if it naturally dies out it is not succesful it is therefore wrong


Cheers for those words.

Well homosexuality may be encoded for in the genes of some or however
it is effected makes little difference.
And nature knows best. So if you wanted to say nature was wrong or imperfect
then that becomes this argument.

The DNA replication does not know what it is doing at the time.
It cannot take responsibility for its actions retrospectively.

All reproduction and life is at the most basic level is ultimately the actual DNA replication, and any traits that come along with it are incidental -the parts that make me me and you you are ultimately self programmed.

To summarise.

Gay because of self programming is valid position since no position is right or wrong (since all information is neutral).
Gay because of inherited Genes is valid because the person has no choice in his/her homosexuality.

Life, Evolution and reverse entropy is an incredibly wasteful process.
Only a minute percentage of the suns energy is converted into life

For every sperm or egg that goes unfertilised there will be an advantageous effect on the chances
of fertilisation for other eggs and sperm.

Every sperm is not sacred :)
Debate Round No. 2


sabarashy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Tanawsomeguy55 3 years ago
Cons argument has one loophole a study done by british scientist has come up that women homo sexuality is not gene related and male homo sexuality is only related to genes 40% that means women choose to be lesbian and men mostly choose to be gay SCIENCE YO
Posted by Demotico 3 years ago
Homosexuality = Population Control
Posted by missmedic 3 years ago
how is consensual sex between two people wrong?
No votes have been placed for this debate.