The Instigator
danjr10
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
daley
Con (against)
Winning
35 Points

its ok to be gay

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 10 votes the winner is...
daley
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/12/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,495 times Debate No: 18752
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (10)

 

danjr10

Pro

it is not right to keep somebody from what they believe.

thank you to whoever accepts this.

my argument will be explained in the next round
daley

Con

No, it's not ok to be gay, and I'll be arguing some of the reasons why. I look forward to Pro's opening arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
danjr10

Pro

resolve: Being Gay is perfectly fine and normal in todays society. great people are gay including neil patrick harris, ellen degenerous, and alexander the great. many great people have supported gay rights such as Lady Gaga, and President obama. In todays society it is totally normal to be gay. and gay people should not be discriminated for any reason. im bi sexual and i know that gay guys go for gay guys not straight men. and the factor of religion should not even come in to play since this country has freedom of religion
daley

Con

It is nasty to be gay. Why? Because to men having sex involves one of them putting his penis into the whole the other guy stools out of. It can't be clean to put ones penis in such a usually dirty place. Some gays actually end up sticking their penis into excrement that has not yet come out and drill out the brown stuff, ewwww...Its also not ok to be gay because homosexuality is offensive in that it shows lack of morals, hence, most societies do, and have always viewed it as taboo. Now as for all those people fighting for gay rights, let me as this. Where do we draw the line? If homosexuality is acceptable, then are we to accept bestiality as well? If not, why not? Once we blur the lines of morality and claim that such acts are ok, it allows for a whole host of other abominable practices. If all humans we homosexual our species would die out; that should tell us that something is wrong with this practice. What is more; the word of God, the Holy Bible, says that its wrong. I find it odd that the Islamic countries have no problem ruling their state by their religious tenants and the Quaran; why then should Christians fear to rule with the tenants of the Bible? After all, even the declaration of independance was founded upon the Biblical teaching that all men are created equal. Sure, they guys who fight for gay rights are considered great by Pro, but greatness is just a subjective point of view. Some German's considered Hitler Great; go figure.
Debate Round No. 2
danjr10

Pro

i have a question for my opponent. do you are about what gay men do in there spare time. Do Gay people have any effect on your life directly. and the " bible" the so called "word of god" is half wrong about jesus christ. Jesus christ accepted gay people for who they are, and that god loves them. but we as a society have freedom of religion, alot of people choose not to beleve in christianity, because there teachings are hypocritical. we are in the united states of america where the pilgrims came for religious freedom. so i ask you this, why is being gay wrong? because if your argument is religion are argument is invalid.
daley

Con

"i have a question for my opponent. do you are about what gay men do in there spare time."

Yes, I know, cause I know many gay people. In their spare time a large percentage of them dress up like women behind closed doors while a good few are brave enough to flaut this in public. It's not ok to act like something you are not. Why dress and talk like a woman if you are not one? They don't have a womb, they can't give birth, its not ok to pretend to be what you are not, namely, the opposite sex. It means these gay people are simply delusional. In their spare time many other gay people spend lots of time researching, arguing, and promoting either among friends or even in the media that homosexuality is genetic. This is not ok, for it is a lie. There is no gene that gives a child a preference for dolls over trucks. No one is born with information about dresses, lipstick, dolls, and so on in his brain; these are social behaviours that are learnt. No one is born gay or straight, for no one is born having sex. One chooses which sex he or she will copulate with. What else do they do in their spare time when they aren't working at their jobs like the rest of us? Hmmm...Yeah, they bull...They put their penis in what's basically the excrement hole. If that's not a dirty thing to do I don't know what is! Gave gave men a behind to stole out of, not to get drilled. Thing is, if someone were to put his finger in there and dig out a peice of stole everyone would think that's nasty, yet that's exactly what gays do with their penis. Some of them even put their lips there and give a blowjob. Ewwww. Putting your mouth on a toilet?

"Do Gay people have any effect on your life directly."

Whatever else gay people may do that is good for society doesn't change the fact that homosexuality is not ok and is nasty. No amount of good a person does can make his evil actions ok. Pro is arguing that because gay people do many great things, and are defended by many prestigious people, that homosexuality must be ok. But skavery was also practise by many people recognized as great, famous, or prestigious in their time. Even presidents of America approved of sllavery, did that make slavery ok? No, so why should Obama promoting gay rights make homosexuality ok? He says that the constitution of the land allows it, but then again, the constitution of some lands once allowed the Catholic Church to carry on crusades to kill or torture anyone who disagreed with its doctrines. Constitutions are not infallible, and are made by imperfect men, so this argument fails. The constitution has no law against cheating on one's wife or husband, nor against telling lies, nor against eating a plate of stool, but these things are not ok, just like homosexuality. Just because gay people have rights doesn't mean being gay is a good thing. Even criminals have rights. They have the right to a fair trial, to a laywer, to a phone call, they have plenty rights, yet crime is not ok; so gays have rights too, but that is no argument in favor of homosexuality being a good thing anymore than it proves crime is a good thing.

"and the " bible" the so called "word of god" is half wrong about jesus christ. Jesus christ accepted gay people for who they are, and that god loves them."

So what is your source to prove that Jesus accepted gay people? Is it not the very same Bible which you say is wrong? Funny how you try to use a source and condemn it at the same time...But what my opponent misses is that nowhere does the New Testament ever put Jesus in the presence of a gay person. I agree with him that Jesus loves homosexuals. Jesus loves everyone, even the worst sinner, but that doesn't mean he approves of their sins. Jesus according to the Bible, is the friend of sinners, but does that make the sin ok? God loved Adolf Hitler, but that doesn't mean he approved of the Holocaust. Similarly, he loves gay people, but here is what he says about homosexuality:

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." (Leviticus 18:22) Jesus was a Jew who obeyed the law of Moses and thus he too would have tought homsexuality an abomination. Notice also the New Testamet condemnation of this practice at Romans 1:24-28.

"but we as a society have freedom of religion"

Yes, we do have freedom of religion, and God gave us all free will. That doesn't mean that anything we choose with that freedom will be good for us. It certainly isn't good to have a religion that promotes its members stapping C-4 to themselves and blowing their bodies up in train stations to kill Americans. But what about the moral side? My challenge to homosexuals is this. If being gay is ok, then by what moral compass do you draw the moral line? The fact is that religion and spirituality have had the greatest impact on the development of morals through history; so if we turn our backs on these core religious morals, then by what are we to be guided morally? Gay people have no alternative moral source which is better than the word of God. Is cheating on one's spouse ok? If not, then says who? At least we Christians have an authority upon which we can say its wrong, but do gays? It seems that once you accept homosexuality, that anything goes, hence, its not ok to be gay. Its a downhill slide off the moral compass. For all Pro's talk about freedom of religion, most of the world's major religions such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam do not accept homosexuality. That should tell us something. Something deep inside most of us says this practice is wrong, Pro should listen.

"alot of people choose not to beleve in christianity, because there teachings are hypocritical."

Pro hasn't listed even one hypocritical teaching of Christianity, he hasn't even attempted to show how its so, so does he expect us to accept his word that its so? I don't accept homosexuality because its hypocritical, in that they pretend to act like what they are not - women! In that they tend to blame their genes for they way they act, many of them cliaming they were born this way, instead of taking responsibility for their own actions. I don't blame anything in my genes for being straight. I once fornicated, and I didn't blame my harmones, but accepted responsibility. Whom you have sex with is a choice, what you wear is a choise, how you behave around others is a choice, and because most gays don't accept responsibility for these choices its hypocritical. Pro couldn't tell me what's hypocritical about Christianity but I'm telling him whats hypocritical about homsoexuals in general, though not all of them, so vote Con.

"we are in the united states of america where the pilgrims came for religious freedom."

No we are not; maybe Pro is, but have never been to the United States. Debate.org has members from countries worldwide, so Pro can't just assume we are from the US. Who are these pilgrims? Were they Christians? I doubt there came here for the religious freedom to cheat on their spouses, kill their neighbours while blowing themselves up, or freedom to marry the same sex. When the pilgrims first got here gay marriage was illegal, so much for freedom, huh? Total freedom with no boundaries equals total chaos.

"so i ask you this, why is being gay wrong? because if your argument is religion are argument is invalid."

Just because they are many religions doesn't mean all of them are correct in their teachings. Homosexuality is wrong according most cultures, religions, and social norms. I have shown that if all of us were gay the human species would die. A practice that could kill the human species cannot be good. It is also dirty because one is having sex with the excrement hole. It is also wrong because they are pretending to be what they are not, actling kinda like women. If one is a man, he should act like a man. Pro has not torn down my reasons why being gay is not ok, but attacked religion instead, so vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 5 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
What this is great Entertanment.. . "Are you not entertained!!!!" firstly daily positions not even defendable but he won.. lol...
Posted by innomen 5 years ago
innomen
What Socialpinko said, "worst debate ever", and there have been some bad ones here.
Posted by OMGJustinBieber 5 years ago
OMGJustinBieber
I can't tell how seriously Daley is being here. I refuse to believe that anyone would seriously espouse those arguments, it's like an 8 year old discussing sex. Still good enough for the win against this opponent.
Posted by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
Lol worst debate ever
Posted by larztheloser 5 years ago
larztheloser
Wow, I never thought Ron Paul supporters would brag about Ron Paul on a debate about homosexuality. Unless of course you agree with me that this motion is really about whether we should be happy or not lol.
Posted by Crypto247 5 years ago
Crypto247
Ron Paul tells the Truth! VOTE RON PAUL 2012!
Posted by daley 5 years ago
daley
I never said ALL, go learn to READ the text properly before shouting "moron" you MORON....!!!
Posted by MarquisX 5 years ago
MarquisX
All gays aren't crossdressers and all crossdressers aren't gay. Ignorant moron.
Posted by larztheloser 5 years ago
larztheloser
Well, OK. I'll post a debate challenge.
Posted by Cobo 5 years ago
Cobo
So if someone believes they can kill someone than it's ok? I also wanna see this sad argument.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cerebral_Narcissist 5 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
danjr10daleyTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Terrible debate, no one did a good job. PRO failed to say anything beyond gay = okay. CON at least tried to make an argument and though it was flawed and childish it was not disputed.
Vote Placed by ShrawderA 5 years ago
ShrawderA
danjr10daleyTied
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: Not much of a debate, Pro...
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
danjr10daleyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Wierd debate but Con argued better
Vote Placed by GaryBacon 5 years ago
GaryBacon
danjr10daleyTied
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: Although I disagree with Con's position, Pro did nothing to counter the arguments. I have no problems with gay people, but it seems like Pro never took this debate seriously.
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
danjr10daleyTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pros arguments were gay (lame pun...)
Vote Placed by rogue 5 years ago
rogue
danjr10daleyTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I am ashamed. Con's arguments used no logic or reason. It was mostly that he could not stand that gay men have anal sex. Guess what? Lots of straight couples do that. It was a rant. Terrible debate. Pro didn't support anything.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
danjr10daleyTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: both sides had spelling issues, however, the arguments, regardless of how bad they were, were left uncountered and unrefuted.
Vote Placed by Gileandos 5 years ago
Gileandos
danjr10daleyTied
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 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 was given to con as pro attacked Con's religion. Pro could not even spell "resolved" point to Con. Con's argument about penal penetration into stool as unclean and is not okay went unrefuted, Point to Pro. Pro made source statements without citing a source, points again to Pro.
Vote Placed by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
danjr10daleyTied
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 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: Counterbombing izbo. Neither side won the debate. Daley, let me challenge you.
Vote Placed by izbo10 5 years ago
izbo10
danjr10daleyTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: spelling and grammar was poor on both sides. con's arguments were poor and of bad taste, therefore the argument and conduct points to pro.