Well what can I say? There is just no base for a counter-argument at all. Because at the end of the day, it's just love, and who can say love is wrong? You can't control it, homosexual people can't help being homosexual. Love is just love. Not a cause to be punished, or shunned, or have rights taken away from you. Just love.
Since Men and Women are considered equal in todays society i think it shouldnt matter which combination of which goes together since it doesnt make a big difference. They should be able to marry but im not sure about in churches im sitting on the fence in that. So i think it is.
1- "It's not natural."
It actually does happen in nature, and if it were not natural, it wouldn't exist in the first place. I have no idea why anyone would choose to be bullied and humilliated.
2- "They can't have children."
By that logic infertile people should be denied love.
3- "children need a mother and a father."
So single parents should have their children taken away.
Morals are a human thing. We can base our own personal morals on whatever we want, be it religious texts, or that gut feeling. I personally don't denounce gay marriage, as I like people expressing free will. That being said, I'm not gay and never will be, and there's nothing wrong with that either. ^_^ Morals are subjective, that's all there is to it!
Firstly, saying that allowing gay rights will cause humanity to die, due to a lack of procreation, is just incorrect. We saw the same argument coming from southern Americans about giving black people rights, saying it would lead to everyone being black! Has that happened? Not in the slightest, as the world keeps turning.
Why do people still care about other people's sexual preference. It may go against nature, but why do you care? Just let people do what they want to do and leave it alone. Morals are relative to the person, so asking if something is universally morally right or wrong is like asking "Are humans short or tall?" The question is so broad that you cannot say one way or another. Because of this problem, lets just let them be and say "Who cares?"
I would like to start out this statement with a few definitions
1.Concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.
2. Holding or manifesting high principles for proper conduct.
a person who is sexually attracted to people of their own sex.
Second, I would like to point out that the use of “right” and “wrong” and “goodness” and “badness” in the definitions of the word “moral” make this question incredibly subjective. And for that reason, I would like to present the question in this format. “Is homosexuality in violation of any socially accepted law or conduct?” because I believe it is reasonable to say that if homosexuality can be found in violation of a law or conduct than it is, to some degree at least, morally wrong. I included the term “socially accepted” so that any evidence presented to prove homosexuality immoral have actual social relevance and authority.
Within the question, it is stated that no religious text should be used as evidence or justification, so I wanted to clarify that point as it is the main argument I have seen to demoralize homosexuality.
Moving onward, I would like to see if homosexuality is clear of another main point that it is charged with. Illegality. While it is true that a homosexual marriage is still illegal in a number of states, we are not judging the morality of homosexual marriage, we are judging the morality of homosexuality itself. So, if we were to find a law stating that homosexuality was illegal, it would be in the subgroup of sodomy laws. While there were, in earlier history, many sodomy laws attacking homosexuality, all such laws were overturned in the 2003 Supreme Court decision in the case Lawrence vs. Texas. So, this proves that there are no laws specifically banning people from being homosexual in the United States of America, clearing homosexuality of another of the main laws in conducts it is held to be in violation of.
Finally, I would like to step out into more abstract territories and talk about the laws and conducts of nature. One of the most major things homosexuality is accused of is being unnatural. The argument goes like this. The purpose of sexual intercourse is to reproduce. Homosexual couples are unable to reproduce with their sexual intercourse, so homosexuality is unnatural. There is, however, a flaw in this argument. There are other evolutionary purposes for sexual intercourse. Homosexuals, and people open to homosexuality, have been shown to display higher than normal amounts of the hormone progesterone, which is linked to friendly activities and social bonding. So, it would be perfectly natural for homosexuality to evolve by using sexual intercourse as a means to create strong social bonds, hence progesterone. Even great apes have begun to evolve homosexuality as well.
To conclude, I would like to state, definitively, that homosexuality is not illegal, it is not unnatural, and most of all, it is not immoral.
It's like saying is it morally right for people being allowed to food. It's completely natural! I remember reading somewhere that it can problem for sheep farmers when it comes to breeding, because the rams always get together instead of the female. Same thing with housecats, some cats will go after males instead of females.
If it's natural it shouldn't be restricted.
Unless it's waste, for health reasons of course.
You cannot make a morality judgment for all because what is moral for one culture is immoral for another.
In an Indonesian village they recognize 5 genders and worship hermaphrodite priests and believe that living in harmony with all 5 genders brings balance to the world.
In India they have a 3rd gender called hijras.
Some cultures argue that it is immoral to separate small children from their mother in prison, while others think it is harmful for the children.
I posit that people should focus on their own morality and trying to discern what is right for them rather than worrying about others.
One can state different impacts on society as a whole, and the need for procreation among other things, but at the core of the discussion, is a preference that only impacts the two people involved in the relationship a moral question?
One cannot control what they like. You may as well ask if it is moral to enjoy peas as a part of your overall diet.
If you were speaking of certain proclivities and practices within the homosexual community, perhaps there would be a discussion. As an example, the gay community is noted as being a fairly promiscuous community. While I apply the same argument above to this, personally, at least in this case there would be some moral footing, as it speaks to many other issues that do effect society as a whole.
I think that the question itself is not very well posed.
Homosexuality is morally wrong. It goes against nature and what naturally takes place in our world. Animals in nature don't have issues with homosexuality. Insects, fish, nothing in nature is homosexual. Only humans who have the ability to choose between right and wrong. If an individual chooses homosexuality, they have chosen to go against what is natural.
Homosexuality goes against the laws of human nature, I will believe it is natural when i see a child born out of a homosexual relationship naturally. If every human being became homosexual, explain to me how the human race would survive? Despite my views on homosexuality I despise the act not the people who practise it.
Do you think that it's right to encourage gays and lesbians to have sex which causes serious, even fatal, health problems?
Do you think that it's right to deliberately deny children the right to both their mother and father in gay marriage?
Do you think that it's right to deny scientific evidence that shows that children growing up in homosexual households are less successful that those with their mother and father?
Do you think that it's right to separate procreation from marriage and cause distress in our next generation?
Do you think that it is right to separate procreation from marriage and thus encourage people to not be responsible with their children for the good of the children?
Natural selection favored creatures that reproduce. Creatures that like sex were more likely to reproduce and thus natural selection favored them. These biological reactions to want sex can accidentally be stimulated by homosexual relations. Once the body becomes stimulated by homosexual relations, it becomes more likely to want more, and can become addicted to it. Once a person or animal becomes addicted to homo-sexual sex, it becomes a homo-sexual.
Since homosexuality is a fluke of evolution and provides no evolutionary reason to exist, it should not be promoted. I just want to clarify that this doesn't mean one should be force not to be a homosexual. This is because forcing someone to be something they don't want to be is unmoral.
So to finally answer the question, homosexuality is not morally right because it is an addiction to a biological reaction of homo-sexual sex. But to clarify again, just because it is morally wrong doesn't mean that they should be bullied. Bullying a person for any reason is wrong.
First Marriage is defined as by webster, " the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law" There are other definitions out there that also back this one up. Secondly I find that it is immoral when biology wise we were never made to mate with that of the same sex. Thus we are not meant to have the feelings of "love" towards that of someone of the same sex.
How else will we make babies?
Like will we all just commit adultery and sleep over lesbian couples? Will we have special birthing mothers? I mean what do we do to have children? Seriously how!
I don't care if a man makes out with another man but how do we have a new generation then?
Saying you need moral proof and reasoning is a joke. Religion is a source for morals idiot. How stupid can you be. What you really meant was "I don't like religion so don't use that. I don't understand it so you aren't allowed to use it." Could you at least try to hide your ignorance? The Bible says acting on homosexual desires is wrong, probably because God knows that a relationship with the opposite sex is more fulfilling emotionally. But to humor you, evolution says homosexuality is wrong because it doesn't further the species and if you base your morals off of evolution then there ya go. Its wrong.