The Instigator
cloebowie
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Kelisitaan
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

One Can Be for Birth Control and Against Homosexuality Without Contradicting Oneself?

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 1 vote the winner is...
cloebowie
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/26/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,409 times Debate No: 97902
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (27)
Votes (1)

 

cloebowie

Con

This debate is whether one can encourage birth control and discourage homosexuality without contradicting oneself. I can tell you why they can't, and you can tell me how they can.

If one does not agree with homosexuality because they don't agree with sex without reproduction, then one cannot agree with sex accompanied by birth control without contradicting oneself, because sex accompanied by birth control is sex without reproduction (or, at least, is intended to be). [1]

Resource(s):
https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

Make the best debater win.
Kelisitaan

Pro

First, let me state that I don't believe either are sins, nor am I opposed to either. However, one can certainly oppose homosexuality yet support birth control without contradicting oneself.

Here is an example: I oppose homosexuality because I oppose sex between 2 people of the same gender. It has nothing to do with reproductive reasons. I simply oppose sex between 2 people of the same gender.

I support birth control because I support the right to use contraception.
Debate Round No. 1
cloebowie

Con

I would like to endorse your statement and declare that I also support homosexuality, as well as "natural family planning," for lack of a better term.

I'm afraid I a hundred percent agree with you, and regardless of whether my statement was miswritten or misread, it was misunderstood, so allow me to explain.

I've come across some people who believe homosexuality is morally wrong because it's sex without reproduction, and I've found that a lot of these very people are heterosexuals who approve of contraception, which would, therefore, contradict their disapproval of homosexuality.

I understand that homosexuality can be disliked for various reasons, just as anything else can be, but I'm referring to individuals who are against homosexuals because of their inability to reproduce and those individuals only. I don't think they realize they're contradicting themselves, which is why I created this debate, to argue some sense out of them.

I'm sorry for not elaborating more earlier, but I think of the opening round as more of an introduction to the argument than the argument itself and try to be as concise with it as I can. If you would've read the comments, you may have had a better understanding of what you were getting yourself into, but how were you to know.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you'd like to continue the argument, to avoid forfeiting and losing, we may proceed accordingly, which would probably mean to continue this as a discussion, rather than an argument, and it'll probably just result in a tie.
Kelisitaan

Pro

It should not be a tie; your statement is false. No where did it say I needed to read the comments, and if you discussed it in the comments, then you should have went back and edited your post to change your statement.

As stated, your statement is false. You concede this point. End of debate

/Debate
Debate Round No. 2
cloebowie

Con

Shall we review? "If one does not agree with homosexuality because they don't agree with sex without reproduction, then one cannot agree with sex accompanied by birth control without contradicting oneself, because sex accompanied by birth control is sex without reproduction (or, at least, is intended to be)."

I didn't say you had to read the comments but am saying you could have read them, for clarity, not that you should have needed any clarification, when I specifically stated, in the opening round, that one is contradicting oneself if they are against homosexuality because they don't agree with sex without reproduction. I never stated that one is contradicting oneself if they are against homosexuality in any way, shape, or form. That's not how I feel, and that's not what I said.

I'm only sorry because you misunderstood me, and I wish I could've said it in a way you would've understood, to avoid this miscommunication, but I said what I meant, and I meant what I said.

I'm hoping this results in a tie because I don't want to win a game my opponent didn't intend to play, and you've given me no reason why I should lose, except for the accusation in which I have proved to be wrong.
Kelisitaan

Pro

I'm fine with it being a tie; I think there was confusion on both parts.
Debate Round No. 3
27 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: dsjpk5// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision:

[*Reason for non-removal*] No RFD is required on this debate, so votes are not moderated.
************************************************************************
Posted by Sonofcharl 1 year ago
Sonofcharl
I was not criticising the content of your proposition. Nor doubting your sincerity.
I was simply suggesting that the way you have structured your opening statement, makes it difficult for someone with the relevant mindset, to counter your argument.
Posted by cloebowie 1 year ago
cloebowie
Jocularly_Solemn, thank you for speaking on behalf of this debate. I couldn't have defended it better myself. If only everyone was open to comprehension, as oppose to insisting on misinterpreting a statement with little to no room for misinterpretation.
Posted by cloebowie 1 year ago
cloebowie
Sonofcharl, just because something is not a popular belief doesn't mean it's not a belief; someone in these very comments just expressed that belief, and I was once against sex without reproduction, too. That, however, is only the half of this argument, for the other half is being for contraception and whether that contradicts being against sex without reproduction or not, for I think it does, while many people I've come across do not.
Posted by cloebowie 1 year ago
cloebowie
Nanubot, if I'm not mistaken, you've even said so yourself, that some people contradict themselves, and those people are the ones I'm presenting this argument to. Not every debate is for everybody. This debate is not for you, since you see the contradiction, and therefore, are not debating this matter. This debate is for people who are against homosexuality but for contraception and claim to not be contradicting themselves, because I believe they are, and that would be where the argument comes in.
Posted by Sonofcharl 1 year ago
Sonofcharl
Your debate relies solely on your opponent having the belief that sex without reproduction is wrong.
It's most unlikely that anyone challenging your position would hold that point of view. Your argument therefore is flawed.
Posted by Nanubot 1 year ago
Nanubot
Uh.. you do know, homosexuals arent hated JUST because they can't procreate? If someone hates homosexuals, you just assume they don't like that a couple can't make children, and thus, contradict themselves when they support birth control? Wowie. While some people CAN contradict themselves, some people don't contradict themselves, rendering this argument false.
Posted by Jocularly_Solemn 1 year ago
Jocularly_Solemn
TheBenC The "reason" many people say they are against homosexuality is that people involved in such a relation can't reproduce to give birth to new humans and hence can't do what the main role of all humanity is. Ironically most of these people also support birth control which is not having children or not following the "main role of all humanity" if you look from the same perspective.....So these people contradict themselves.
Posted by TheBenC 1 year ago
TheBenC
I have no idea how these are related. Homos do not need birth control. Only straight people need it. You need to add some context here. This seems like a Catholic based view. The Church is traditionally against both homosexuality and birth control, so you are asking if there is a way to reasonable fall into the middle ground??
Posted by cloebowie 1 year ago
cloebowie
Rjupudi18, I'm afraid the age restriction on this debate is eighteen, but thank you for your interest.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
cloebowieKelisitaanTied
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:30