Points: 0

Is being gay ok?

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 1 vote the winner is ...
TheRealNihilist
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Society
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Winner selection
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Points: 1
Description
No information
Round 1
Published:
Hello, and thank you for accepting my argument.

Ok, let me ask you a question. If homosexuality is fine, then why did our many ancestors before us not support it? I know that there is small examples of it during the Renaissance, Ancient Rome, Ancient Greece, etc. but it is not to the extent that it is now. Also, being gay can extremely affect you, and those around you, in a negative way. AIDS and depression can affect the person and possibly be life-threatening. Look at Freddie Mercury, the lead singer of the band Queen. Freddie and Queen were very popular in the 1970's and 80's and still are now (especially with the pretty new movie about Queen-Bohemian Rhapsody). If Freddie Mercury did not die of pneumonia from AIDS in 1991, Queen could have been a very popular band in the 90's and early 2000's, and perhaps even now. Imagine telling your seven year old kid, who really likes We Are the Champions and Another One Bites the Dust, that the lead singer of Queen died from an illness from being romantically involved with other guys. He, because of his selfish actions, devastated that little kid and many other Queen fans around the world. It can also affect others by absolutely crushing and devastating wives/husbands and kids. It can also hurt or even kill others if they give blood, and someone else, who had just been seriously injured just got AIDS from a blood transfusion. Also everyone says that homosexuality is not a choice is wrong. Race is not a choice. Gender is not a choice. Being born premature or very late is not a choice. However, religion, your political views, and who you are attracted to (if anybody) are all not choices (even though they can be strongly guided from those who are close to you.
Published:
I thank CommanderCornJuice for creating this. 
If homosexuality is fine, then why did our many ancestors before us not support it? 
Many of our ancestors supported slavery. Should we say slavery is ok?
AIDS and depression can affect the person and possibly be life-threatening
Depression is a problem that isn't specific to being gay.
AIDS is a transmitted disease that can come through anal. Are you opposed to anal if straight partners do it?
Since AIDS is also a problem with straight people you would be against straight couples because they can negatively impact the people around them. 
 If Freddie Mercury did not die of pneumonia from AIDS in 1991, Queen could have been a very popular band in the 90's and early 2000's, and perhaps even now.
I am sure if we asked FM if he wanted to not have sex with his partner of choice to live longer. I doubt he would do it given how ingrained a sexual preference is and what it can do to someone to live a life they are not fully on board with. I support a cure for AIDS instead of outright banning gay sex. Since a cure is unlikely I would like preventable measures put in place in order to make it minuscule. We ought to value happiness more than some Biblical commandments because Biblical commandment leave people feeling unhappy like gay people. I advocate for a system that allows everyone to be free to do what they want not be restricted thus become unhappy.
Imagine telling your seven year old kid, who really likes We Are the Champions and Another One Bites the Dust, that the lead singer of Queen died from an illness from being romantically involved with other guys. 
Imagine telling a black kid you are still impacted from what occurred during slavery which predominately in the USA was committed by Christians. It happened and in both scenarios we must both help people instead restrict them even more. AIDS can be preventable like with most things that isn't genetics. Stop telling people what to do when they like doing it. You don't have a case for outright banning homosexuality apart from well Queen died of illness and my Religion said so. 
He, because of his selfish actions, devastated that little kid and many other Queen fans around the world.
Are you that kid? If it is I am sorry that someone else's enjoyment brings you pain but it isn't their job to make you happy and you don't deserve anything from them. The kid is selfish for thinking he means so much that he is able to restrict the agency of someone else to do what the kid wants him to do. That is selfish and Queen fans that can't respect his homosexuality should just listen to his music instead of selfishly professing what they like to happen unless of course they can make a good argument against homosexual acts but I haven't seen that yet.
Also everyone says that homosexuality is not a choice is wrong. 
Explanation:
Race is not a choice. Gender is not a choice. Being born premature or very late is not a choice. However, religion, your political views, and who you are attracted to (if anybody) are all not choices (even though they can be strongly guided from those who are close to you.
This doesn't explain why you think it is wrong. You just homosexuality is wrong then stated other examples without showing how it links.

Basically provide an argument for homosexuality being instead of an analogy that didn't really go anywhere. 

Over to you CommanderCornJuice

Round 2
Published:
Many of our ancestors supported slavery. Should we say slavery is ok?
No, I'm not saying that, but what what about all the good things our ancestors taught us- moral values, teaching us how to make things, not to mention teaching us how to survive. Overall, the good outways the bad so I think we can trust them until we can realistically prove otherwise.

Depression is a problem that isn't specific to being gay.
AIDS is a transmitted disease that can come through anal. Are you opposed to anal if straight partners do it?
Since AIDS is also a problem with straight people you would be against straight couples because they can negatively impact the people around them. 
I am aware that depression and AIDS are not gay-only things, but there are many gay-related depressions and in fact, most time AIDS are from homosexual contact. Look below at these pie charts from https://www.cdc.gov and www.valleyaids.org.

 We ought to value happiness more than some Biblical commandments because Biblical commandment leave people feeling unhappy like gay people. I advocate for a system that allows everyone to be free to do what they want not be restricted thus become unhappy.
Okay, what if some people want slavery in this "do what they want...not be...unhappy" system. Oh wait, the slaves and other people (including me), like
abolitionists, wouldn't like that. Well, what if many other people and I feel the same way about being gay. How does that work?

Imagine telling a black kid you are still impacted from what occurred during slavery
In what way are black people still impacted from what occurred during slavery. You can't (legally) make them do hard labor jobs in whatever kind of weather and not pay them. You can't whip them or beat them or even kill them. You can't buy or sell them. You can't make them your property, etc. Although racism is a issue, it is a small one compared to other things like school shootings, terrorism, cops being brutally murdered by criminals, military heroes (who are more heroic than you or I will ever be) coming back to their families in pieces,and many, many more. And most of "racism" is cops shooting criminals who hand their hands on the cop's gun and other stuff like that. So, therefore, I think this point is irrelevant and wrong. But please, prove me wrong.

Stop telling people what they like to do and when they like to do it.
Isn't that how laws are made? What if someone wants to rape or kill someone? They are charged with a crime. I know you are probably thinking those are violent crimes. Being gay is (obviously) not. But what if it is? For killing someone from AIDS via blood transfusion, they should be charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Queen died of illness
I was very confused by this, but I think I finally think I understand. Just for clarification Queen is not Freddie Mercury's title, like Prince, it was the band he was in.

Are you that kid?
No, I was just trying to give an example and make you feel more personal to what I'm saying.

unless of course they can make a good argument against homosexual acts but I haven't seen that yet
What about the fact that males were given penises and females were given vaginas, and the point of sex is reproduction. What about the fact that God made man and woman different so that they could be together. What about AIDS killing people. What about society, being twisted by an idea that was never even thought of at the beginning of time (whether you believe the Big Bang theory and that we came from monkeys, or a religious idea, or whatever). 

I really like this debate so far and I'm excited to hear what you have to say next.
Published:
No, I'm not saying that, but what what about all the good things our ancestors taught us- moral values, teaching us how to make things, not to mention teaching us how to survive. Overall, the good outways the bad so I think we can trust them until we can realistically prove otherwise
Here you started by saying I am not for slavery then you say we ought to adopt what our ancestors did which would contradict your earlier statement of not supporting slavery. I am going to for you are pro slavery so your moral system doesn't care about human lives instead your selfish wants I think supported by Catholics. Human property should be shunned. People should be allow to be sexually active with whomever can consent too.
I am aware that depression and AIDS are not gay-only things, but there are many gay-related depressions and in fact, most time AIDS are from homosexual contact.
But there are many straight related depressions and AIDS. Should we ban straight sex? No so think of a better point. Your sources show no pie charts.
Okay, what if some people want slavery in this "do what they want...not be...unhappy" system. Oh wait, the slaves and other people (including me), like
abolitionists, wouldn't like that.
Great defense. "wouldn't like that". Since this isn't something to work with do tell me why homosexuality is bad instead of saying I don't like it.
In what way are black people still impacted from what occurred during slavery.
Something called inheritance. Since their ancestors had less money. Less money was given to them. I had an analogy yet you didn't engage with it. 
You can't (legally) make them do hard labor jobs in whatever kind of weather and not pay them. You can't whip them or beat them or even kill them. You can't buy or sell them. You can't make them your property,
Who is advocating that we should follow our ancestors which so happened at slaves? You so don't give me well now we don't have slaves when you personally don't care about the present unless of course it is better than the past from your perspective.
Isn't that how laws are made?
Non-sequitur. No mention of laws in my comment just outlining a principle hold dear to Americans liberty which just so happens you oppose. Mentioned here:
For killing someone from AIDS via blood transfusion, they should be charged with involuntary manslaughter.
You didn't state the context instead simply wanted them charged even if they might not have knowledge about having AIDS. So basically you are for punishing people even if they can't comprehend what they did wrong.
I was very confused by this, but I think I finally think I understand. Just for clarification Queen is not Freddie Mercury's title, like Prince, it was the band he was in.
Sorry. FM then. 
No, I was just trying to give an example and make you feel more personal to what I'm saying.
Then it was used to show how selfish this boy was to tell someone else to not do what makes them happy in order to make them happy.
What about the fact that males were given penises and females were given vaginas, and the point of sex is reproduction.
That is under the assumption we ought to reproduce. Can you prove to us why we ought to do it?
 What about the fact that God made man and woman different so that they could be together.
God does not exist. Please see my debate unless of course you have proof. Well I am all ears.
What about AIDS killing people.
What about guns killing people are you for banning guns? 
What about society, being twisted by an idea that was never even thought of at the beginning of time (whether you believe the Big Bang theory and that we came from monkeys, or a religious idea, or whatever). 
You don't dictate society. You take part in it. Whatever way you think society should be is your own view. Not held by others so either make a good argument or just don't talk about it as if you had a point.

I really like this debate so far and I'm excited to hear what you have to say next.
I am excited as well.

Just so we are clear. No real case for homosexuality not being okay instead of easily debunked claims that I have tried to use his own words in this debate to demonstrate the contradiction.

Over to you CommanderCornJui
Round 3
Published:
I'm sorry that I forgot to show the pie charts last time so here they are:

Here you started by saying I am not for slavery then you say we ought to adopt what our ancestors did which would contradict your earlier statement of not supporting slavery. I am going to for you are pro slavery so your moral system doesn't care about human lives instead your selfish wants I think supported by Catholics. Human property should be shunned. People should be allow to be sexually active with whomever can consent too.
I am not at all for slavery and, in fact, find it very offensive that you think I am pro slavery. So I can now see you don't have an actual reason that homosexuality is not okay besides people should be able to do what they want. Please give me an example of why it is ok besides this. Otherwise, you don't actually have a case and are just correcting what I say, which is not debating. All I was saying is that we shouldn't just act snobby and so much better than our ancestors because they taught us everything we know. I'm also offended that you said I have no moral system even though I probably have a better one than you. It's called the Ten Commandments. Ever heard of them? Now you'll probably debuff it by saying something like "Oh yeah, well Catholic moral systems don't count because they support slavery and are against people having the sexual preferences they want". I'm just saying I believe in ideas like Thou shall not steal, Honor thy father and mother, and don't kill (even fetuses because that is inhumane and cruel). The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program was named for a courageous young man named Ryan White who was diagnosed with AIDS following a blood transfusion in December 1984. Ryan White was diagnosed at age 13 while living in Kokomo, Indiana and was given six months to live. This is from https://hab.hrsa.gov/about-ryan-white-hivaids-program/who-was-ryan-white. How is not wanting this 13-year old kid to die selfish. I guess you support kids and teens dying? Hmm, I'm not sure...  

But there are many straight related depressions and AIDS. Should we ban straight sex? No so think of a better point.
I never said that there wasn't examples of AIDS from straight sex and straight related depressions. However, (look at pie chart above) most of the time AIDS is from male to male sexual contact. Also, there are very many gay related depressions. What you are saying is like saying that school shootings aren't an issue because there's not as many cases as Islamic terrorism. Just agree that it's an issue. Also straight sex is the only way humans can reproduce, and unless you want the human race to fall because of some greedy gay people, You should think of a better point.

Something called inheritance. Since their ancestors had less money. Less money was given to them. I had an analogy yet you didn't engage with it. 
First of all, there is all sorts of white and other races experienced with poverty. Don't forget that many indentured servants were white and could be dealing with the same thing. But, you know what works 90%+ of the time to get out of poverty, perseverance and hard work. You know what doesn't work? Laziness. I know that sometimes the person can't do anything about it, but a lot of times they can. They just don't want it bad enough or work hard enough. And also if black people have inheritance, then how can all these people (like Obama) afford expensive and fancy schools (like Harvard). Second of all, your analogy and mine were completely different. Mine was about a confused child because of a topic that is very advanced for him that he doesn't understand. Yours is about something based on a lie. Let's face it. There's as much white poverty as black poverty. Third of all, you didn't engage with my analogy and criticized it, so why should I engage in yours.

That is under the assumption we ought to reproduce. Can you prove to us why we ought to do it?
You honestly want the human race to end, don't you? It's honestly sad that I have to explain this to you, but to quote The Dark Knight "Some men just want to watch the world burn." Reproduction is how humanity continues. What's more important-someone who's happy because they are "expressing" themselves or the whole human race. No offense, but the stupidity in this statement is well beyond anything I have seen before.

God does not exist. Please see my debate unless of course you have proof. Well I am all ears.
I, as a very devout Christian, and a very devout Catholic, take very high offense to that. You are the most idiotic, insensitive person I have ever talked to. If you want to say that you don't believe in God or that you don't think that there is a supreme being, that's fine. I disagree with you, but we have freedom of religion in this country, but what you said was absolutely offensive. "God does not exist". What about all the miracles that have been done in God's name and the saints' names? Oh wait, I guess you don't understand basic FACTS!

What about guns killing people are you for banning guns? 
Guns don't kill people. People kill people. There are no gun accidents, only carelessness. Although, I guess you wouldn't understand if you've never shot a gun. However, people can also die from themselves, animals, illnesses (thus AIDS), injuries, and medical conditions (like heart attacks). I can't think of any other examples, but if you can please tell me. No I'm not for banning guns. We are literally in another debate about banning the second amendment. Pay attention.


Signing off, Commander Corn Juice
Published:
I am not at all for slavery and, in fact, find it very offensive that you think I am pro slavery. 
I have clearly shown your line of thinking leads to slavery so you being offended over me presenting your idea in a different context is your problem.
So I can now see you don't have an actual reason that homosexuality is not okay besides people should be able to do what they want.
What a way to jump the gun. I have clearly shown how your points are bad yet you don't understand it.
Please give me an example of why it is ok besides this.
I have. Your points don't actually state how homosexuality are bad therefore you have no gays being not okay.
I'm also offended that you said I have no moral system even though I probably have a better one than you. It's called the Ten Commandments.
Never said this. 
This is from https://hab.hrsa.gov/about-ryan-white-hivaids-program/who-was-ryan-white. How is not wanting this 13-year old kid to die selfish. I guess you support kids and teens dying? Hmm, I'm not sure... 
Anecdotal evidence. You have only stated one person got AIDS through blood transfusion. This doesn't show this is a larger problem only states this one event occurred.
However, (look at pie chart above) most of the time AIDS is from male to male sexual contact.
Lets say I agree with your findings. I think we should ought to provide preventative measures to gay people like what we do for straights because it would be the fair thing to do. This isn't a problem with homosexuality. It is a problem of preventable measures not put in place.
Also, there are very many gay related depressions.]
No evidence to support this.
Also straight sex is the only way humans can reproduce, and unless you want the human race to fall because of some greedy gay people, You should think of a better point.
Can people bear in mind the "greedy gay people" comment? Thanks.
This is under the assumption if we ought to reproduce. You can't prove an ought so we are left with what people want to do. If people don't want to have children then they are not going to have it. You have yet to prove a God so what I am saying is true.
First of all, there is all sorts of white and other races experienced with poverty. 
Pivoted from my point of inheritance well what about X. Instead of directly arguing against my point you choose to engage in a whataboutism.
But, you know what works 90%+ of the time to get out of poverty, perseverance and hard work. 
No evidence. If this was the case no one should be poor but there are still people poor and there is something called a poverty cycle
There's as much white poverty as black poverty. Third of all, you didn't engage with my analogy and criticized it, so why should I engage in yours.
You asked me a question and I gave an answer.
You honestly want the human race to end, don't you?
So you can't actually demonstrate it.
 "Some men just want to watch the world burn."
I want everything dead because you can't demonstrate a universal ought to reproduce?
No offense, but the stupidity in this statement is well beyond anything I have seen before.
My opponent instead of really thinking about the issue instead resorts to name-calling. I don't think this is how knowledge is learnt so I think it would best for my opponent to understand what anyone else is saying before saying something constructive not whatever this was.
You are the most idiotic, insensitive person I have ever talked to.
My opponent has called me out for things I didn't do. His inability to understand went to him calling me names like here. If Con had evidence he would show but he didn't.
"God does not exist". What about all the miracles that have been done in God's name and the saints' names? Oh wait, I guess you don't understand basic FACTS!
So me saying God does not exist makes me insensitive? I am only stating what is the most rational position. If you feel offended please realize facts don't care about your feelings.
Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
No people use guns to kill people. 
There are no gun accidents, only carelessness.
Huge claim not explained.
Although, I guess you wouldn't understand if you've never shot a gun.
It is more likely you haven't given the level of argumentation you gave earlier.
However, people can also die from themselves, animals, illnesses (thus AIDS), injuries, and medical conditions (like heart attacks).
Another instance of whataboutism. Instead of arguing against the point directly you said what about this or that.
I can't think of any other examples, but if you can please tell me. No I'm not for banning guns. We are literally in another debate about banning the second amendment. Pay attention.
I bring up an analogy and guess he didn't like it so he didn't want to talk about it.

I think I have done enough to show my side is more convincing.

Anyways

Thanks for the debate CommanderCornJuice
Added:
--> @GuitarSlinger
Physical would be the baseline.
I guess therapy to determine mental abuse as well.
So physical harm as a bare minimum and mental abuse if therapists have agreed it to be so.
Contender
#27
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
How would you determine if something is harmful to another person? Are you talking just physical harm?
#26
Added:
:1
Contender
#25
Added:
--> @GuitarSlinger
Could've tagged me sheesh.
>>do you think it's wrong to "use people" for your own pleasure or gratification?
If it is consensual and socially it is not harmful to either party then yes would I think the majority would say to it.
Contender
#24
Added:
Quick question for everyone, do you think it's wrong to "use people" for your own pleasure or gratification?
It's a simple "yes / no" question.
#23
Added:
--> @Kikomori
He said that?
Well I hope he learns how to make better arguments or finds that God doesn't exist.
Contender
#22
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
I feel sorry for you. His ‘God exists because I am offended that you don’t believe in him’ was hard to even read.
#21
Added:
--> @Discipulus_Didicit
Guess so.
Contender
#20
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
Yeah I saw that. Really stupid response.
Let's say for the sake of argument that he is right that our ancestors had more good ideas than bad (it is subjective to a certain extent, so I would be willing to grant him that)... Agreeing with most of what a group says is no reason to feel obligated to agree with the rest as well. If you agree with say 85% percent of what they did then you can still toss out the remaining 15%.
So even accepting his shaky premise without question his conclusion is laughable.
#19
Added:
--> @Discipulus_Didicit
He pretty much said what the ancestors did more good than bad so we should adopt what they did. "but what what about all the good things our ancestors taught us- moral values, teaching us how to make things, not to mention teaching us how to survive. Overall, the good outways the bad so I think we can trust them until we can realistically prove otherwise."
Contender
#18
Added:
Oh and his response too. Jeez.
If you admit that our ancestors were imperfect and did some good things and some bad things then why try to use their opinion on things as justification for anything? Just look at each individual thing on it's own, it doesn't matter what people of the past thought.
This fucking guy!
#17
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
Damn lol I guess you did, I didn't even read the debate. It is a pretty obvious route to go though. The argument "X used to be considered good or bad and therefore should still be considered good or bad" is incredibly nonsensical.
#16
Added:
--> @Discipulus_Didicit
Hey I tried that!
Maaaaan
Contender
#15
Added:
Ok, let me ask you a question. If democracy is fine, then why did our many ancestors before us not support it?
#14
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
Sorry it wouldn't let me send them in picture form.
Basically: Male to male sexual contact 67 or 68%; Heterosexual sexual contact: 23 or 24%; Injection drug use: 6%; Male to male sexual contact and injection drug use: 3%.
Instigator
#13
#1
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Winner 1 point
Reason:
1. Appeal to tradition
That dead people did not like it, is quickly countered with said dead people supporting slavery. Con tries to extend with special pleading... I don't buy it.
2. Depression
Everyone gets it, and nothing to suggest even a higher rate... so no progress for con here.
3. AIDS
Cons main case, that AIDS exists, and homosexuals can contract it. There's actually a good source (a pie chart) showing that gay males are about three times more likely to contract it, but said chart also agrees with pro's counter that straight people catch it too... This leaves it in a weird realm that to say it's not okay under the arguments offered would be to say being straight is also not ok (way more risks than if asexual).
S&G: Very hard to follow debate due to the quote formatting and lack of headlines.
Conduct: Some insults, but it seemed due to not understanding proper form than intentional disruption to the debate.