Instigator / Pro

Mieky

1488

rating

debates

66.67%

won

Topic

#6354

Being LGBTQ is a choice

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Winner

After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...

AlpacaHunter

Parameters

Publication date: 06.29.2025 05:38AM
Last updated date: 07.06.2025 11:25AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 2
Time for argument: Three days
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: One week
Point system: Winner selection
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

AlpacaHunter

1500

rating

debates

66.67%

won

Description

The debate that everything is a choice is from me seeing all the debates on "Being trans isnt a choice"

And it gets me angry because how is something not your choice yk.

Round 1

Mieky

06.29.2025 10:12AM

Pro

First to began, everything you do as a human being is a Choice. You choose to do everything.

Just like me I like guys but I can "choose" to like girls at any moment being something or classifying yourself as something is your choice.

AlpacaHunter

06.29.2025 10:21AM

Con

To start off, I will clearly outline my stance. I stand strongly against the claim that being LGBTQ is a choice. Identity is not something that individuals simply select like a favorite color or a fashion trend—it is deeply rooted in biology, psychology, and lived experience. To say otherwise dismisses the reality of millions of people around the world who do not "choose" to be different, but rather live authentically as who they are.

Firstly, modern science supports the idea that sexual orientation and gender identity are not choices, but innate traits.

Studies by the American Psychological Association and the World Health Organization recognize that being LGBTQ is not a mental disorder nor a lifestyle decision—it is a natural variation of human experience.
Brain scans and twin studies suggest a biological component to sexual orientation, showing consistent patterns that cannot be explained by environment or personal choice alone.
If it were a choice, we would expect people to switch their orientation easily—but in reality, attempts to "change" someone's orientation (such as conversion therapy) are ineffective and harmful.

An example is that in 2015, a major study published in Psychological Medicine found that identical twins are more likely to both be gay if one is, compared to fraternal twins, pointing to a genetic influence.

Furthermore, If being LGBTQ were a choice, why would so many choose a path that often leads to discrimination, exclusion, and even violence?

Around the world, LGBTQ people face bullying, legal persecution, and sometimes even death for expressing their identity.
In over 60 countries, same-sex relationships are still criminalized. In some places, being LGBTQ can result in imprisonment or execution.
It is unreasonable to suggest that someone would willingly choose such a difficult life unless it were a core part of who they are.

An example is that in Uganda, anti-LGBTQ laws have made life extremely dangerous for queer people. Yet many still live openly, not because they choose to be LGBTQ, but because they cannot pretend to be something they’re not.

Round 2

Mieky

06.29.2025 11:09AM

Pro

Identity is not something that individuals simply select like a favorite color or a fashion trend—it is deeply rooted in biology, psychology, and lived experience.

What are you getting at? This makes absolutely no sense what does any of those things have to do with this debate right now. Yeah HOW THE HELL is being Lgbtq deeply rooted in biology or psychology your making no sense. And yea it is based on how you are living your life and you live your life with "The choices you make."

To say otherwise dismisses the reality of millions of people around the world who do not "choose" to be different, but rather live authentically as who they are.

Uhh dont you know that everyone is different in their own way right? Being LGBTQ doesn't make you special or different either.

Studies by the American Psychological Association and the World Health Organization recognize that being LGBTQ is not a mental disorder nor a lifestyle decision—it is a natural variation of human experience.

But you said "it is deeply rooted in biology, psychology, and lived experience. "

If it were a choice, we would expect people to switch their orientation easily—but in reality, attempts to "change" someone's orientation (such as conversion therapy) are ineffective and harmful.

Huh once I choose to be LGBTQ I'm LGBTQ. If I wanted to like the same gender, I could do that because it's my choice. I'm not saying that people are LGBTQ to be different. I'm saying that once you choose to be LGBTQ I'm mean that's that. But some people "Choose" to switch back to liking the opposite sex.

Furthermore, If being LGBTQ were a choice, why would so many choose a path that often leads to discrimination, exclusion, and even violence?

what are you talking about, no literally. Why are you making it seem like if your not LGBTQ your in a straight relationship that involves violence. I mean every day I choose to me straight and non of the stuff you mentioned has every happened to me this path isn't bad you're making it seem that way.

Say a homosexual guys parents never show him a dude right every and he never experienced seeing or interacting with another man would he still be Homosexual?

This took me into this debate too. If the guy is never seen a guy but only women he would obviously heterosexual seeing that he never seen another man. So if his genetics had him being LGBTQ would he be? Being LGBTQ is based on The "choices" you make in your life no science can fix that.

AlpacaHunter

06.29.2025 11:25AM

Con

To start off, choosing who you love or who you’re attracted to is not the same as choosing what clothes to wear or what hobbies to try. Our opponents argue that LGBTQ identity is a decision based on lifestyle or environment—but that overlooks decades of scientific evidence, personal testimony, and the simple truth that most people don’t wake up and choose their identity. If anything, LGBTQ individuals often discover who they are in spite of the pressures around them—not because of them. In this round, we’ll show why identity is not a decision, but a deep part of who a person is

You are saying that being LGBTQ is just a lifestyle or based on how you live your life.Well, let’s clarify: when we say identity is rooted in biology, psychology, and lived experience, we mean that it’s not something people simply wake up and decide—like deciding what to wear. Multiple scientific studies show that sexual orientation emerges before conscious lifestyle choices are made.

For example, many LGBTQ people report “knowing” from a very young age—even before puberty—whom they were attracted to. That’s not a decision; it’s a recognition.
The American Psychological Association says orientation is not something people choose to adopt, like a habit—it’s a part of who they are, shaped by a mix of internal factors.

So yes, while people choose how to live (like who to date or whether to come out), they don’t choose whom they’re attracted to.

You also tried to tell people that If I choose to be LGBTQ, then I am. Some people switch back.Again, this is a great question—because it points to a common misunderstanding. People can explore, experiment, or even mislabel their feelings. That doesn't mean the underlying orientation is changing. It means people are figuring themselves out.

Some people are bisexual, meaning they feel attraction to more than one gender. Choosing to date a man or a woman doesn’t mean they’re “switching”—it means they’re expressing different parts of the same orientation.
Others may identify differently at different points in life—but that process is discovery, not choice. You don’t choose who you’re attracted to—you discover it over time.

You tried to say that everyone is different—being LGBTQ doesn’t make you special.This is TRUE! Everyone is unique. However, the point isn't that LGBTQ people are more special than others—it's that they are just as valid. But because some societies treat LGBTQ people unfairly, it’s important to protect their right to exist as they are, without claiming that they chose something “wrong.”

You were also saying that If a boy never sees another man, he’d be straight. This example is interesting, but doesn’t prove sexuality is a choice. It actually supports our point. If someone never meets another man, they might not know how to name their feelings—but those feelings still exist. It’s like someone being born with a love of music—even if they never hear a piano, that doesn’t mean they don’t love music; it means they never had a chance to express it.

Orientation exists whether or not it’s acted on.
Attraction happens naturally. Exposure may reveal it—but lack of exposure doesn’t erase it.

You assumed that not all straight people live easy lives either—why assume LGBTQ life is hard? That’s fair. No one said straight people have perfect lives. But the point was: if LGBTQ people were choosing a path, why would so many "choose" one that—in many societies—leads to bullying, rejection, or danger?

Straight people don’t have to “come out.”
In many countries, LGBTQ people face jail or worse. If it were a free choice, most people would not choose hardship.
This supports the idea that they are living as who they are, not choosing a difficult path for fun.

Finally, I want to say that you can’t choose who you fall in love with, just like you can’t choose your height or your fingerprints. People can choose how they respond to their identity, but not the identity itself. Saying LGBTQ people “choose” their orientation ignores biology, dismisses lived experiences, and undermines basic human dignity.

LucyStarfire

06.30.2025 12:39AM

#13

-->

@Mieky

You are not wrong, its just that this is greatly unknown. Cant really know what caused person's brain to develop in some way. I mean, even science didnt figure that out.

Lemming

06.29.2025 11:32PM

#12

-->

@Mieky

@Mieky
I'm pretty sure 'some gay people, have wanted to not be gay.
Some gay Christians, I imagine, have not wanted to be gay.

But it's not something people are always able to change so easily, I think. If 'ever in some cases.

@NoOneInParticular
The 'future might end up being blasted weird though,
The more and more we're able to change our bodies and brains with technology.

Umbrellacorp

06.29.2025 10:05PM

#11

-->

@Mieky

Your statements are questionable not only factualy but also logicaly. What do you mean your sister chose to like women? Could she be bisexual? She likes both and just found out later in life? It is scientificaly verifiable that sexual orientation is not a choice. Even if it was, why would someone choose that path when they know they are gonna face judgement and discrimination. Having intercourse with someone is a choice, not being sexualy attracted to them. This is what you do not understand.

Mieky

06.29.2025 09:42PM

#10

I dont get what im wrong about though

So y'all are telling me gay people don't want to be gay? If I were to want something I will choose to purse it!!!

From my experience, I have a gay sister who use to like dudes until she found out about wlw then she choose to purse women. Its is not scientific its just choices.

Mieky

06.29.2025 09:38PM

-->

@LucyStarfire

uhh i'm not sure!!!!!

LucyStarfire

06.29.2025 12:35PM

-->

@Mieky

Thats very interesting argument. Its true that people's sexuality can change over time, as brain can change. Thats why those turned on by rape arent usually the ones who had normal childhood. Now how much of sexuality is personal choice and how much is created by other people impacting person's life is difficult to say exactly.

Lemming

06.29.2025 12:26PM

(RFV Part 1)
Title, Being LGBTQ is a choice
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender
If a person wanted to go against the spirit of the debate, they might have argued that some people are born with transgender body parts biologically, though it's not common I think.

Description
Gave people background on where Pro was coming from, motivation-wise.

Pro Round 1
Shows 'remarkable value of human will and choice.
But is rather short, and perhaps tuned to Pro's 'specific life experiences and personality.
. . .
'Can 'Choose, hm, I don't think it's really so 'easy for most people, to just 'change what they value.
Sure 'theoretically they could, but in practice they don't, and I think Nature and Nurture are explanatory for this.
. . . People only 'choose when certain conditions are met. It's not reasonable to expect 'everyone to make the same choices in life.
Some people for example, have a genetic weakness to alcohol, 'or a 'learned weakness.
They're not just going to choose to quit, even when it threatens their life.
They'll only choose to quit, when the right conditions are met, giving them great enough 'reason to.

I suppose people can accustom themselves over time into most choices, but eh, I don't think this is a debate on free will.
I 'suppose many people could come to like the same or opposite sex over time, but I don't think most would willingly make such a choice. Coercions doesn't 'feel much of a choice.
. . . And it's likely there are many people who through Nature or Nurture, have become 'solid in their preferences, that even attempting or coerced to, would not change their preferences.

Certainly 'enough people in history, where one can point to failed coercions.
Though again we come back to choice,
Some choices offered are no choices at all, say some might say.
Such as betraying family, many would sooner die.
. . . But 'some people 'do choose to betray family, and if conditions were a bit different, the refuser might have chosen such as well.

. . . Personally I tend to take a practical view of Free Will in life and Philosophy, and in such a sense Pro's argument rings with me. . . But Pros argument is awful short, and I expect has a 'lot of counterarguments from Con coming.

Con Round 1
I 'do think Nature plays a large roll in preferences.

I'm not convinced that attempts to change someone's orientation is ineffective and harmful.
Though I 'could be convinced that it 'can be for 'some individuals.
Some people 'are pretty hard wired to be the way they are.

"If it were a choice, we would expect people to switch their orientation easily"
I'm not trying to summon Dr Peterson, but I wonder, what do the two of you debaters 'mean by 'Choice?

Without 'links, I'm not inclined to give points for sources.
Though I cherry pick from sources myself on occasion,
I think 'ideally, one's opponent and voters should have the ability to check the context of what the sources say.

Interesting argument, on why choose a harder path in life.
Life 'is hard for some lifestyles in history.
I'm not sure it's 'unreasonable though. . . A core part yeah, but let's take anger for example, it can be pretty self harming, both to body and social relationships, yet a person might 'keep being angry and acting out.
. . 'Yet, one day 'choose to go to counseling, or read a self help book or something.

At this point though, my votes 'heavily leaning towards Con.
A person being Hard Wired, is a good argument. . . Hm, but then, a human is much 'more than other animals.
A dog is pretty hard wired to be a dog.
A 'human though, has the imagination to be more than many of their genetics, , , I 'suppose one could 'technically remove certain genes, if one had enough tech? Not sure that's a 'choice though.
And there 'is the problem of people 'deeply Hard Wired one way or another.

Lemming

06.29.2025 12:26PM

(RFV Part 2)
Pro Round 2
Well, people 'are born with Genetic Predispositions, sometimes quite strongly.
And Con 'does have a point, that sexual identity 'can be a strong core value in a person, that they are unlikely to change easily.
. . . Course, one can also be a racist, through genetics and experiences, many might argue their feelings of racism is a choice, and through actions they could feel less racist.
Core Habits 'are pretty strong in people though, difficult to change on a 'whim.

I think Con is arguing it's not just some jacket they can (easily) take off.

"once you choose to be LGBTQ I'm mean that's that."
Would that mean it 'was a choice, but can no 'longer be a choice?
Core values 'can form awful early, before a kids really 'thought much about their choice.
But I suppose a choice can be argued as an 'action. But then even a dog could make choices.

"Say a homosexual guys parents never show him a dude right every and he never experienced seeing or interacting with another man would he still be Homosexual?"
Maybe, some people 'are pretty Hard Wired genetically.

Hm, I'm not sure if 'choice, was the best word for this debate.

Con Round 2
Well, I argue it's a choice made off Genetics and Life Experiences.

"Discover who they are",
Eh, I 'am fond of poetry such as "I am the master of my fate" - Invictus
or
"You, I've mistaken for destiny
But the truth is, my legacy
Is not up to my genes

True, though the imprint is deep in me
It will always be up to me
Up to me"
- Genetic Opera

Con makes argument that it's not a 'simple 'easy choice.

I 'do think people can choose who they attracted to,
Except 'maybe the most Hard Wired of people.

I'm not highly convinced by the 'discovery argument, or the underlying orientation argument.
But it 'is an argument, and one that Con used somewhat in round 1.

Again, I'm big on 'both Nature and Nurture, I think how people live 'does effect who they are attracted to.
. . . Course I 'could be assuming too much malleability in humans, and assuming less humans Hard Wired, than what are. (Shrug)

Con makes a decent argument of music, people 'do have natural predispositions genetically.
Though one might argue that if the predisposition never branches out, it might atrophy off.
. . . Course, a person hardwired might be more likely to 'keep said predisposition.

Con is right that Pro did not address the 'why choose a hard life question.
Though Pro argued they 'don't have hard lives (Not true in many places)

Fiddler on the roof - "Do you love me ?"

Umbrellacorp

06.29.2025 12:04PM

-->

@AlpacaHunter

Please do not make false scientific statements for the sake of the argument! Respectfuly! Biology does not say that sexual orientation is carried in your genes. A 'gay gene' has never been proven to exist. Now, i agree that it is not a choice, but not because it sits in your genes. It is a combination of hormonal, psychological, genetic and many other factors which develop during early life (infancy) independently. Not born.

AlpacaHunter

06.29.2025 11:44AM

By the way, maybe the voting period is a bit long

AlpacaHunter

06.29.2025 11:37AM

You are saying the LGBTQ can not be in your genes when the scientific research has proven it? If you are saying this, go conduct or find a research that said that LGBTQ can not be in your genes before we continue arguing. Without facts, your arguments are not worth to be trust and taken into account. On the other hand, my arguments are backed up with facts.

Mieky

06.29.2025 11:15AM

-->

@AlpacaHunter

I didnt even see this
"An example is that in Uganda, anti-LGBTQ laws have made life extremely dangerous for queer people. Yet many still live openly, not because they choose to be LGBTQ, but because they cannot pretend to be something they’re not."

How dumb can one person be. There choosing to be LGBTQ, They are choosing to be LGBTQ they could always choose to hide it or stop showing off there queer but NO they continue to choose to show off in public. Its there choice your acting as if your LGBTQ the day you come out of the womb thats not the case. when your a baby your not LGBTQ when your 5 Your not LGBTQ its when your brain develops and you find out what it is and you find out you like it and you yk become it. Its not rocket science

Lemming

06.29.2025 10:10AM

An interesting question, that I'm sure people have 'strong views about.

Nature and Nurture.

How 'much control, makes something a choice?

Lemming

06.29.2025 12:44PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Winner

1 point(s)

Reason:

Con presents a more detailed and coherent argument, while I think Pros arguments were too sparse requiring more interpretation than Con.
I also think Pro mistook some of Cons arguments.

Cons arguments were more backed by explanation of how Hard Wired individuals might come to be, or have difficulty changing.
While Pros arguments were, people can just choose anything.

While Pro isn't 'wrong, people 'do make choices throughout their lives, and 'can choose even difficult choices.
Pro's arguments went into backing their own arguments less.

Longer RFV in comments #7 and #6 of debate.

Umbrellacorp

06.29.2025 12:26PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Winner

1 point(s)

Reason:

Quoting pro: "Just like me I like guys but I can "choose" to like girls at any moment being something or classifying yourself as something is your choice." You can choose freely which gender you like?
-I have been warned by mods not to make counterarguments when voting. But as a voter i am gonna question the sincerity of this argument.

Quoting con: "An example is that in 2015, a major study published in Psychological Medicine found that identical twins are more likely to both be gay if one is, compared to fraternal twins, pointing to a genetic influence." Good argument, verifiable.

Quoting pro: "What are you getting at? This makes absolutely no sense what does any of those things have to do with this debate right now. Yeah HOW THE HELL is being Lgbtq deeply rooted in biology or psychology your making no sense. And yea it is based on how you are living your life and you live your life with "The choices you make.""
-Tries to disregard a perfectly good argument as-allegedly-irrelevant. Could have easily looked up the study that is being mentioned by con and find out about the biology or psychology.

Quoting pro again: " quotes con: "Furthermore, If being LGBTQ were a choice, why would so many choose a path that often leads to discrimination, exclusion, and even violence?"
Then says: what are you talking about, no literally. Why are you making it seem like if your not LGBTQ your in a straight relationship that involves violence. I mean every day I choose to me straight and non of the stuff you mentioned has every happened to me this path isn't bad you're making it seem that way."
- He completely misunderstands a very logical point raised by con.

Quoting con: "Orientation exists whether or not it’s acted on.
Attraction happens naturally. Exposure may reveal it—but lack of exposure doesn’t erase it."
-very well points out to pro's confusion (wether the choice is acutally being gay or having intercourse with another man).

By arguments this debate is a clear win from con. Pro either intentionally disregards his arguments or does not understand them. Con adresses the topic perfectly well.