CreateDebate


Debate Info

140
83
Normal Abnormal
Debate Score:223
Arguments:148
Total Votes:253
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Normal (84)
 
 Abnormal (58)

Debate Creator

Alverus(38) pic



What do you think about homosexuals? And about homosexuality?

Note that homosexuals and homosexuality are distinct things. You can disapprove homosexuality but respect homosexuals.

Normal

Side Score: 140
VS.

Abnormal

Side Score: 83
9 points

Here is a short list of species in which homosexuiality has been observed:

clears throat

-

African Buffalo[21]

African Elephant[22]

Agile Wallaby[23]

Amazon River Dolphin(Boto)[19]

American Bison[21][24]

Antelope[25]

Asian Elephant[22]

Asiatic Lion[26]

Asiatic Mouflon[27]

Atlantic Spotted Dolphin[19]

Australian Sea Lion[28]

Barasingha[29]

Barbary Sheep[30]

Beluga[19]

Bharal[31]

Bighorn Sheep[30]

Black Bear[32]

Blackbuck[33]

Black-footed Rock Wallaby[23]

Black-tailed Deer[29]

Bonnet Macaque[14]

Bonobo[34][35][36]

Bottlenose Dolphin[19][37]

Bowhead Whale[19]

Brazilian Guinea Pig[38]

Bridled Dolphin[19]

Brown Bear[32]

Brown Capuchin[39]

Brown Long-eared Bat[40]

Brown Rat[41]

Buffalo[30]

Caribou[42]

Cat (domestic)[43]

Cattle (domestic)[44]

Cheetah[26]

Collared Peccary[45]

Commerson's Dolphin[19]

Common Brushtail Possum[46]

Common Chimpanzee[47]

Common Dolphin[19]

Common Marmoset[39]

Common Pipistrelle[48]

Common Raccoon[49]

Common Tree Shrew[50]

Cotton-top Tamarin[51]

Crab-eating Macaque[14]

Crested Black Macaque[14]

Dall's Sheep[30]

Daubenton's Bat[40]

Dog (domestic)[52]

Doria's Tree Kangaroo[23]

Dugong[53]

Dwarf Cavy[38]

Dwarf Mongoose[54]

Eastern Cottontail Rabbit[41]

Eastern Grey Kangaroo[23]

Elk[29]

Euro (a subspecies of wallaroo)[23]

European Bison[21]

Fallow Deer[29]

False Killer Whale[19]

Fat-tailed Dunnart[55]

Fin Whale[19]

Fox[56]

Gazelle[25]

Gelada Baboon[57]

Giraffe[25][4][58]

Goat (Domestic)[30]

Golden Monkey[59]

Gorilla[60]

Grant's Gazelle[25]

Grey-headed Flying Fox[40]

Grey Seal[28]

Grey squirrel[disambiguation needed ][61]

Grey Whale[19][20]

Grey Wolf[62]

Grizzly Bear[32]

Guinea Pig (Domestic)[38]

Hamadryas Baboon[57]

Hamster (Domestic)[38]

Hanuman Langur[63]

Harbor Porpoise[64]

Harbor Seal[28]

Himalayan Tahr[65]

Hoary Marmot[66]

Horse (domestic)[67]

Human (see Human sexual behavior)

Indian Fruit Bat[40]

Indian Muntjac[68]

Indian Rhinoceros[69]

Japanese Macaque[14]

Javelina[70]

Kangaroo Rat[41]

Killer Whale[19]

Koala[71]

Kob[15][72]

Larga Seal[28]

Least Chipmunk[61]

Lechwe[72]

Lesser Bushbaby[73]

Lion[26][74][75][76][77][78]

Lion-tailed Macaque[14]

Lion Tamarin[39]

Little Brown Bat[40]

Livingstone's Fruit Bat[40]

Long-eared Hedgehog[79]

Long-footed Tree Shrew[50]

Macaque[80]

Markhor[81]

Marten[49]

Matschie's Tree Kangaroo[23]

Moco[82]

Mohol Galago[73]

Moor Macaque[14]

Moose[83]

Mountain Goat[30]

Mountain Tree Shrew[50]

Mountain Zebra[84]

Mouse (domestic)[85]

Moustached Tamarin[51]

Mule Deer[29]

Musk-ox[86]

Natterer's Bat[40]

New Zealand Sea Lion[28]

Nilgiri Langur[63]

Noctule[48]

North American Porcupine[87]

Northern Elephant Seal[28]

Northern Fur Seal[28]

Northern Quoll[55]

Olympic Marmot[88]

Orangutan[89]

Pacific Striped Dolphin[19]

Patas Monkey[90]

Pere David's Deer[29]

Pig (Domestic)[91]

Pig-tailed Macaque[14]

Plains Zebra[92]

Polar Bear[32]

Pretty-faced Wallaby[23]

Proboscis Monkey[59]

Pronghorn[93]

Przewalski's Horse[84]

Puku[94]

Quokka[95]

Rabbit[96]

Raccoon Dog[97]

Red Deer[29]

Red Fox[98]

Red Kangaroo[23]

Red-necked Wallaby[23]

Red Squirrel[61]

Reeves's Muntjac[68]

Reindeer[42]

Rhesus Macaque[14]

Right Whale[19]

Rock Cavy[38]

Rodrigues Fruit Bat[40]

Roe Deer[29]

Rufous Bettong[99]

Rufous-naped Tamarin[51]

Rufous Rat Kangaroo[23]

Saddle-back Tamarin[51]

Savanna Baboon[57]

Sea Otter[100]

Serotine Bat[40]

Sheep (Domestic)[30][101]

Siamang[102]

Sika Deer[29]

Slender Tree Shrew[50]

Sooty Mangabey[90]

Sperm Whale[19]

Spinifex Hopping Mouse[41]

Spinner Dolphin[19]

Spotted Hyena[16][18]

Spotted Seal[28]

Squirrel Monkey[103]

Striped Dolphin[19]

Stuart's Marsupial Mouse[104]

Stumptail Macaque[14]

Swamp Deer[29]

Swamp Wallaby[23]

Takhi[84]

Talapoin[90]

Tammar Wallaby[23]

Tasmanian Devil[104]

Tasmanian Rat Kangaroo[23]

Thinhorn Sheep[30]

Thomson's Gazelle[25]

Tiger[105]

Tonkean Macaque[14]

Tucuxi[106]

Urial[107]

Vampire Bat[40]

Verreaux's Sifaka[108]

Vervet[90]

Vicuna[109]

Walrus[110][111]

Wapiti[112]

Warthog[113]

Waterbuck[114]

Water Buffalo[30]

Weeper Capuchin[39]

Western Grey Kangaroo[23]

West Indian Manatee[115]

Whiptail Wallaby[23]

White-faced Capuchin[39]

White-fronted Capuchin[39]

White-handed Gibbon[116]

White-lipped Peccary[117]

White-tailed Deer[29]

Wild Cavy[38]

Wild Goat[30]

Wisent[21]

Yellow-footed Rock Wallaby[23]

Yellow-toothed Cavy[38]

Acorn Woodpecker[18]

Adelie Penguin[19]

Alex Burredexty

American Flamingo[20]

American Herring Gull[21]

Anna's Hummingbird[22]

Australian Shelduck[23]

Aztec Parakeet[24]

Bengalese Finch (Domestic)[25]

Bank Swallow[26]

Barn Owl[27]

Bicolored Antbird[28]

Black-billed Magpie[29]

Black-crowned Night Heron[30]

Black-headed Gull[31]

Black-rumped Flameback[18]

Black Stilt[32]

Black Swan[16][17]

Black-winged Stilt[32]

Blue-backed Manakin[33]

Blue-bellied Roller[34]

Blue Tit[35]

Blue-winged Teal[36]

Brown-headed Cowbird[37]

Budgerigar (Domestic)[38]

Buff-breasted Sandpiper[39]

Calfbird[40]

California Gull[41]

Canada Goose[42]

Canary-winged Parakeet[24]

Caspian Tern[43]

Cattle Egret[44]

Chaffinch[45]

Chicken (Domestic)[46]

Chilean Flamingo[20]

Chiloe Wigeon[36]

Chinstrap penguin[47]

Cliff Swallow[26]

Common Gull[41]

Common Murre[48]

Common Shelduck[23]

Crane spp.[49]

Dusky Moorhen[49]

Eastern Bluebird[35]

Egyptian Goose[23]

Elegant Parrot[24]

Emu[50]

Eurasian Oystercatcher[51]

European Jay[29]

European Shag[52]

Galah[24]

Gentoo Penguin[19]

Golden Bishop Bird[53]

Golden Plover[51]

Gray-breasted Jay[29]

Gray-capped Social Weaver[54]

Gray Heron[44]

Great Cormorant[52]

Greater Bird of Paradise[55]

Greater Flamingo[20]

Greater Rhea[50]

Green Sandpiper[56]

Greenshank[57]

Greylag Goose[58]

Griffon Vulture[27]

Guianan Cock-of-the-Rock[14][15]

Guillemot[48]

Hammerhead (also known as Hammerkop)[59]

Herring Gull[21]

Hoary-headed Grebe[60]

Hooded Warbler[61]

House Sparrow[37]

Humboldt Penguin[19]

Ivory Gull[62]

Jackdaw[29]

Kestrel[27]

King Penguin[19]

Kittiwake[63]

Laughing Gull[62]

Laysan Albatross[48]

Lesser Flamingo[20]

Lesser Scaup Duck[23]

Little Blue Heron[44]

Little Egret[44]

Long-tailed Hermit Hummingbird[22]

Lory spp.[24]

Mallard[36]

Masked Lovebird[24]

Mealy Amazon Parrot[24]

Mew Gull[41]

Mexican Jay[64]

Musk Duck[23]

Mute Swan[65]

Ocellated Antbird[28]

Ocher-bellied Flycatcher[66]

Orange Bishop Bird[54]

Orange-fronted Parakeet[24]

Ornate Lorikeet[24]

Ostrich[50]

Peach-faced Lovebird[24]

Pied Flycatcher[67]

Pied Kingfisher[34]

Pigeon (Domestic)[68]

Powerful Owl[69]

Purple Swamphen[49]

Raggiana's Bird of Paradise[70]

Raven[29]

Razorbill[48]

Red-backed Shrike[35]

Red Bishop Bird[54]

Red-faced Lovebird[24]

Common Redshank[57]

Red-shouldered Widowbird[71]

Regent Bowerbird[72]

Ring-billed Gull[41]

Ring Dove[73]

Rock Dove[73]

Roseate Tern[43]

Rose-ringed Parakeet[24]

Ruff[39]

Ruffed Grouse[74]

Sage Grouse[74]

San Blas Jay[29]

Sand Martin[26]

Satin Bowerbird[75]

Scarlet Ibis[20]

Scottish Crossbill[45]

Senegal Parrot[24]

Sharp-tailed Sparrow[76]

Silver Gull[21]

Silvery Grebe[60]

Snow Goose[42]

Steller's Sea Eagle[77]

Superb Lyrebird[78]

Swallow-tailed Manakin[33]

Tasmanian Native Hen[49]

Tree Swallow[79]

Trumpeter Swan[80]

Turkey (Domestic)[81]

Victoria's Riflebird[70]

Wattled Starling[37]

Western Gull[1]

White-fronted Amazon Parrot[24]

White Stork[82]

Wood Duck[36]

Yellow-backed Lorikeet[24]

Yellow-rumped Cacique[64]

Zebra Finch (Domestic)[83]

Amazon molly[46]

Blackstripe topminnow[47]

Bluegill Sunfish[47]

Char[45]

Grayling[45]

European Bitterling[48]

Green swordtail[48]

Guiana leaffish[49]

Houting Whitefish[45]

Jewel Fish[50]

Least Darter (Microperca punctulata)[48]

Mouthbreeding Fish sp.[47]

Salmon spp.[51]

Southern platyfish[48]

Ten-spined stickleback[48]

Three-spined stickleback[48]

Anole sp.[52]

Bearded Dragon[53]

Broad-headed Skink[48]

Checkered Whiptail Lizard[53]

Chihuahuan Spotted Whiptail Lizard[53]

Common Ameiva[53]

Common Garter Snake[48]

Cuban Green Anole[52]

Desert Grassland Whiptail Lizard[53]

Desert Tortoise[54]

Fence Lizard[disambiguation needed ][53]

Five-lined Skink[disambiguation needed ][48]

Gopher (Pine) Snake[47]

Green Anole[52]

Inagua Curlytail Lizard[53]

Jamaican Giant Anole[52]

Laredo Striped Whiptail Lizard[53]

Largehead Anole[52]

Mourning Gecko[55]

Plateau Striped Whiptail Lizard[53]

Red Diamond Rattlesnake[48]

Red-tailed Skink[48]

Side-blotched Lizard[53]

Speckled Rattlesnake[48]

Water Moccasin[48]

Western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis)[48]

Western Banded Gecko[55]

Whiptail Lizard spp.[53]

Wood Turtle[52]

Appalachian Woodland Salamander[56]

Black-spotted Frog[57]

Mountain Dusky Salamander[56]

Tengger Desert Toad[52]

Alfalfa Weevil[58]

Australian Parasitic Wasp sp.[58]

Bean Weevil sp.[58]

Bedbug and other Bug spp.[59][60]

Blister Beetle spp.[61]

Blowfly[61]

Broadwinged Damselfly sp.[62]

Cabbage (Small) White (Butterfly)[63]

Checkerspot Butterfly[63]

Club-tailed Dragonfly spp.[64]

Cockroach spp.[65]

Common Skimmer Dragonfly spp.[64]

Creeping Water Bug sp.[66]

Cutworm[67]

Digger Bee[68]

Dragonfly spp.[64]

Eastern Giant Ichneumon Wasp[58]

Eucalyptus Longhorned Borer[66]

Field Cricket sp.[69]

Flour Beetle[70]

Fruit Fly spp.[71]

Glasswing Butterfly[63]

Grape Berry Moth[72]

Grape Borer[66]

Green Lacewing[73]

Hen Flea[73]

House Fly[74]

Ichneumon wasp sp.[58]

Japanese Scarab Beetle[75]

Larch Bud Moth[72]

Large Milkweed Bug[60]

Large White[60]

Long-legged Fly spp.[76]

Mazarine Blue[60]

Mediterranean Fruit Fly[71]

Mexican White (butterfly)[60]

Midge sp.[76]

Migratory Locust[77]

Monarch Butterfly[63]

Narrow-winged Damselfly spp.[62]

Parsnip Leaf Miner[76]

Pomace fly[76]

Queen Butterfly[63]

Red Ant sp.[76]

Red Flour Beetle[60]

Reindeer Warble Fly (Hypoderma tarandi)[76]

Rose Chafer[disambiguation needed ][76]

Rove Beetle spp.[60]

Scarab Beetle (Melolonthine)[78]

Screwworm Fly[76]

Silkworm Moth[72]

Southeastern Blueberry Bee[68]

Southern Green Stink Bug[60]

Southern Masked Chafer[76]

Southern One-Year Canegrub[76]

Spreadwinged Damselfly spp.[62]

Spruce Budworm Moth[72]

Stable Fly sp.[76]

Stag Beetle spp.[60]

Tsetse Fly[76]

Water Boatman Bug[disambiguation needed ][60]

Water Strider spp.[60]

Blood-Fluke[79]

Box Crab[80]

Harvest Spider sp.[81]

Hawaiian Orb-Weaver (spider)[81]

Incirrate Octopus spp.[80]

Jumping Spider sp.[81]

Mite sp.[76]

Spiny-Headed Worm[82]

-

-

-

Now I will kindly ask the mindless fuc....misguided ignoramuses who post on the other side to STFU.

Side: Normal
5 points

Sperm Whale?

Dammit! I knew it! I KNEW IT!! Those Sperm whales are soooo gay. LOL

Side: Normal
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
4 points

I'm actually going to have to agree with lolzors on this one. Just because other animals do it does not, necessarily, make it the norm.

Now, I think the issue here is more of what is "normal?" If we mean the average, homosexuality is not normal. If we mean by what is practical, homosexuality is most likely not normal.

I think you're merely taking what is natural, and sure, it is natural, but so is heart disease. Unless heart disease were to become the average cause of death, it wouldn't be "normal" to have heart disease.

Abnormal doesn't have to be negative. Lolzors may be against homosexuality in general, but that doesn't change the denotation of the debate.

Side: Abnormal
youngidealis(50) Disputed
2 points

I think you are getting normal and abnormal mixed up with something other than their psychological meanings. In psych, 'Abnormal' doesn't just mean uncommon.

Side: Normal
iamdavidh(4856) Clarified
2 points

If we mean by what is practical, homosexuality is most likely not normal.

I think though that the example highlights the normalcy of a species to have a percent of homosexuality. As in "Is it normal for some animals in a given species to be homosexual" and the numbers clearly say, yes, that would be a normal phenomenon. There is no reason to introduce the additional factor of practicality. After all, how much of human sex of any sort is "practical"?

Assface mentions normal as a percent, and this too could categorize it as abnormal.

Again though, it is picking one of many "abnormal" things and comparing it to a whole. When manipulated and surveyed I think that "normal" in terms of sexuality, is not normal at all. The whole of it is quite abnormal, and this makes the various forms of it, including homosexuality, normal.

Side: Normal
0 points

I agree.

Using animals as an example that it is normal is actually quite stupid, it is not normal. It may be natural, but definitely not normal. Homosexuality should be treated similarly to diseases and disorders, because that's exactly what it is (simply has no adverse effects).

The only reason someone would be against this is because they were unable to accept the truth that hurts too much (honestly now, who would want to consider themselves as fucked up?). If you have issues you have issues, saying otherwise won't change it.

Side: Abnormal
lolzors93(3225) Disputed
2 points

Just letting you know... there are also documented cases of cannibalism, rape, incest, bestiality (meaning having sex with humans), pedophilia, etc. in the animal kingdom. So if you are going to argue this tactic then you have to also say that it is natural to eat other humans, rape other humans, have sex with animals, have sex with kids, etc.

Side: Abnormal
MuckaMcCaw(1968) Disputed
2 points

Well, he was arguing about naturality, not morality....still....what, EXACTLY, IS immoral about two being of the same sex showing their love for one another in a personal act?

Side: Normal
2 points

Liar. That list wasn't short at all.

------------------------------------------------------

Side: Normal
nummi(1435) Disputed
2 points

Answer this. Those animals, do they also bang females of their kind? I bet they do. That's not homosexuality, that's bisexuality.

Homosexuality means having a sexual attraction toward the same sex. Are those animals sexually attracted to the same sex, the way that they only do their own gender? Without ever doing the right gender? I bet it has something to do with dominance or just being confused or just having a mating season and being incapable of controlling themselves and thus they bang the first fluff of fur they see. They do not have an abstract mind as we do. They have instincts and urges to ensure survival, those tell them to fuck the right gender to have offspring. If some of them have urges that direct them toward the same gender then that means they are genetically messed up, it means they have a genetic disorder, and it also means they will not have offspring, meaning their flawed genes will die.

Homosexuality is a human thing. Seeing similar acts done by animals while they also bang the correct gender, and claiming those acts to be a sign that homosexuality is okay, normal, right, is very stupid. Those "homosexuals" are attracted to the females of their kind, the same does not go about humans.

Rendering your "argument" completely worthless.

Who's the mindless fuck now? As you failed to include important aspects.

Side: Abnormal
1 point

First, homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, and I have nothing against homosexuality.

Second, unfortunately, the list was probably an huge waste of time because comparing animals to humans is completely fallacious due to Jean Paul Sartre's Existence precedes Essence.

Basically, human action is based on rationality whereas animal action is based on instinct.

Therefore, rationality in human action allows for choice while instinct in animals action is inherent inclinations.

Side: Abnormal
TheAshman(2299) Disputed
3 points

Homosexuality is no more a lifestyle choice than Heterosexuality, I just dont understand this attitude that Homosexuals had a choice about their sexuality but Heterosexuals did'nt it makes no sense

Side: Normal
iamdavidh(4856) Disputed
1 point

Basically, human action is based on rationality whereas animal action is based on instinct.

It's not based solely on rationality. And I don't think Jean Paul Startre would even submit that it were, appeal to authority falacy aside.

There is something of a point to what you say:

Therefore, rationality in human action allows for choice while instinct in animals action is inherent inclinations.

Only if you are defining homosexuality only as the act and not the desire. This is incorrect though and I've had this argument with you before. Not sure why you are still making the same mistake.

For example, eating is a desire. I, as a rational person can decide not to, sure. People have knowingly and arguably for rational reasons, literally starved themselves.

However, the desire to eat does not go away. Ergo, homosexuality, the desire, is not rational or irrational, it is instinctual. It is normal for humans to have instincts, like eating and sex. Apollo gives examples highlighting many animals have a similar instinct as well.

The desire is normal than, it can be said of a certain percent of our species.

So then your argument would need to be that it is not normal to try to act on a desire that is natural.

I don't believe that is a position you would take.

Side: Normal
LeRoyJames(372) Disputed
1 point

I have three dogs, and they all try to hump each other interchangeably, but this doesn't mean they're gay. First of all, they never actually engage, I don't even think they know how. Second, they're just playing a dominance game, it may derive from actual sex, but the meaning has changed. I wouldn't be surprised that many of the example you give fall into the same category. I don't think you can look at behaviors that we, as humans, might categorize as gay, and apply that same rule to animals.

Side: Abnormal
Troy8(2431) Disputed
1 point

Argumentum ad populum

Side: Abnormal
2 points

What do I think of homosexuals and homosexuality?

Nothing that I don't think of heterosexuals and heterosexuality.

Side: Normal
2 points

Pretty apathetic actually... I'm cool with everyone doin' who or whatever they want as long as it doesn't negatively effect me... and I don't see how this would?

Side: Normal
1 point

Exactly. I really don't understand homophobes. I can't see how homosexuals cause harm or even affect someone's life.

Side: Normal
2 points

That's because they don't. Some people in society are just totally ignorant and disrespectful:)

Side: Normal

they are just like any average human on earth. you wont call christains or atheist abnormal because its not in nature to such beliefs(to some being an atheist is abnormal and to others being christain or any other religion is abnormal)would you?

Side: Normal
2 points

We have reached a point in time where modernisation is shooting up like never before. Personally i believe that we should remain normal to these circumstances.

It is written in the Bible tht everyone is born equal , so why not respect this?

Let us show to homosexuals the respect they deserve because we are living in a free world these days. Why judge people and botherv about what others are doing.

Side: Normal

I like homosexuals.

I'm indifferent about homosexuality because it doesn't affect me.

I totally hate the gay marriage debate. ;)

Side: Normal
2 points

A great many of my friends are either homosexuals or bisexuals so I don't think anything in particular about either orientation.

I am angered by claims that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, as opposed to something with which one is born. If that is so then why have so many turned to suicide by means of escaping the ordeal that is "coming out" to their family, friends and others? On an alternative note, however, I agree that there are cases in which individuals claim to be a particular sexual orientation in order to gain favour amongst people. It's sad, but true.

Side: Normal
2 points

Completely normal. Considering homosexuality is found within 315 - 485 different animal species, including the domestic cat and the domestic dog, it's completely normal.

Side: Normal
2 points

My own freaking cats are homosexuals. They try to fk each other though the are neutered and male, and they lick each other and spend alot of time together. It's normal. Everyone's entitled to their life.

Side: Normal
2 points

It is normal. It is normal to me, it is normal to the sperm whales, it is normal to the gay community. It's something common in the world. Well-known, but unfortunately, not accepted like any other difference in taste. You don't see people who listen to hip-hop tormenting others who listen to punk. People who like chocolate ice cream don't pick on people who like vanilla. So why is it such a big fucking deal that there's people in the world that like something different. Or rather, the same sex. So, yes. It is absolutely normal.

Side: Normal

I think they're exactly the sane as us, 'cause, y'know... They ARE exactly like heterosexuals, minus the sexual preference of course. Basically they are no better or worse than you or I, if you think otherwise you're a bloody idiot.

Side: Normal
2 points

If it was unnatural, it wouldn't exist.

Several species on earth, I'm not going to mention any because Apollo already did a great job, do homosexual acts.

Not being able to reproduce is not a valid argument against homosexuality, unless you're also against women who reached menopause having sex, or women who simply are just .. unable do carry children.

Also you'd have to be against all protection, like condoms and the pill.

Sex is two things.

Reproduction and pleasure. Sex is NOT just reproduction, if it was, then we wouldn't have had any pleasure during the act.

Side: Normal
2 points

Before Christianity men loved other men and women loved other women. There were fables that explained homosexuality in the ancient world, because people realized that it was completely normal for human beings. The only reason anyone doubts its natural place is because of the teachings of it in Christianity. Since Christian ideology is so much a part of America's backbone, it is natural that its values be indirectly passed to its population and others of Christian surrounding.

Side: Normal
2 points

I don't really care what people do in their own homes, and regardless of whether it's right or wrong, homosexuals have as much right to be happy as anyone. Christians make a big deal about how the bible says homosexuality is bad, but it also says to let those who are without sin throw the first stone, to treat others as you would have them treat you, and has the parable of the Good Samaritan, in which someone who was a member of a supposedly not so good tribe went out of his way to help someone else.

Regardless of whether you think homosexuality is good/bad or normal/abnormal, you should still treat them with respect. Maybe homosexuality is bad, but a homosexual could still be someone who would risk his life to save a child, or do some other noble deed. He may still be an overall good person, and may just be flawed in a different way than you or I.

I consider myself pretty tolerant of homosexuals in general, and I've had gay and lesbian friends in the past, but it still feels a little icky when I see two men making out. People make a big deal over whether or not a person is born homosexual or whether or not they choose it, but I never hear anyone talk about the whether or not the revulsion that many straight people feel when confronted with gays is something they're born with, or if they choose it.

Side: Normal
1 point

You're 100% right. People don't need to support homosexuality, but they must respect it. Besides, I'll never understand homophobes. I really can't see how homosexuals affect them. And yeah, I know that most heterosexuals thinks disgusting homosexual acts (at least between two men). And, as well as they have to respect homosexuals, I think that homosexuals should respect them. If a person don't like to see it, don't do it in front of him/her. Of course, unless it's a public space. If it's public, anyone can do anything that don't break the law.

Side: Normal
2 points

If America is all about free religion and beliefs, why do we base laws and logic in this faith, because the bible condemns homosexuality many hate these people, i thought this was a "live and let live country" but its not, and has never been, i have nothing against these individuals, but they will never be accepted as long as faith makes the laws

Side: Normal
TheAshman(2299) Disputed
1 point

Think you've hit the nail on the head because Americans have been banging on about the Country being Land Of The Free, Home Of The Brave for so long a lot of people now believe it not realising that Americans have less Free Speech and Rights than a lot of other Countries, in a way the War Of Independence backfired spectacularly the Americans fought off the tyranny of Britain but now have less freedoms than the British.

I just thought I would point out that this is not a dig at America or the Americans and is not intended to upset anyone it's just my views from what I have seen and read etc

Side: Normal

From a pure biological view point, the purpose of sex is to reproduce the species. But can we agree to be real with each other? Animals fuck to breed. People fuck because we like it. There's not a lot of people who can HONESTLY say that the have sex for EXPRESS purpose of having children. Even proper heterosexual Christian couples, if they are being honest, aren't planning on having kids every time they fuck. So, let's just call it what it is: A BEHAVIOR. So, people choosing to have sex because they like it is quite normal. When are we going to get past all of these nonsensical labels and admit that there is no gay or strait. No one is 100% strait. No one is 100% gay. We all have a little bit of the other in us. If you haven't found it, you haven't looked hard enough.

Side: Normal
1 point

I don't know if you know that this is scientific proved. Bu it is. A biologist named Alfred Kinsey created the Kinsey Scale, which classify humans in a scale 0-6, being 0 exclusively heterosexual and 6 exclusively homosexual. And he also says that 11,6% of white males people are with 3 in the scale (bisexual) when they are on the age 20-35. And a few people are on the scale 0 or 6. Most are in 1-2 (when heterosexual) or 4-5 (when homosexual).

Supporting Evidence: Kinsey Scale (Wikipedia) (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Normal
2 points

I think homosexuality is normal, it is natural and there is nothing wrong with being gay. There is a certain amount of taboo that surrounds the idea of homosexuality but that is because (I think) people are scared of what they don't know and what they can't fully explain.

Side: Normal
1 point

Are mental diseases, coughs, genetic disorders, tumors, personality disorders, mental disorders, etc., normal? If so then yes, homosexuality is also normal.

Side: Normal
TheAshman(2299) Disputed
2 points

All the things you have listed are natural disorders and the people that suffer from them are normal and should be treated that way, Homosexuality is natural but not a disorder and Homosexuals should be treated the same way that any other person is wether they suffer from an illness or are "normal"

Side: Abnormal
nummi(1435) Disputed
1 point

All the things you have listed are natural disorders and the people that suffer from them are normal and should be treated that way,

They are natural. The people, if without them are normal, but with them are not. If someone is messed up why do you think that person should automatically be treated as some abomination? I have never claimed anything like that myself.

Homosexuality is natural but not a disorder and Homosexuals should be treated the same way that any other person is wether they suffer from an illness or are "normal"

As are all disorders natural, so is homosexuality. It is a disorder and it is natural.

For the survival of a species that has two different genders the genders must be heterosexual. Otherwise the species would go extinct. There is also no need for homosexuality, not to mention it is rather stupid since the gear you've got is to be used on the opposite sex, not the same sex. Using your gear on your own sex is wrong. Homosexuality is a disorder.

Side: Normal

Homosexuality is completely natural and usually (not always) has to do with how the Mother's body responds to the child in her womb. But the thing is, homosexuality is normal, so stop acting like just because you have a different sexual orientation than most people that your somehow "different" or "special" or "unique" because your not, your just like everyone else.

Side: Normal

I think they're soooooooooooooooooooooooo gay

Side: Normal
1 point

We live in a modern society and have, more than ever the biggest range of people in our world than ever before and the population of the planet is constantly growing. Can we honestly expect that with that amount of people who are all different, we won't get homosexuals people? At the end of the day I don't see how 'normal' can have a definition because one persons idea of normal will be completely different to another persons. I believe that at the end of the day, love is love, it doesn't matter the sex of the person you fall in love with as long as they make you happy and that you trust them. And if two people happen to be the same sex and fall in love, what is wrong with it? Homosexuality has been around since Celtic times and I doubt that with the most amount of homosexual people in the world being at its peak, it will change. I think people that don't agree with it, are ignorant of the fact that love is love, whatever the sex is of the person.

Side: Normal
Alverus(38) Clarified
1 point

I doubt that with the most amount of homosexual people in the world being at its peak, it will change.

I don't think that there are scientific studies about that, and if there are I never heard about, so nothing is proved. However, in my opinion, the homosexuals quantity is nearly the same of all time. I don't think that the number of homosexuals grow over the years, otherwise in some time the whole population will be homosexual. But I agree that nowadays there are more open homosexuals. I think that this is because nowadays we live in a more civilized and intellectual world, and this increases the homosexual's courage to come out.

Besides this, your argument was perfect. You have the correct ideals.

Side: Normal
2 points

thank you, I know my argument isn't exactly supported by scientific evidence, I was just voicing my opinion:)

Side: Normal

There is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality. This is America and bigotry does not belong here.

Side: Normal
0 points

NORMAL........................... NORMAL............. NORMAL...........................................

Side: Normal
3 points

Statistically, at least. A species in which a majority of the specimens were homosexual wouldn't thrive as ours has.

Its abnormalcy doesn't lend to objectionability in any way, as some would suggest. Plenty of things are abnormal and harmless, like sleeping naked or autofellatio.

Side: Abnormal
3 points

I get your point and agree with you. It isn't normal, but natural. I should put the options "natural" and "unnatural". Thank you!

Side: Normal
riahlize(1573) Disputed
1 point

Statistically, at least. A species in which a majority of the specimens were homosexual wouldn't thrive as ours has.

Lesbian lizards. I don't know if they're as populace as us (probably not) but they seem to be stable in their existence.

We're not necessarily a thriving species anyway. We populate quickly but we also die off quickly too. Our overpopulation seems to only contribute to more birth abnormalities. Like mother nature is trying to kill us off because we're too high in numbers.

Its abnormalcy doesn't lend to objectionability in any way, as some would suggest. Plenty of things are abnormal and harmless, like sleeping naked or autofellatio.

This I completely agree with.

Side: Normal
Assface(406) Disputed
2 points

Lesbian lizards.

I probably should have specified heterosexually reproductive species. If we could reproduce asexually, everybody could be as gay as they wanted without imperiling humanity. Too bad about that.

Side: Abnormal
iamdavidh(4856) Clarified
1 point

Is there something which necessarily would mean that if homosexuality were naturally a larger portion of the population that the population would necessarily be less to a great degree? It seems obvious at first glance, but since when did homosexuals not have kids outside of their homosexual desires? And I've never seen any evidence that physical attraction necessarily lessens the desire for one to have kids. Would people as a whole have not adapted to the prevalence of homosexuality similar to how individuals who want kids but are gay adapt to the situation?

And if homosexuality were a larger portion of society, it seems this adaption would only be easier. Easier to adopt, easier to have relations for reproduction in conjunction with relations for love, etc.

Next premise: Is the assumption that society "thriving" to the extent it has must be necessarily tied to reproduction patterns and population? I could certainly see how it could be, but not that it necessarily is the case.

It seems each premise is flawed here. Perhaps true, but not necessarily true. And with the introduction of this new sort of "norm" other means of moving forward as society would be developed.

Its abnormalcy doesn't lend to objectionability in any way, as some would suggest. Plenty of things are abnormal and harmless, like sleeping naked or autofellatio.

True exactly.

What constitutes normalcy though? If it is only the extent to which it is practiced as a percent of a people, I'd guess no one is normal completely. Are there more people with say a foot fetish than who are gay? Are there more people into S&M;than who are gay? How does the percent of straight people who like ass sex compare to the overall homosexual population if that is the case? How about those who dress like characters? A specific character? People who like leather vs. those who like lace?

By what measure is homosexuality abnormal if "normal" sex is not the norm?

I would guess normal sex, if sexually active people are honest, is the abnormal.

I think perhaps the wording is incorrect, as others have eluded to.

Side: Normal
Berrystar(159) Disputed
0 points

There are too many people anyway. 1/2 the world being homosexual would drown the population, so to speak, from nearly 8 BILLION to a better 4 billion or less!

Side: Normal
2 points

I consider it to be abnormal merely due to the fact that we are not intellectually honest about what sort of behavior is normal and natural and what isn't.

None of us choose our sexual orientation - we are born with it, but does that make it normal? The current pro gay crowd is permiated by double standards and hypocrisy. If we accept homosexuality as a type of behavior that society must condone given the current arguments of naturality, then let's be fully consistent.

Nobody chooses homosexuality and it happens in nature - therefore it is normal and cannot be considered unnatural.

--------------------

Nobody chooses to have a taste and a craving for human flesh - cannibalism is a very common phenomena in nature and has been recorded in 1500 different species - therefore, cannibalism is normal and cannot be considered unnatural.

Why not give the people the opportunity to sell their bodies to a food corporation for a large sum of money after they die just like they do for medical institutions.

And given this, cannibalism is natural - it happens in nature, therefore it's normal. To deny this is hypocrisy and discriminatory against people who wish to eat human flesh.

-----------------------------

Cross-species sex i.e bestiality also has been recorded in nature. Animal hybrids are not uncommon at all.

If we evoke and defend homosexuality because it's natural, therefore we must also defend cross-species sex. If we truly have sexual autonomy, why can't a man have sex with his horse? We must consider it to be moral and natural and why not even have parades for besties?

-------------------------------

There is a whole research paper devoted to necrophilia in regards to the Mallard duck. If such an occasion happened in nature, must we then determine that is is natural and normal?

------------------------------

There are many more cases, but I just wanted to get my point across.

I would also like to say that homosexuality in animals is generally not due to active attraction to the same species - rather it is a show of social dominance.

If we are prepared to defend homosexuality with the given arguments, it would be arbitrary to deny all the above mentioned sexual practices. It would actually be hypocritical.

Given that society sees the previously mentioned practices as taboo, I must conclude that homosexuality must also not be condoned by society.

Side: Abnormal
youngidealis(50) Disputed
3 points

False analogy. The same comparisons can be made against heterosexuality. Also, Normal and Abnormal are psychological terms. look them up.

Side: Normal
VecVeltro(412) Disputed
1 point

You keep accusing me of false analogies like it's some sort of mantra.

The naturality argument is exactly that - Homosexuality is documented in nature, therefore it is natural.

I gave many examples of other societal taboo's that are documented in nature - we must conclude that the actions I mentioned are also normal and not unnatural. Should we therefore tolerate such practices.

And abnormal is not necessarily a psychological term. It means ''not normal'', or ''deviant'' or even ''unnatural''. Look it up on the dictionary, I'm not interested in debunking rethorical fallacies.

Side: Abnormal
BenWalters(1513) Disputed
1 point

Maybe it was unintentional, but your argument is a strawman.

Homosexuals, cannibals, necrophiles, those who want to engage in beastiality, are simply normal people who desire different things that most other people do. A desire is not bad, it is not harmful to others, I have no problem with people desiring whatever they want. What I could potentially disagree with is people acting upon those desires.

Now, you need to look at the problems with the act itself, the harm is causes onto others, onto the individual, and so on. Where homosexuality takes place between two consenting adults, the others cannot make the same claim (except cannibalism, but I do not think you need too look too far to see why ripping flesh could be considered bad).

What you're saying is that just because something happens naturally, it must be fine. That's not what is happening here. Even if homosexuality was not natural, and people wanted to do it just because they wanted to, then there would be no issue. The only relevance to homosexuality being natural + therefore moral is a rebuttal to the argument that homosexuality is non natural + therefore immoral. I believe this argument is flawed, but it is harder to point out flawed logic to those that believe the same, than it is to find a gay animal.

Side: Normal
VecVeltro(412) Disputed
1 point

My argument is not a strawman.

Cannibalism, necrophilia and bestiality - these are all things that can take place between consenting adults. A person can express intent in his testament - he can give ownership of his cadaver to someone else and that someone could either eat the body or have sex with it. Depends on his desires. The consent is there.

To say that necrophilia and bestiality have no consent is outright incorrect. I find it especially funny that you would imply that animals don't consent to sex - well they also don't consent to being stuffed into meat factories to live a miserable, worthless existence. If you eat meat, then I don't see why you would ever care about animal consent.

I'm just saying that all of these things - cannibalism, necrophilia and bestiality - can be defended with the same arguments. Like homosexuality, the previously mentioned actions can be consented to, only affects the people involved and is generally a private matter. If people take offense, well then tough luck. People take offense to homosexuality as well, but somehow they have to put up with it. So why condemn those three and condone homosexuality - it's intellectual hypocrisy.

Side: Abnormal
Alverus(38) Disputed
1 point

I agree with youngidealis. This is a failure comparison.

Yes, cannibalism, bestiality and necrophilia are natural. But they aren't the same thing that homosexuality because they aren't sexual orientations, and they cause harm to others. Besides, they aren't consensual. Nobody wants to be eaten, animals don't have how say yes or no and dead bodies are dead. Homosexuality causes absolutely no harm to society.

Yes, it is. Recent studies show that there are several specimens that only have sexual relations with another individuals of the same sex and specie. It's their instinct. In humans, how we don't have instincts (not in that way), the instinct is replaced by sexual desire.

And why would society do that? According to you, homosexuality must be compared to cannibalism, bestiality and necrophilia. So why don't compare these to heterosexuality too? You don't choose to love the opposite sex. And who knows if homosexuality is the normal and heterosexuality is the abnormal? Just because there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals? There are more men than women in the world. Does this mean that being a woman is abnormal?

And I actually don't understand homophobes. Tell me, how the homosexuals bother you?

Side: Normal
VecVeltro(412) Disputed
1 point

This is a completely consistent comparison.

Tell me, who exactly does cannibalism, bestiality and necrophilia harm? And how does it harm them? All of these things can be consensual, so your first paragraph is moot. I even said that in terms of cannibalism where I suggested that people should be able to sell their bodies to corporations, so when they die the corporation gets ownership of the body. Before you criticize my post, you should read it.

As I said, all of these things can be consented to. The only harm that other people might get is emotional harm - people may get offended. Well, so what? People get offended by homosexuality too and we tell them to put up with it.

And you are actually affirming my point. I don't choose the opposite sex and I don't choose the same sex to get attracted to - but necrophiliacs don't choose their attraction towards cadavers and besties don't choose their attraction towards animals, so should the society tolerate and condone such behavior?.

Your comparison of gays to women is outright laughable. Women are no deviation from the general norm. You might as well say: ''Well, who knows - maybe down syndrome is actually normal and people with 46 chromosomes are abnormal. Just because there are more non-down syndrome people doesn't mean that down syndrome isn't normal.''

My whole point was that if deviation from the norm is acceptable, then why draw the line at homosexuality when the pro-gay arguments could also be applied to bestiality and necrophilia?

Side: Abnormal
1 point

Its abnormal because it goes against nature.

Can two homosexuals (of the same gender) reproduce? No.

Does homosexuality bring any added benefits to life? No.

Is it a dangerous lifestyle? Yes.

However, homosexuality is becoming more and more accepted throughout the world and, therefore, can be considered "natural" because it is more of a "norm" than in past years.

Homosexuals on the other hand are great people and I love being friends with a number of them.

Side: Abnormal
Saurbaby(5579) Disputed
5 points

Its abnormal because it goes against nature.

How can this statement be true when there are countless amount of animals that take part in homosexual acts?

Can two homosexuals (of the same gender) reproduce? No.

And this is important because?

Does homosexuality bring any added benefits to life? No.

Highly debatable, we do not need all people who are created and alive to reproduce in order to continue with our species. And now more than ever it's not necessary. So homosexuals can somewhat help in a sense with population control. People live longer, and are reproducing more. And there's more to reproduce. If there are people who can't reproduce that are more open to admit it, then we won't get overpopulated.

Is it a dangerous lifestyle? Yes.

LOL, this is a ridiculous claim. I am gay, my lifestyle is far from dangerous. You have a fake image in your mind of how gay people live, but dangerous lifestyles don't just come from homosexuals.

How is it dangerous?

And you're not a very good friend to these people you claim to be friends with, otherwise you'd know that the life is not dangerous.

Side: Normal
lolzors93(3225) Disputed
1 point

Just because other animals do homosexual acts does not mean it is natural. Do other animals have mental illnesses? If they do then are mental illnesses abnormal? How do you define abnormal and natural?

If you can't reproduce then it goes against what is natural for sexual relations. The vagina and penis is used for reproduction... the anus is not meant for anything but excreting waste...

There is no benefit for the homosexual for being homosexual.

This is my response about homosexuality one time....

"Actually, being gay has many negative consequences... 60% of male homosexuals had more than 250 lifetime sexual partners... 28% had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners.... and 79% admitted that more than half of their sexual partners were strangers (The Institution for Sex Research; Understanding the Times student manuel pg. 147). "The average AIDS victim has had 60 different sexual partners in the past twelve months... the average heterosexual male has - throughout his life - from five to nine sex partners" (Dr. William Foege, Director of the Centers for Disease Control). "Yvonne Zipter, a lesbian writing in Chicago's gay journal Windy City Times, in an article entitled "The Disposable Lesbian Relationship," notes that the "lasting lesbian relationship" is a "mythic entity" (Understanding the Times student manuel pg. 147). The current figure is that 70% of Americans with

AIDS are male homosexuals or bisexuals. Dr. Bernard J. Klamecki, says that 86% of homosexual males use various drugs to enhance and increase their sexual stimulation. The homosexual is also 3 times more suicidal than heterosexuals. The life expectancy for gays wihtout AIDS is 33 years shorter than hetersexuals.... etc. (Understanding the Times student manuel pg. 148).

The life style of gays is not a safe one.... I'm sorry, but you are wrong..."

I actually am very good friends with one, if I got married right now, he might end up being one of my groomsmen... And in fact, he enforces my beliefs that it is a dangerous lifestyle....

Side: Abnormal
Apollo(1608) Disputed
3 points

Its abnormal because it goes against nature.

False. Thousands of species exhibit the behavior.

Can two homosexuals (of the same gender) reproduce? No.

Yes, they can. Simply not with each other.

Does homosexuality bring any added benefits to life? No.

Its existence necessitates an evolutionary advantage. Scientists have proposed many reasons.

Is it a dangerous lifestyle? Yes.

Justify this absurd assertion.

However, homosexuality is becoming more and more accepted throughout the world and, therefore, can be considered "natural" because it is more of a "norm" than in past years.

What? How does social acceptance of something change how often it exists?

Side: Normal
stukaville(7) Disputed
2 points

'Thousands of species exhibit the behavior'

But each of the species has a substantial majority that practice heterosexual sex, so homosexual sex is not the norm if it is the minority behavior in each species.

'Yes, they can. Simply not with each other'

You deliberately ignored the point of the question, even so, you undermined yourself, if a homosexual has sex with the opposite sex and reproduces, he practiced heterosexual sex.

'Its existence necessitates an evolutionary advantage. Scientists have proposed many reasons.'

There is no direct evolutionary advantage from homosexual sex, If an Alpha male suddenly began to have sex with other males and not females, his DNA would not be passed on. Give some examples of benefits these 'scientists' have proposed.

'What? How does social acceptance of something change how often it exists?'

I don't think Lolzors was trying to claim that there is more homosexuality because its more accepted, the levels of homosexuality has probably been a stable percentage for thousands of years.

Side: Abnormal
lolzors93(3225) Disputed
1 point

This was my response earlier: "Just because there are animals that are homosexual does not mean anything... Most male animals will have sex with anything that moves just so it can pass down its genes... there are countless of explanations for this... along with the lines that it could be a mental disorder counting it as "abnormal."

You are knit picking. You understood what I was talking about... They cannot reproduce with one another.

Such as? If anything it is un-evolutionarily sound for this reason: the psychological factor for evolution is sex. If a man is only attracted to men then that present a problem especially since evolution also states that passing down genes and survival of the fittest is one of the fundamental factors of evolution. If a man cannot pass down his genes because he is not attracted to females presents huge problems... Evolution should be that last thing you should debate with in this argument.

This is my response to someone a while back:

"Actually, being gay has many negative consequences... 60% of male homosexuals had more than 250 lifetime sexual partners... 28% had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners.... and 79% admitted that more than half of their sexual partners were strangers (The Institution for Sex Research; Understanding the Times student manuel pg. 147). "The average AIDS victim has had 60 different sexual partners in the past twelve months... the average heterosexual male has - throughout his life - from five to nine sex partners" (Dr. William Foege, Director of the Centers for Disease Control). "Yvonne Zipter, a lesbian writing in Chicago's gay journal Windy City Times, in an article entitled "The Disposable Lesbian Relationship," notes that the "lasting lesbian relationship" is a "mythic entity" (Understanding the Times student manuel pg. 147). The current figure is that 70% of Americans with

AIDS are male homosexuals or bisexuals. Dr. Bernard J. Klamecki, says that 86% of homosexual males use various drugs to enhance and increase their sexual stimulation. The homosexual is also 3 times more suicidal than heterosexuals. The life expectancy for gays wihtout AIDS is 33 years shorter than hetersexuals.... etc. (Understanding the Times student manuel pg. 148).

The life style of gays is not a safe one.... I'm sorry, but you are wrong..."

If something is socially accepted then it does not make it abnormal because it is not considered abnormal to society. For example: interracial couples were considered abnormal at one time. Now they are not considered abnormal.

Side: Abnormal
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
1 point

Its abnormal because it goes against nature

Impossible. Even if you define nature as not man-made, homosexuality does not defy "nature" in any way by its definition.

Can two homosexuals (of the same gender) reproduce? No.

That doesn't make something unnatural.

Does homosexuality bring any added benefits to life? No.

To you, maybe not. To others, it may.

Is it a dangerous lifestyle? Yes.

As dangerous as most other lifestyles. If you go hiking you are partaking in a dangerous act. If you spend thousands of dollars on college you are partaking in a dangerous lifestyle. All subjective.

However, homosexuality is becoming more and more accepted throughout the world and, therefore, can be considered "natural" because it is more of a "norm" than in past years.

Normality is not the same as natural as I pointed out to Apollo. Something can be "natural" yet not be "normal" and vice-versa (depending on if you view nature as not man-made.)

Homosexuals on the other hand are great people and I love being friends with a number of them.

If you love being friends with a number of them, I suppose they've brought benefits to your very own life.

Side: Normal
youngidealis(50) Disputed
1 point

All of your points are demonstrably false, save one that's just irrelevant. I'll respond to one such point because you really need to educate yourself before saying these things.

"Is it a dangerous lifestyle? Yes."

The mere fact that heterosexual idiots like you have believed this has caused any and all trends that MIGHT have once agreed with you to turn completely around and statistically show that heterosexuals carry more STD's by percentage than homosexual men. Also, if health is a factor, then being a lesbian is most healthy and should be fully supported by you in every way. The passage of STD's between lesbians rounds down to 0%

Side: Normal
Alverus(38) Disputed
0 points

Its abnormal because it goes against nature.

Actually, no. People are born with their defined sexual orientations, so it's natural. Besides, cases of homosexuality was registered in more than 300 animal species.

Does homosexuality bring any added benefits to life? No.

Neither do heterosexuality. They can reproduce? Yes, they can. And so can the homosexuals. Of course not between them, but they can have sexual relations with the opposite sex just for reproduction, not for pleasure. And they always can make in vitro.

Is it a dangerous lifestyle? Yes.

I don't see your point. If you're referring to anal sex, a lot of heterosexuals make it too, so it can't be considered an exclusive homosexual lifestyle. And even more: if you're referring to AIDS, it can also be transmitted by vaginal sex.

However, homosexuality is becoming more and more accepted throughout the world and, therefore, can be considered "natural" because it is more of a "norm" than in past years.

It's not a "norm". Homosexuals still suffer from prejudgment, social exclusions and homophobic attacks, being them aggressions or even murder. Besides, it can't be a "norm" because people don't choose to be homosexuals.

P.S.: Keep this civil. I admire you for be against homosexuality and still respect homosexuals. There are a really few people in the world like you, trust me.

Side: Normal
lolzors93(3225) Disputed
0 points

Thats disputable... my mom's master's thesis for psychology determined that it was half and half nature and nurture... but the key is that sexuality is not determined at birth but later in life. When you were one-year-old do you remember liking girls/boys? It develops over time... and that leaves tremendous room for the environment to play a huge role.

Just because there are animals that are homosexual does not mean anything... Most male animals will have sex with anything that moves just so it can pass down its genes... there are countless of explanations for this... along with the lines that it could be a mental disorder counting it as "abnormal."

Thats what I was saying, homosexual couples cannot reproduce with one another... there is no point for them to be together sexually.

"Norm" might have been too strong of a word... I was just trying to say that it could be considered natural now because there are so many homosexuals now a days.

Thank you!

Side: Abnormal

Homos are gays and lesbian combined together to make a "gasbian". That is reallllllll SICK man........... Examples of homos........ people who wear such sick clothing.

Side: Abnormal
1 point

This is a little misleading. It is asking two questions and trying to force us to give the same answer for both.

I suppose we could say that homosexuality is not common, and so not normal (pending one's definition of normal). But that really degrades into semantics for both sides on what is "normal."

I will start by saying that "normal" is not the same as "moral" and so none of my argument should be looked at with morals in mind. I will also like to say that none of this reflects what I believe any laws should be.

I would argue that sexual desires are an evolutionary trait to get us to try to spread our seed and allow our genes to pass on. Any sexual desires that contradict that evolutionary goal are not "normal."

Side: Abnormal
1 point

Technically.. It's abnormal. Mother nature gave men and women different genitalia to use them correctly- to re produce. That is, natural. For two of the same sex to mate is not natural. However, for all those haters out there, i am not saying it shouldn't be!

Side: Abnormal
1 point

Abnormal. The majority of people are not homosexual. The norm is being heterosexual.

Side: Abnormal
Alverus(38) Disputed
1 point

So what? The majority of people are men. Does this mean that women are abnormal? Yes, there is more heterosexuals than homosexuals. However, the "norm" includes everything: heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual. There isn't a "right" sexual orientation. Every sexual orientation is right, normal and natural.

Side: Normal
Troy8(2431) Disputed
1 point

You misunderstand. When did I ever say it was wrong? Normal means standard, typical, or common, it does not imply right or wrong.

Side: Abnormal
1 point

List of animals that have shown heterosexual tendencies: All. Animals. Ever.

Side: Abnormal
1 point

First, we should define the word "normal." According to the fine folks at Merriam-Webster, "normal" can be defined as the standard, regular pattern, or average development. Logically, this debate should end right now, but I need to elaborate. Saying homosexuality is not a choice has the same principals as saying murderers are not choosing to be murders, and rapists are not choosing to be rapists. Do you have further explanation as to why there are only two genders on this planet, and why those two genders can NATURALLY reproduce? I have no problem with people being happy and prospering in life together. Our Constitution was created for that specific reason. We are free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. I do, however, have a problem with homosexuals attempting to get the public to believe it is normal to be attracted to the same sex, because it is obviously not normal and is not following regularities. Is homosexuality the standard? No. Is homosexuality typical? No, it is not. Therefore, it is abnormal.

Side: Abnormal
0 points

I have friends who are gay and they're not bad people at all. I see everyone talking about how it's :not nature/natural: blah blah and people saying it is :because animals take part in homosexual acts too: but WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANIMALS. We're humans. VERY different from animals. If homosexuality isn't wrong then why does everyone keep fighting for it to be accepted? because they know deep down it is. People only support gay because they either are of someone close to them is and they probably had to accept that before they supported them. For me now, I don't support gay rights at all, but I'm not against gay people. You're gay? sure we can hangout. Go to an event to support gay rights? No thank you. By the way no one is born gay.

Side: Abnormal
youngidealis(50) Disputed
1 point

Ad populum and the argument from ignorance. You don't know why it feels funny when you think about it so it must be squirrels... No wait you said it must be abnormal. That's the argument from ignorance talking. Also everybody thinks that the majority agrees with them. They're not always right about that, and the majority can always be wrong about things too. See American History of Slavery.

Psychology would disagree with you about being born gay. Did you choose to be straight? I also have no one close to me who's gay and I'm not gay. I choose to support their equal treatment because I've taken psychology of human sexuality and I now know the science. Forget gay rights events. Go to your local community college and take a cheap course in the Psychology of Human Sexuality. Gay people aren't looking for your approval, they are looking to get just enough tolerance for you to leave their equal rights alone.

Side: Normal
Vanessadp101(21) Clarified
1 point

Uhhh yea did you not read the end? Obviously im gonna leave their equal rights alone. Not my problem.

Side: Normal
Alverus(38) Disputed
1 point

Ignorance is the first and, in most cases, the only step to hate. Research before making an argument and write it in a formal language to prevent it of be destroyed.

The argument of animals is to prove that homosexuality is natural and to show that homosexuality can't extinguish a specie. So it's valid.

People fight for the acceptance of homosexuality because it is NOT accepted. Homosexuals suffer from prejudgment, social exclusion and homophobic attacks, as physical/verbal aggressions and even murder. Would you like to live in a society where 2/3 of it thinks you are against the nature and deserves to die and burn in hell?

E-V-E-R-Y homosexual is born homosexual. Of course they don't realize it in childhood, because children don't have sexual desire, neither for boys or girls. But in teenage, when the desire pops, the homosexuals realize that they prefer the same sex rather than the opposite sex. So it's not a choice and people are born with their defined sexual orientation. Are you homosexual to know?

Side: Normal
stukaville(7) Disputed
1 point

Not strictly true, I know a gay man I went to school with. He had two girlfriends i school and told me that he realised he was gay after he had left school, around 17 yrs old.

Side: Abnormal