• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

  • No

    Votes: 99 79.2%
  • Yes, explain

    Votes: 26 20.8%

  • Total voters
    125
Status
Not open for further replies.
In some respects, sure it does. In other's it comes up short.

From a scientific standpoint? Not at all. Comparing the scientific data from both positions, the pro-GM position has more validity than any anti-GM position. If you disagree, please demonstrate evidence that shows the opposite.
 
From a scientific standpoint? Not at all. Comparing the scientific data from both positions, the pro-GM position has more validity than any anti-GM position. If you disagree, please demonstrate evidence that shows the opposite.

There has been no study that shows, conclusively, that homosexuality is not a choice. That's using science. Yes, there are studies that indicate that Homosexuals couples can raise normal, well adjusted children. That doesn't legitimize homosexuality, however.
 
There has been no study that shows, conclusively, that homosexuality is not a choice. That's using science. Yes, there are studies that indicate that Homosexuals couples can raise normal, well adjusted children. That doesn't legitimize homosexuality, however.

There have been a plethora of studies that show that homosexuality is not a disorder. That legitimizes homosexuality. And there have been no studies that show, conclusively, that ANY sexual orientation, including heterosexuality it or isn't a choice. Therefore THAT aspect of science does not apply to this argument.
 
There have been a plethora of studies that show that homosexuality is not a disorder. That legitimizes homosexuality. And there have been no studies that show, conclusively, that ANY sexual orientation, including heterosexuality it or isn't a choice. Therefore THAT aspect of science does not apply to this argument.

So you agree that God exists then?
 
There has been no study that shows, conclusively, that homosexuality is not a choice. That's using science. Yes, there are studies that indicate that Homosexuals couples can raise normal, well adjusted children. That doesn't legitimize homosexuality, however.

So I take it you've never met a person 'born gay' before? Do you believe that when gays act gay they are just indulging in some sort of hedonistic character play?
 
Are you asking for my belief or what I can prove? Those are two different questions.

Irrelevant, really. The point is that having no proof of a thing doesn't make the opposite true.
 
So I take it you've never met a person 'born gay' before? Do you believe that when gays act gay they are just indulging in some sort of hedonistic character play?

I have never met a gay infant, no. Second question: entirely plausible.
 
Science definitely is being used to support gay marriage.

Science is being used mostly to counter stupid anti-GM arguments. The only science being used to support GM is studies on the effects of gay parents.
 
Irrelevant, really. The point is that having no proof of a thing doesn't make the opposite true.

I have argued that premise successfully when defending the belief in God against atheists... in fact it is the cornerstone of my argument, so you are singing to the choir, here.
 
I have argued that premise successfully when defending the belief in God against atheists... in fact it is the cornerstone of my argument, so you are singing to the choir, here.

Ok, then how is it that your research proving that homosexuals can have otherwise healthy families somehow legitimizes homosexuality?
 
What about a 5 year old that acts 'gay'?

How does a 5 year old act "gay"? My 3 year old son carried around a pink hello kitty case for a week. Does that make him gay? (He carried toy cars in it, btw.)
 
Ok, then how is it that your research proving that homosexuals can have otherwise healthy families somehow legitimizes homosexuality?

It doesn't. Research that demonstrates that homosexuality is not a disorder legitimatizes homosexuality. Research the proves that homosexuals can have families as healthy as those of heterosexuals legitimatizes GM, scientifically. See the difference?
 
And, as an aside, with what we know about developmental sexuality, I would caution ANYONE of trying to identify the sexual orientation of someone as young as 3 or 5, especially based on a behavior or two. Further, I have no idea what "acting gay" looks like on a 5 year old.
 
It doesn't. Research that demonstrates that homosexuality is not a disorder legitimatizes homosexuality. Research the proves that homosexuals can have families as healthy as those of heterosexuals legitimatizes GM, scientifically. See the difference?

It not being a disorder doesn't make it not a choice.
 
How does a 5 year old act "gay"? My 3 year old son carried around a pink hello kitty case for a week. Does that make him gay? (He carried toy cars in it, btw.)

You obviously don't know what 'queer' entails. If your child began to develop without properly 'liking' girls as other boys, developed queer speech, habits, and spoke differently than other boys somehow you would begin to understand.

sorry, i have never parented, dont mean to be rude...
 
And, as an aside, with what we know about developmental sexuality, I would caution ANYONE of trying to identify the sexual orientation of someone as young as 3 or 5, especially based on a behavior or two. Further, I have no idea what "acting gay" looks like on a 5 year old.

I agree entirely.
 
It not being a disorder doesn't make it not a choice.

For the 1,987,348th time... there is no conclusive evidence that sexual orientation is either a choice or not a choice. Current researchers agree that sexual orientation develops due to a combination of the following factors: biological, genetic, hormonal/chemical, and environmental. This goes for ALL sexual orientations, homosexuality, bisexuality, AND heterosexuality. None of these orientations, however, can be classified as a disorder, which legitimatizes each of them.
 
You obviously don't know what 'queer' entails. If your child began to develop without properly 'liking' girls as other boys, developed queer speech, habits, and spoke differently than other boys somehow you would begin to understand.

sorry, i have never parented, dont mean to be rude...

At 5?!!! Sorry, all of those things would not determine one's sexual orientation. Perhaps the child needs a speech therapist for some speech disorder. Perhaps he's shy around girls... not outrageous at that or many other ages. And perhaps he just has different likes... like a boy who likes art rather than baseball. No WAY can someone make that kind of determination on just those behaviors.
 
For the 1,987,348th time... there is no conclusive evidence that sexual orientation is either a choice or not a choice. Current researchers agree that sexual orientation develops due to a combination of the following factors: biological, genetic, hormonal/chemical, and environmental. This goes for ALL sexual orientations, homosexuality, bisexuality, AND heterosexuality. None of these orientations, however, can be classified as a disorder, which legitimatizes each of them.

there is no conclusive evidence that sexual orientation is either a choice or not a choice......Current researchers agree that sexual orientation MAY DEVELOP due to a combination of the following factors: biological, genetic, hormonal/chemical, and environmental. Though no genetic dissimilarity between heterosexuals and homosexuals has been found. ........which legitimatizes each of them. That's an opinion.
 
there is no conclusive evidence that sexual orientation is either a choice or not a choice......Current researchers agree that sexual orientation MAY DEVELOP due to a combination of the following factors: biological, genetic, hormonal/chemical, and environmental.

Agreed.
Though no genetic dissimilarity between heterosexuals and homosexuals has been found. ........which legitimatizes each of them. That's an opinion.

Since there is no conclusive proof of the causation of sexual orientation, the legitimacy of a sexual orientation cannot be scientifically based on genetics, biology, or biochemistry. Therefore, to scientifically legitimatize either or each, another foundation must be used. Since scientific evidence shows that neither sexual orientation is and of itself is a disorder, the legitimacy or "normalization" of each can be identified.
 
At 5?!!! Sorry, all of those things would not determine one's sexual orientation. Perhaps the child needs a speech therapist for some speech disorder. Perhaps he's shy around girls... not outrageous at that or many other ages. And perhaps he just has different likes... like a boy who likes art rather than baseball. No WAY can someone make that kind of determination on just those behaviors.

.... I cant verbalise what I want to say, but I expressed my example incorrectly ... or it was taken wrong.

That doesn't determine a child to be gay, but what can be said of gay children who develop like that, or at least develop into gays and believe or know they have been gay their whole lives? Is there no evidence at least from hearsay in society that people are born gay? I apologise for not knowing much on the issue.
 
Last edited:
.... I cant verbalise what I want to say, but I expressed my example incorrectly ... or it was taken wrong.

That doesn't determine a child to be gay, but what can be said of gay children who develop like that, or at least develop into gays and believe or know they have been gay their whole lives?

That they are most probably gay, however, the causation is currently unknown. It could have been genetics. It could have been biology. It could have been hormones/biochemistry. It could have been environment. There is no conclusive evidence that makes the determination. I believe at some point, a genetic or biochemical component to sexual orientation will be discovered. It appears innate to me. However, there is no scientific basis for this, so it is nothing by my opinion. Scientifically, and in debate, I stay with the position that the determinants for sexual orientation are inconclusive and a definitive answer is not currently known.
 
Agreed.


Since there is no conclusive proof of the causation of sexual orientation, the legitimacy of a sexual orientation cannot be scientifically based on genetics, biology, or biochemistry. Therefore, to scientifically legitimatize either or each, another foundation must be used. Since scientific evidence shows that neither sexual orientation is and of itself is a disorder, the legitimacy or "normalization" of each can be identified.

So, we have to use something other than science to answer the fundamental question in this argument. Is homosexuality, and by extension, homosexual marriage, something society will accept as legitimate?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom