Homosexuality is a Choice

As per the Structure determined in R1, I will only be using this speech to address Pro's case (his R1 comments). Again, I thank TMC for this debate, and hope that he and our readers are trying to keep an open mind as they read the debate. To begin deconstructing Pro's case, I will first address the BOP, then subdivide his arguments into portions, and lastly I will turn some of Pro's sources back against him.BURDEN OF PROOFSince this resolution is a question of fact, Pro bears the sole BOP. In other words, if he fails to prove his claim, he has lost. But, what exactly is the claim that Pro needs to prove? The resolution is referring to "homosexuality" as an entity. Therefore, to show one or two examples of where choice may exist is insufficient to affirm (though I sincerely doubt any such instance exist, regardless.) Therefore, the resolution can be interpreted in one of two ways: (A) homosexuality is always a choice, or (B) homosexuality is usually a choice. Given the former burden, it will be almost impossible for Pro to affirm given the weighty scientific evidence leveled against him. Given the latter burden--certainly a more charitable one--Pro will need to demonstrate with confidence that a majority of homosexuals choose to be homosexual.ARGUMENTSA. Ex-GaysPro suggests that there are presumably thousands of "ex-gays" now living as heterosexuals. Firstly, none of Con's sources substantiate this claim, and secondly, the rationale behind this is dubious at best.People who seek gay conversion therapy--I use the term "therapy" incredibly loosely--are clearly people seeking to blend in to "normal" heterosexual society. These individuals have a motive to claim that they have been cured. It seems more logical, given the medical and psychological evidence I offered last round, that individuals are simply suppressing there homosexual urges or remaining chaste altogether. That doesn't make them straight; it makes them homosexuals in denial. Additionally, for the same reasons people have motives to suppress their homosexuality, they have a motivation to lie on self-reporting surveys that are designed to gauge the efficaciousness of such "therapy."Let's review some background on these conversion programs: "In 2012, the Pan American Health Organization (the North and South American branch of the World Health Organization) released a statement cautioning against services that purport to 'cure' people with non-heterosexual sexual orientations as they lack medical justification and represent a serious threat to the health and well-being of affected people, and noted that the global scientific and professional consensus is that homosexuality is a normal and natural variation of human sexuality and cannot be regarded as a pathological condition. The Pan American Health Organization further called on governments, academic institutions, professional associations and the media to expose these practices and to promote respect for diversity. The World Health Organization affiliate further noted that gay minors have sometimes been forced to attend these 'therapies' involuntarily, being deprived of their liberty and sometimes kept in isolation for several months, and that these findings were reported by several United Nations bodies. Additionally, the Pan American Health Organization recommended that such practices be denounced and subject to sanctions and penalties under national legislation, as they constitute a violation of the ethical principles of health care and violate human rights that are protected by international and regional agreements." [1]"National health organizations in the United States have announced that there has been no scientific demonstration of conversion therapy's efficacy in the last forty years. They find that conversion therapy is ineffective, risky and can be harmful. Anecdotal claims of cures are counterbalanced by assertions of harm, and the American Psychiatric Association, for example, cautions ethical practitioners under the Hippocratic oath to do no harm to refrain from attempts at conversion therapy. Mainstream medical bodies state that conversion therapy can be harmful because it may exploit guilt and anxiety, thereby damaging self-esteem and leading to depression and even suicide...Mainstream health organizations critical of conversion therapy include the American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, the American Counseling Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the American Academy of Physician Assistants." [1]In light of these two excerpts, we now have reason to believe that "therapy" has no scientific evidence to back it up (and isn't recognized by most major medical organizations) and is potentially harmful. But the first of these two claims is the most relevant to the debate, so let's discuss it a bit more."A 2009 APA task force found that conversion therapies, despite being touted by religious organizations, have little evidence to back them up. A review of studies from 1960 to 2007 found only 83 on the topic, the vast majority of which did not have the experimental muscle to show whether the therapies achieved their stated goals." [2] Even former leaders of the conversion movement have acknowledged that their programs don't work, [3] and for every testimony that Pro might cite about the effectiveness of the programs, I can pull counterexamples, like this one. [4]It is also necessary to point out that "fluidity" is not the same as "choice." Choice implies an active decision; "fluid" transitions can occur passively and without any choice on the part of the individual. I agree that sexuality is "fluid," but not that it is "chosen."B. GeneticsAs per the BOP analysis, one example hardly proves anything. Moreover, I have provided ample analysis in my case that rebuts Pro's core assertions here.C. Pro's SourcesTurn No. 1Let's look at the Harvard.edu link first. The source writes: "In light of the ambiguity of the scientific research on sexuality, I will present a brief example where there is a clear genetic link to adult homosexuality. Congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) is a hormonal disorder that causes an excess of male-specific hormones, known as androgens, while the fetus is developing in the womb (Pang et al. 1985; Witchel and Azziz 2010). CAH is most often caused by a mutation in a single gene, and genetic tests have existed for well over a decade (Van Ryzin 2009)." This source also notes that, "there is a loose consensus among geneticists, if not social scientists (Butler 1990; Kitzinger 1995), that there is some evidence for a genetic predisposition to homosexuality."Turn this source. This source substantiates the claim that homosexuality has a biological basis, strengthening the idea that it is not actually a choice.Non-uniqueNow turn your attention to the AmericanThinker.com link. "Even if we accepted, for argument's sake (which I do not accept), that McCaskill was "anti-gay" because she signed a petition, the case against Dixon is based purely on wild assumptions about sex. To fire Dixon, one must accept that gay men cannot stop themselves from having anal sex or engaging in fellatio." This article is referring to one's ability to choose to have sex. Of course, engaging in the act of sex is a choice; that is not what Pro and I are debating. We are debating whether attraction is a choice. Therefore, this argument does not clash with my case.Turn No. 2Next, let's look at TheNation.com. This source writes: "No one this side of the rainbow flag is arguing that people choose the direction of their romantic and sexual desires in the way that someone might, say, choose between different brands of toothpaste. Desire happens unbidden." P1. Desires are not chosenP2. Homosexuality is a sexual desire for someone of the same sexC1. Homosexuality is not chosen And--Presto!--we have turned this point into a logically valid argument against Pro. RejectionWe should reject Pro's non-hyperlinked source since I cannot access it to assess its validity. Also, any sources cited in the comments should not be evaluated as they are an attempt to obviate the character limit of the debate.D. Food for ThoughtIf people lived in a culture that castigated homosexuals for who they are, do you think they would come out as gay? Many people don't handle the social rejection well, and many want to keep those social and familial ties they risk losing when they come out. Yet, that doesn't stop them from coming out in such cultures. Really, if homosexuality were chosen, rational people in such close-minded societies would save themselves the pain and choose to be heterosexual instead. The fact that people come out as gay in those societies is thus evidence that homosexuality is not a choice.SOURCES1 - http://en.wikipedia.org...2 - http://news.yahoo.com...3 - http://time.com...4 - http://www.huffingtonpost.com...Thanks! I respectfully remind Pro that R3 is his last round to post arguments. I now turn over the floor to him...