Homosexuality should be accepted by humanity

Thank you for that. Your argument was extremely well written and thorough, and took quite some time to go through. Although it seemed as though you pulled quotes out of news articles more than give your own opinion. It is obvious to the reader that this is a topic that is something you care a great deal about.For my response, I would first like to present the points listed in my response, and then pull some quotes from my opponent's argument and answer them.The Bible is against homosexualityFor centuries, the Bible has been a foundation for the morality and well being of mankind. Many people consider the Bible in error when it refers to homosexuality and say this automatically makes it unreliable. I beg to differ. Just because you don't believe what the Bible has to say doesn't make the Bible wrong. The Scriptures have stood the test of time through history, science, and prophecy. The following link is a website containing the seven references to homosexuality listed in the Bible. I'm going to use this list to shorten my response. http://www.christianbiblereference.org...Marriage ought to be between a man and a womanThis point ties into my next point being that homosexuality is against the natural order. Natural marriage has always been between a man and a woman. If a homosexual couple were to adopt a child (which I'm glad you mentioned in your argument) it would deny that child a father figure or a mother figure. That child will never have a role model to look after. The same would go for any home that is not in the natural order it should be (single mother, late adoption, etc.). I will save what you said about this for after my main points.Homosexuality is against nature"14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)" Romans 2:14-15"Natural law’s most elementary precept is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.” By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him. Thus, he can know the end or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to transform the means that help him accomplish an act into the act’s purpose.Any situation which institutionalizes the circumvention of the purpose of the sexual act violates natural law and the objective norm of morality.Being rooted in human nature, natural law is universal and immutable. It applies to the entire human race, equally. It commands and forbids consistently, everywhere and always."I will mention this after my main points as well, but the fact that you bring animals into the picture is absolutely absurd. What do animals have to do with the business of humans? There is a noticeable difference, mainly being that man has society, art, culture, language, wears clothes, has creativity, has a spirit, and most importantly has a conscience. Animals have nothing to do us. I'll discuss this later.http://www.tfpstudentaction.org... There is a difference between religion and God's lawI bring this point up because there are some religious groups out there that accept homosexuality. They are referred to as LGBT-affirming. Their whole purpose is to deliberately throw away the God's law and accept homosexuality. This is outrightly wrong. God's law is perfect and cannot be altered. Any church in their right practice as following the Bible simply cannot condone homosexuality as ok. So basically, if any group that claims to follow God accepts homosexuality, they are wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org...HomophobiaI noticed you used the term homophobic quite a bit in your argument. I'm not exactly sure what you were trying to accomplish by doing that. Dictionary.com defines homophobia as an "unreasoning fear of or antipathy toward homosexuals or homosexuality." I believe people who support homosexuality use this term to describe those who disagree with or "hate" on homosexuals and it needs to stop. Homophobia is used flippantly, as if those who don't support have some sort of mental disorder. I personally do not agree with homosexuality, does that make me a homophobe? Because I'm certainly not afraid or have antipathy. I'm sure there are people out there who do have homophobia, but they are far and few. http://dictionary.reference.com...Ok, now on to the quotes."-The perception of homosexuals is that they are a vector for AIDS, syphilis, gonorrhea, etc.-The fact of the matter is that all STDs can be transmitted regardless of sexuality to one's partner depending on the sexual act committed." Ok, first of all you are indeed correct. STDs can be transmitted regardless of sexuality. In my opinion, the best form of safe sex is no sex (abstinence). The reason STDs run so rampantly today is because morality has degraded so much in our society and people sleep with whoever they want to. That again is yet another debate by itself. Secondly, are you aware that the first known case of HIV/AIDS was discovered in 1981 and was carried by...five homosexual men? As far as I know this was the first known case and this could have been the start of HIV in America. Because of homosexuals? I don't know, but this is my assumption. This timeline describes it well: http://aids.gov...;" The reality is that homosexuals have the same capacity to raise a child as heterosexuals. In fact, it would be beneficial to society if adoption laws in various states ended their prohibition of gay adoption in order to stimulate the increase in adoption. Growing with two parents, regardless of sex, would be more beneficial than growing up in an impoverished home with a single parent."To a point I do agree with you. I wouldn't say it is more beneficial to grow up with two gay parents though. I would say an impoverished home with a single parent is equivalent to a gay adoption. However, if this prohibition would be lifted, I would most likely support it. If this got more kids out of adoption homes and into families, I would support it. The main idea behind why I strongly disagree is because these kids are not growing up in the correct environment. It is certainly not a Christian home, and society has benefited from Christians with morals (yes, that is my opinion). History has pretty much proved that already."In fact, according to the 2000 census, only 24% homes were composed of a married mother and father with children living at home. The Florida court argues that children are better off raised in a two-parent heterosexual household. In fact, scientific studies have shown that children who grow up in one or two-parent gay or lesbian households fare just as well emotionally and socially as children whose parents are heterosexual."This is odd because I'm quoting your quotation. Although there are some serious flaws with these few statements, and eventually with the article in whole because of those statements. One, this article failed to show the evidence behind those "scientific studies". This is merely the opinion of the news journalist! And this most likely single individual is arguing with a state court? I wouldn't call that science until you show me the evidence behind it. "Many view homosexuality as an unnatural practice that is distorting what nature (or god) intended. The fact of the matter is that homosexuality flourishes in the animal kingdom as an integral and vital aspect of many species.""If god does exist then he obviously is not concerned with other species being homosexual, ..."Again, we've already covered that above in my main points. I wouldn't call this behavior homosexuality in animals, merely the instinct of dominance and submission. More at this website link which summarizes my viewpoint nicely: http://www.probe.org...;"Homophobia is continually perpetuated by stereotypes and unfamiliarity with the nature of sexual orientation. Homosexuality is not a disease, it cannot be eradicated with a vaccine. By verbally assaulting an individual based on characteristics that cannot be altered, you are psychologically damaging the individual. The action in the previous statement leads to an increased chance of suicide, alcohol abuse, and a myriad of issues that could have been avoided."I must say if this is true it is truly tragic. Simply because someone has a different lifestyle and sexual preference they are being bullied!? That is absolutely wrong. And you are right, they are indeed damaging the individual psychologically. I only wish people wouldn't be so ignorant about such matters as to physically or verbally assault those who a different. I have the utmost respect for all individuals, gay or otherwise. I follow after Jesus who loved the sinner but hated the sin they had.I am amazed I managed to fill all 10,000 characters. Many thanks to such a wonderful opponent who has brought up an awesome debate. Ultimately, it is up to the "voters" to decide on who wins this debate, but in the end, God's law is always right and will continue to be after you or me are gone. Dear reader, I encourage you to find a Bible and spend some serious time reading and considering what it says. Its been around a lot longer than you or I have been. Thanks again!- Inspired