I did not strawman in my debate with 16kadams

NOTE: Once again, all I have to do is show that ONE of my opponent's arguments was a straw man. That is all I need to do to fulfill by BOP. Pro must refute ALL of my arguments to win.The Actual Argument (in the debate):1. It is immoral to actively use a faculty against its proper function.2. Homosexual acts actively use our sexual faculties against their proper function.3. Therefore, homosexual acts are immoral.Premise 1:"Point 1: It is immoral to actively use a faculty against its proper function.A faculty in this situation is the natural ability to commit in a certain action. [2] In this case, sex. So, before we can assume homosexual acts are against this faculty, we must ask what is the purpose of sex."16k even gives a definition for faculty and links to its definition, which is defined as followed:"an ability, natural or acquired, for a particular kind of action"My Opponent's Arguments (in the debate):"Anything that a tree makes that is not one of those functions is immoral.therefore, these things are immoral ......."In other words:P1. Anything that a tree makes that is not one of those functions is immoral.P2. "Thing" X is not one of those functions.Therefore, "thing" x is immoral.Premise 1:This is in concordance with 16k's argument and not a straw man. I concede this.Premise 2: I have six objections to premise 2. I will dispute six of your "thing" x's.1) "Wildlife Habitat"In other words:P1. Anything that a tree makes that is not one of those functions is immoral.P2. Wildlife habitat is not one of those functions.Therefore, wildlife habitat is immoral.First of all, 16k was talking about "use a faculty against its proper function." That is an ACTION. You list objects. Objects for actions are incompatible with his argument. Homosexual acts aren't objects. Therefore, you have misrepresented his argument. That is a straw man. 16kadams EXPLICITLY STATES: "A faculty in this situation is the natural ability to commit in a certain action."One cannot commit an object, only an action. 2) "Cork"P1. Anything that a tree makes that is not one of those functions is immoral.P2. Cork is not one of those functions.Therefore, Cork is immoral.Same reasoning as #1. -But perhaps Pro meant using cork. This is not stated in the debate, and thus, cannot be used as a defense.But for the sake of unnecessary argument, I will refute that.P1. Anything that a tree makes that is not one of those functions is immoral.P2. Using cork is not one of those functions.Therefore, using cork is immoral.Premise 2 is false. Utilizing resources in your environment is not only a human function, it is absolutely necessary. Pro has misconstrued 16kadam's EXPLICITLY STATED definition of a faculty.3) "Cider"P1. Anything that a tree makes that is not one of those functions is immoral.P2. Cider is not one of those functions.Therefore, Cider is immoral.Same as #1.- But perhaps Pro meant drinking cider.P1. Anything that a tree makes that is not one of those functions is immoral.P2. drinking cider is not one of those functions.Therefore, drinking cider is immoral.Except drinking does fit under 16k's explicitly definition of a faculty.4) "Animal Bedding"Same as previous ones.5) "Scenery"Clearly a straw man. Scenery is neither a material object (assuming your argument is correct, which it isn't) nor an action.6) "Fruit"The purpose of fruit is to be eaten. Straw man.Another of My Opponent's Arguments (in the debate):1) Government is immoral under 16k's argumentGovernment is not a faculty. Straw Man2) ExerciseBody movement is a faculty and a proper function. Pro's definition of a proper function is incompatible with 16k's argument. Straw man.Rebuttals (THIS debate):I. Objects.A. "He uses this example of a bicycle and uses his own argument to justify whether or not it is moral or immoral(good or bad.)"False. 16kadams is describing THE ACTION of moving from point A to point B:"moves forward when you pedal and the two wheels work correctly to propel you forward. We can call it bad if it does not work in the motion of bringing you to point A or B."--16kadamsB. "For this example, he uses coke."False. He uses THE ACTION of drinking coke, not the object coke. This was one of your straw man's in the debate."it does not fulfill the purpose of drinking: hydration.""--16kadamsConlusion:I have pointed out 8 of my opponent's straw man arguments. I need only successfully defend one.My opponent's arguments themselves were straw mans in THIS debate.___________1. http://www.debate.org...2. http://dictionary.reference.com...