Homosexuality is not a choice.

Seeing that my opponent has forfeited his closing arguments for the third round, I will be concluding my arguments as to why I, the Con, should win, as well as writing a rebuttal on the debate as a whole. My opening statement is as follows. This debate has discussed whether or not a homosexual individual does or does not choose to embrace a homosexual lifestyle. This debate focuses on the definition of the word "homosexual" as a person who is born being attracted to someone else of the same sex. This debate does not discuss "homosexuality's" intimately sexual connotations. As the Con, it has been my goal to prove that homosexuality is a choice. Upon proving this in any form, the Con should win for completing the task of doing so and proving the Pro to be wrong. I ask once again that the voters please judge this debate within the confines of the debate and not vote based on personal preference but rather how both sides carried their arguments and how they based their reasoning.The following statements are the reasons the Con should win this particular debate. -My opponent argues that "homosexuality is never a choice." However, if it is the burden of the Con to prove otherwise, then simply proving an instance where an individual *chooses* to proclaim themselves as a homosexual, the Con wins. Due to the fact that the Pro states that my example is possible and shows no effort to discredit this argument, the Con has met the task to prove this lifestyle is a choice and therefore should win this debate. I would also like to remind the voters as to why they should still consider the Cons example credible regardless of how the Pro contests this in round 2. - [1] The Pro states he has never heard of my example happening before. However, if my arguments validity is simply on what my opponent has "heard" and "not heard" there can be no fair debate.[2]The Pro is very unclear about the rules of this debate. He seems to not understand that if the Con provides a logical example of when homosexuality would be a choice and he makes no effort to contest this, the voters must default to the Con as the winner. [3] "we do not know if sexuality is nature or nurture. It does not matter when a person realizes their homosexuality. This is not the issue. The issue here I must address is that homosexuality is never a choice." -Pro ; If the Pro is unsure about the reason individuals live a homosexual lifestyle and then continues to state very clearly that homosexuality is not a choice, then what is it? The Pro does not know! The Con should win simply on the grounds of the Pros indecisiveness on this topic. I would also like to extend my reasons that I should win from the previous round. 1. In argument "A" I provided three reasons as to why Homosexuality is a choice. 2. In argument "B" I provided definitions which the Pro must use in order to support his case which Imply the need to choose or for a choice to be made. If his statements define themselves in such a way then the Pro concedes that Homosexuality is a choice. 3. In argument"C"My opponent admits in his argument that there is no way to know why people are homosexual, therefore the Con wins for providing a logical explanation for people who have this lifestyle. once again Proves that Homosexuality is more than likely a choice. I respectfully ask the voters as this topic is a very delicate subject for some, to stay unbiased to their preferences and within the confines of this debate where the Con has taken the more logical, credible approach to this matter where as the Pro bases his intelligence on the subject off only people he has met. In conclusion, The viewers should default to the Cons arguments as being more logically sound, more fluent and conclusive of the fact that "homosexuality" is and can be a choice. I have respectfully argued my views without overstepping any of the delicate barriers this topics encompasses and carried my arguments with logic and professional debate etiquette. I ask that the voters please vote for the Con. Thank you.