We must resist the attempts of gay activists to restrict our freedom of expression

Before I begin refuting my opponent's misguided and misinformed points, it should be acknowledged that my opponent has already lost the debate. He has gone to great lengths to explain why the big bad queers are going to steal all our rights, but he not proven at all that they are. When I pointed out that the bill he is talking about says no such thing, he merely disagreed and said the opposite. He has shown no hansard evidence that this bill will curtail any free speech, and I find it exceedingly difficult to debate over something that does not exist, so I will tackle the points that my opponent rather than the one he should have. My opponent begins with the outrageous ideas that homosexuality is not biological and is on par with pedophilia. I can not sum up my unbridled anger at these ideas in words, so I will employ the voices of the scientific community to make my argument for me. "the APA currently states that sexual orientation is not a choice, rather that '...it emerges from most people in early adolescence with no prior sexual experience'"[1] "D.F. Swaab conducted the next noteworthy experiment in 1990. This experiment became the first to document a physiological difference in the anatomical structure of a gay man's brain. Swaab found in his post-mortem examination of homosexual males' brains that a portion of the hypothalamus of the brain was structurally different than a heterosexual brain. The hypothalamus is the portion of the human brain directly related to sexual drive and function. In the homosexual brains examined, a small portion of the hypothalamus, termed the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), was found to be twice the size of its heterosexual counterpart." [2] "Simon LeVay conducted another experiment regarding the hypothalamus of the human brain in 1991. LeVay, like Swaab and Allen also did a post-mortem examination on human brains...LeVay discovered that within the hypothalamus...was two to three times smaller in homosexual men then in heterosexual men. The women examined also exhibited this phenomenon. LeVay concluded the "homosexual and heterosexual men differ in the central neuronal mechanisms that control sexual behavior", and like Allen and Swaab, agreed that this difference in anatomy was no product of upbringing or environment, but rather prenatal cerebral development and structural differentiation" [3] "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation." [4] There are countless other sources and studies that I can cite, but it will all be in vain because my opponent's crackpot theories will be infinitely preferred by those who are striving to come to their comfortable conclusion, such as my opponent's pre-determined decision that homosexuality is wrong. He may not say it, but it certainly backs up his belief that homosexuals are not entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals. He tries to discretely tie homosexuality in with pedophilia, but he must recognize that this is disingenuous and wrong. Homosexuality is the -consensual- relationship between two adults of the same sex, whom society deems to be in control of their bodies and minds, whereas pedophilia is the attraction to one whom society defines as to be not in control of their bodies and minds insofar as they cannot comprehend the ramification and implications of their actions by one one adult who understands that the child cannot understand the situation. Homosexuality is a natural occurrence whereas pedophilia is a form of child abuse, but both are neurological characteristics. My opponent's further equating of homosexuality and pedophilia is transparent to any intelligent person reading it, or so I would hope. He does not seem to comprehend that it morally wrong for a government to infringe on the sexual affairs of two consenting adults. Countries may define 'adult' differently, and that is their prerogative, but there is absolutely no justification for disallowing two adults who are in complete control of their natural functions not to do as they please, so long as there is consent. The same cannot be said for pedophilia. It is disgraceful that my opponent is effectively defending those who criminalize homosexuality, despite saying the contrary. Furthermore, he continues to harp on the idea that homosexuals have a secret agenda to criminalize those who say we are naturally wrong. He has shown -absolutely no- proof of this. If it were so, I would join him in opposing it, but the fact remains that he cannot back up his claims and he is merely making them in an effort to demonize the gay community and stop the natural realization of our equal rights. He may say that homosexuals are advocating to have more rights than religious and ethnic minorities but he has simply not proven it. He merely says it and hopes that no one will ask him for a source. My opponent then went on to distort and deflect my argument that immediate action needs to be taken to stop the flow of violent attacks against homosexuals. He has not acknowledged that no hate speech legislation is in place to protect inflammatory rhetoric against homosexuals. I am at no point saying that homosexuals are a protected class who deserve more rights, but rather I am saying that we are an under protected minority that deserves THE SAME rights. Nothing more. If one were to go on the BBC tonight and demand that every gun owner in England should go out and shoot one homosexual (hopefully not the same one), he would not be prosecuted to the same extent as one who would advocate the same horrendous act against, say, Christians. How is this acceptable? Why is this so? This dreadful inequality is exactly what I am fighting against because it leads to people dying. My opponent speaks well of Britain's openness to homosexuality, yet perhaps he is unaware of the statistics. "In London, recorded homophobic attacks are up by 20 per cent [in 2009]. In Glasgow it's 32 per cent; in Liverpool it's 40 per cent; in Greater Manchester it's 63 per cent...last week, the off-duty police officer left a club in Liverpool with his boyfriend and was lynched by a group of 20 teenagers who smashed his skull and left him close to death... ...A study by Stonewall found 41 per cent of gay children are beaten up, and 17 per cent have been told they're going to be killed (it's 10 per cent higher still in faith schools)... ...The Stonewall study found that in schools with a consistent policy of punishing homophobic language, gay children were 60 per cent less likely to be attacked. That fall in violence could ripple out from the school gates - but today, only 6 per cent of schools adopt this policy." [5] So when my opponent says that homosexuals do not deserve the right to be fully protected by the government, remember those who are being beaten and killed because of it. I am going to break from tradition and not thank my opponent for his debate. Not because I find his opinion and freedom of speech invaluable, but rather because I think he is doing a great disservice for humanity by trying to distort this debate for his own self-satisfaction, at the cost of human life. [1] http://allpsych.com... [2] ibid [3] ibid [4] http://www.apa.org... [5] http://www.independent.co.uk...