Homosexuality has no virtue.

Thank you for your wise comments. My opponent come right out and claims that homosexuals have more manners and style than striaght people(men specifically. ) This is a outrageous claim that He can not verify but by oersonnel assumption. He further is claim that homosexuals know everything about trends and fashion. We are left to think all homosexuals are well-mannered and oozing with style. Obviously straight people have no class or style. "The universe has a natural order on things and we should all respect. " Me and my opponent agree here. But He then declares that it is natural to be homosexual. He continues with these comments : "In philosophy, the natural order is the moral source from which natural law seeks to derive its authority. It encompasses the natural relations of beings to one another, in the absence of law, which natural law attempts to reinforce. " "Natural law, or the law of nature, is a system of law which is purportedly determined by nature, and thus universal" Simply put, the male body is sexually made for the female body. Sperm are by their design oriented toward the egg. Same-sex intercourse cannot fulfill the purpose written into our physical form. Today natural law theory offers the most common intellectual defense for differential treatment of gays and lesbians, and such as such it merits attention. We see many philosophers talked about homosexuality: In Book One, Plato, writes about how opposite-sex sex acts cause pleasure by nature, while same-sex sexuality is "unnatural" (636c). Aristotle, with his emphasis upon reason as the distinctive human function, and the Stoics, with their emphasis upon human beings as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, both helped to shape the natural law perspective which says that "True law is right reason in agreement with nature," as Cicero put it. . http://plato.stanford.edu... My opponent claims that: "And did you know that over 1,500 species in the animal kingdom has been practicing homosexual behavior and obviously, humans also practice it. If species throughout the animal kingdom have been practicing homosexual acts from the past few years then it is safe to say that homosexuality is/has been a part of the natural order. " If this was natural explain Examples Such as: "If we looked at an eyeball and did not know what it was for but could learn everything about its biology, we could pretty well figure it out. It is nearly spherical and moves around in its socket. It has a clear opening which seems to grow and shrink in response to light. It has a light sensitive inner lining connected to nerves which go to the brain, etc. etc. This thing clearly has something to do with receiving light and it seems aimable–it has something to do with gathering light, and converting it into signals, perhaps it is for vision or something closely related. The structure of the eye tells us what it is for. The eye is not the proper tool for catching a baseball, which I have learned personally. That is the hand whose structure is apparently designed for grasping things. The obvious point here is that physical structure indicates its purpose. " . http://theblackcordelias.wordpress.com... I think it is clear the the natural order is male and female. My opponent shows no declaration to hold weight to make homosexuality have any virtue. He says: "I would also like to discuss the remarks and comments made by my opponent to the gays. Like in #2, he said that gays have no restraint to their sexual impulses or to their perverseness. " Lets really see what perverse is: Perversion is a concept describing those types of human behavior that are excessive or deviated from what is considered to be orthodox or normal. Although it can refer to varying forms of deviation, it is most often used to describe sexual behaviors that are seen by an individual as abnormal, repulsive or obsessive. . http://en.wikipedia.org... We see here the definition of perverseness is such acts as homosexuality. My opponent takes it further into marriage and says: "When you say that marriage is only between man and woman, well you're wrong, that is not based on the institution of marriage, that my friend is rather based on the institution of the church. " I rebuttal with: The word "marriage" has always been defined as a husband-wife relationship; so-called "homosexual" unions have never been included in this definition. Regardless of what laws (or lack of laws) relate to this, the word "marriage" should be reserved for the formal union of a man and a woman: traditional marriage. The formal union of husband and wife is central to the creation and preservation of human life and the backbone of human societies around the world. . http://www.objectiveness.com... My opponent would like to add gay marriage into the common term for marriage but it does not belong there. The formal relationship of a man and a woman in marriage is most important to society. No other institution deserves more support. When a marriage is successful and children are reared in such a home, the benefits to society are greater than all the programs any government can create. No social program can compete with it. "It is so ironic to say that homosexuality is rebellious against the norm. Gays are the ones who want to be a part of the norm while some people are just being selfish and unwelcoming. " Though the facts are homosexuality are against the norm. They have fought hard to rebel against laws and previous dogma. To call those that established laws and rules for thousands of years selfish, is to mock thier establishment of law and morality throughout the land. I also think that my opponent has failed to show homosexuality(the act) has any virtue. Round 4 i will be showing how homosexuality is a vice of nature and society. Thanks to my opponent again.