Hermaphrodites are proof that homosexuality is not just a life-style

I did very much, in fact, address your lifestyle topic. It is clear that my point went straight past your head so let me write it out clearly. In the last round the point I made regarding hermaphrodites as being evidence that homosexuality is not just a lifestyle is as follows: If hermaphrodites have absolutely no connection to gays and lesbians; if hermaphrodites are a completely separate case for obvious reasons who have no similarity to homosexuals, then they CAN NOT be proof of anything having at all to do with homosexuals. Furthermore, I may come off as a jerk, but I will continue to press my argument regarding "lifestyle evidence", as well as pursue the argument of sin. I have no further need to address the matter of lifestyle evidence as my opponent has not countered but instead tried to change the subject. I will move on to whether or not homosexuality is a sin. I myself will use the King James version of the Bible as it is the only version yet remaining that has been translated from the original Hebrew and Greek and has been unchanged and unsimplified. It is a direct translation from the original writing unlike the "God's Word Translated Bible. The original translation of the text is written as follows. "7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." -Jude 1:7 Having gone after "strange" flesh or "other flesh" refers to homosexuality. In fact, you don't have to take my word for it. If you read both versions of the verse, the Lord already addressed fornication. To pursue strange flesh does not mean simply fornification, for that would be redundant. Furthermore, "strange flesh" was how romans and greeks referred to homosexuality. Continuing on, my opponent stated the following: "I would also like to point out that the main reason why God punished the citizens of Sodom is NOT because of their sexuality, but because of their sexual mischief" I have two questions for my opponent. 1. Isn't homosexuality sexual mischief??? 2. If they weren't being punished for their homosexuality, then why would god mention it along with the other sins they are guilty of??? My opponent continues: "This brings me to my second point: God gave Christians the 10 commandments which theoretically will get Christians in to heaven if those commandments are followed. None of the 10 commandments address homosexuality, therefore sexual orientation is not a sin." Homosexuality is a form of fornication just like cheating on your wife is. Just like prostitution is. Just like premarital sex is. ( I apologize if anyone feels offended. I am not trying to condemn anyone. I am just trying to prove a point.) Homosexuality is, in fact fornication. It is Sodomy. It is "sexual mischief". If anyone has any question of that they can read the verses I provided in the last round. In almost every verse the lord throws in homosexuality as a violation of the sexual commandment. Just because God wasn't as specific as saying: "Thou shalt not cheat on your wife, have sex before marriage, and have sex with other members of your sex" doesn't mean that its not a sin. Moving on, as far as my opponents "three questions go: "hermaphrodites get to chose their sexuality, but when? Do they actually choose, or do their parents choose? How long do they have to make the choice, and finally if they're born with both sexes, then didn't God already choose their sexuality for them?" I ask my opponent this question: What does that have to do with them being proof of homosexuality being a lifestyle and/or a sin? I fail to see your questions' relevance in this debate. Whether or not hermaphrodite's hormone levels are perfectly equal is irrelevant. Their emotions are still the direct result of hormonal imbalances that stimulate the mind and influence it in different directions. As far as the similarities you gave are concerned, all I got out of that was that they both like the same sex… I shouldn't be blunt but this a quite a "duh" statement. The article you cited is one theory of one UCLA scientist who studied hormonal balances in rats. Either way, the theory does not have to do with estrogen vs testosterone levels. It has to do with testosterone distribution and is therefore very different that that of a hermaphrodite whose hormonal imbalances are the result of the appearance of both estrogen and testosterone. Lastly, I want to clarify this for the sake of my readers. In this debate I am not arguing whether or not homosexuality is in natural occurrence. I can't pretend to know that. I AM arguing that hermaphrodites ARE NOT EVIDENCE to say that homosexuality is in natural occurrence. Seeing as both are very different cases and are completely unrelated, hermaphroditism( I wonder if thats a word...) cannot be used as evidence. It would be like saying that the existence of inflatable aliens proves the existence or extraterrestrial life because they both have egg-shaped heads. …illogical and unrelated.