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

To iterate the fact that neither I, nor my opponent addressed lifestyle, I'll provide the definition of lifestyle (Marriam-Webster): [DEFINITION- lifestyle] Noun 1. lifestyle- the typical way of life of an individual, group, or culture Please look back at the previous two rounds and try to find anywhere that "the typical way of life of an individual, group, or culture" is addressed. My opponent would like to suggest that my intellectual level is too low to actually make that observation, but I'll let the spectators make that judgment. My opponent suggests that the following sentence addresses lifestyle: "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." My opponent has also noted that he may be perceived as a jerk, perhaps because he's not debating the topic, but trying to make personal attacks. --------------------- REBUTTAL 1 --------------------- This is the highlight of the argument: "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."" First of all, I would like to remind my opponent that we're not debating the validity of one Bible over another. Second, since my opponent has brought it up, I will address it: out of 450 English Translations of the Bible, he has concluded that King James is the ONLY version which is in use today and is directly translated from Jewish/Greek. The New American Standard Bible happens to be another literal translation from Greek/Hebrew and here is how the same passage is written there: (New American Standard Bible) "None of the daughters of Israel shall be a cult prostitute, (B)nor shall any of the sons of Israel be a cult prostitute." (Deuteronomy 23:17) Clearly that passage says "cult prostitute" and NOTHING about sodomy! Furthermore, my opponent would like us to believe that "strange flesh" specifically refers to homosexuality, but I would like to assert that it has been a long standing position of the Church to suggest that this is the case, not that it's really true, but because they're anti-gay. --------------------- REBUTTAL 2 --------------------- Furthermore, my opponent already has preconceived ideas of homosexuality and that's evident in his questions: "I have two questions for my opponent. 1. Isn't homosexuality sexual mischief???" Clearly my opponent is asserting that homosexuality is inherently a mischievous act. This is a socially acquired notion, in many other countries homosexuality is openly accepted. My answer to that question is no, homosexuality is not sexual mischief as long as it's between partners who are in a stable relationship and don't cheat on each other (infidelity). "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???" God punished the people of Sodom because of their infidelity. My opponent has used translation of the Bible which specifies sodomy, there are many others that don't. As a matter of fact many other translations specify the act as being a male prostitute... My opponent also said: "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." If God didn't specifically say something, then it means that you shouldn't take it upon yourself to create a meaning that wasn't there to begin with. This is the inherit problem with "interpreting" the Bible, people insert their own ideas where God didn't specify something, that's equivalent to you pretending to be God and telling other people what should be inserted into the Bible. --------------------- REBUTTAL 3 --------------------- My opponent goes on to make the following statement: "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." This statement contradicts his previous claim that hermaphrodites have equal hormonal levels, therefore they can chose their sexuality. My opponent initially claimed that the equal distribution of estrogen and testosterone was the reason that hermaphrodites are a special case and different from homosexuals (see previous rounds). Now my opponent has changes his argument and says that the hormonal imbalances, even if they're not at equal levels,0 stimulate the mind and influence it in different directions which also happened to work in my defense, since MY claim also states that hormonal imbalances in homosexuals can cause the same effects as they do in hermaphrodites. --------------------- REBUTTAL 4 --------------------- My opponent has responded with the following statement: "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." Referring to my opponent's new claim that hormonal imbalances (even if not proportional) are the reason which lets us allow hermaphrodites to chose their own sexuality, I would say that this equally applies to any person including homosexuals. We know that these hormonal imbalances don't happen to hermaphrodites only, as a matter of fact they happen to many people. My opponent earlier stated that if we saw hormonal imbalances in males, then they would experience breast enlargement, which in fact happens to be true (Reference: http://www.associatedcontent.com...) CLEARLY, comparing hormonal imbalances between homosexuals and hermaphrodites is not the same as "inflatable aliens" and ET life, if not for the obvious reason that we have NEVER seen ET life, the for the logical reason that the process which determines a hermaphrodite's hormonal level happens to be the same process which determines every other person's hormonal levels. --------------------- FINAL ARGUMENT --------------------- Even reliable translations of the Bible don't specifically define homosexuality as a sin, and if one interprets that sexuality is a sin based on what's not written in the bible, then they're asserting their beliefs in place of God's [lack of] words. If God does not find that hermaphrodites are sinful, then God shouldn't find homosexuals to be sinful because both are formed by the same process, thus both are an occurrence which is unavoidable. Hormone levels within hermaphrodites, heterosexuals and homosexuals are formed by the same process during the conception of the baby, so if the process can go wrong for hermaphrodites then it can SURELY go wrong for other people.