Homosexual Behavior Is Immoral

I will begin by briefly summarizing my position and providing definitions of terms that will be used on my part for the remainder this debate. My opponent is free to provide his own, but I will unless explicitly stated otherwise will be using terms with the definitions provided in this post. I do not expect these definitions to be terribly controversial for this discussion, though any constructive criticism is welcome if my opponent feels these definitions are insufficient for this debate. My own position, informed by Christian ethics, is that most homosexual behavior is immoral, like most heterosexual behavior, with the exception of homosexual behavior engaged in a monogamous, homosexual union between two consenting adults. Homosexual behavior includes any contact between two persons of the same gender for the purpose of inducing sexual arousal, up to and including an orgasmic response, in either individual. Heterosexual behavior is otherwise similar with the exception that both participants are of opposite genders. A union is a socially recognized, legally protected living arrangement of two individuals for the purpose of sharing and providing emotional, financial, romantic and physical support between both participants, with legal consequences and recourse for the dissolution or violation of the union. Instead of detailing why most homosexual behavior is immoral, I will instead expound on the view that, at the very least, homosexual behavior engaged whilst in a monogamous, homosexual union is not immoral. The aim is to show that the two sources most individuals appeal to for ethical norms do not provide sufficient evidence that all homosexual behavior is immoral. I posit that a behavior is only to be considered immoral if evidentiary support affirming such a conclusion can be provided; otherwise the behavior is to be considered morally neutral. Moral actions must also meet a burden of proof to be considered such. The two sources of moral knowledge relevant to my position are natural revelation and special revelation. Natural revelation includes any source of genuine ethical information any agent with sufficient epistemic faculties can understand without regard to any divine inspiration. Examples of such sources can include natural law and even rational investigation into or rumination of ethical problems and topics. Special revelation is a source of ethical information that cannot be discovered or interpreted by any rational agent without divine assistance. This type of revelation is typified by ethical information found in holy texts provided, in some direct or even indirect way, by a deity. For clarification, an example of natural revelation would be reasoning that humans are of intrinsic value, and so murder is unjustifiable because murder devalues and violates a person. An example of special revelation would be dietary restrictions, where eating certain otherwise nutritious food is considered immoral because a deity, either in direct contact or through the communication, recorded or otherwise, of a prophet, states it is the case. Further, this example assumes that such a deity has the epistemic attributes required to declare such a judgment, or can, at least, actualize a state of affairs such that eating a kind of food is immoral. As far as natural revelation is concerned, there is no evidence for the idea that homosexuality should be considered immoral under the setting enumerated above, but this assertion will have to wait for future rounds before it can be properly defended due to space constraints. Special revelation is also topic that deserves more space than can be accommodated in this post, but it will be treated at length in future rounds. For now, my position can be briefly stated to be that the Bible, which I consider to be authoritative when it discusses relevant ethical issues, never discusses modern homosexual behavior, but that it does provide some keen insight in how Christians should approach the question in the modern world. On a personal note, this particular topic is extremely important for the modern church, and to me, since the cost of being wrong, even being right, can lead to great distress for homosexuals and those who know them. Indeed, the stakes are very high especially for homosexual teenagers, who are five to seven times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers, not because they are immoral, but because they feel God hates them for who they are. Homosexuals have been, like other minorities, mistreated by society and the church throughout history, and it would behoove the church to be careful and responsive to every social, emotional and psychological nuance involved in individuals who feel compelled to practice alternative sexual lifestyles to best show them the love of Christ and his Gos