Homosexuality and Gay Marriage are Morally Wrong

My opponent's argument rests on a fundamental misconception: that there is a link between being homosexual and engaging in immoral behaviors. For example, if one considers the example of infidelity, it is obvious that what is immoral is INFIDELITY, and not HOMOSEXUALITY. This is the case for many such issues. He raises the following points: 1) Children raised by a homosexual couple are deprived of certain aspects of life that only a father or a mother can provide. Children raised by a single mother, a mother and an aunt, a mother and a grandmother, a grandmother, an aunt, a god-aunt, or any other female legal guardian suffer the same detriment. This is not a moral argument. In fact, this entire reasoning says nothing about homosexuality, but rather of the traditional family structure. Thus, we must consider this argument to be solely about gay marriage. In many states, it is explicitly LEGAL for homosexual couples or single homosexuals to adopt children (For example, Illinois). My opponent's position on this matter is counterproductive. What the position seeks is the protection of children and their "proper" rearing by society. If his position is an argument against homosexuality, it is an argument against all forms of child-rearing that follow that same model. Thus, he must consider a child raised by his mother and aunt to be a situation of EQUAL MORAL IMPORT with a child raised by a married lesbian couple. 2) Homosexuals enter into short relationships. One might ask why this is the case. In fact, studies show that there is a negative correlation between internalized homophobia and "outness" (whether or not the individual has come out to the community). There are many such correlations that affect relationships between homosexuals. For example: Outness - Internalized Homophobia (> 99% correlation of negative relationship) Outness - Community Connectedness (> 99% positive) Community Connectedness - Internalized Homophobia (> 99% negative) Internalized Homophobia - Depression (> 99% positive) Depression - Relationship Strain (> 99% positive) Community Connectedness - Relationship Strain (> 95% positive) (Internalized homophobia and relationship quality among lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. By: Frost, David M., Meyer, Ilan H., Journal of Counseling Psychology, 0022-0167, 2009, Vol. 56, Issue 1) This shows that the reason there is such relationship strain in homosexual relationships is because of depression caused by lack of "out-ability" (community acceptance). Furthermore, this fosters a negative relationship between the individual and the community that increases the sense of internalized homophobia, or the fear of being branded a homosexual by the community - fear OF ONESELF. This causes depression, which, linked with community disapprobation, results in much greater relationship strain, explaining shorter relationships. In short - it is the community's fault that homosexuals enter into shorter relationships, NOT homosexuals'. 3) Homosexuals destroy society, and Homosexuals tend to destroy there own lives as well, with unsteady relationships and constantly being unfaithful to their partners. This point involves three fallacies. First, the assumption that homosexuals are somehow "apart" from society or "attacking" it. Second, that homosexuals are destroying their own lives, as though we were somehow in a better position to judge whether or not they feel their lifestyle is destructive. And third, that infidelity is a trait that is innate to homosexuals. Homosexual relationships by definition cannot be to procreate - it's impossible. Thus, homosexuals have sex for the main other reason humans have sex - pleasure. All statistics incorporating fidelity in comparison between married heterosexuals and homosexuals are based upon the comparison between married sex for procreation & recreation and unmarried sex for recreation. Obviously if one is having sex only for recreation, they will be more inclined to seek multiple partners. Statistics show that between 41 and 43% of marriages end in divorce (http://www.divorcerate.org... ; http://wiki.answers.com...) and the rate increases for second (60%) and third (73%) marriages. This suggests that even among heterosexuals, as the number of monogamous relationships increases, so does the propensity towards dissolution. The fact of the matter may be that the homosexual lifestyle is simply different from the heterosexual lifestyle. This does not give license to denounce it as immoral any more than we may denounce the lifestyles of African Tribes as immoral. Immoral based on WHAT? You notion of right and wrong? God's? 4) Through theses reports one can conclude that homosexual relationships lead to or are a result of alcohol abuse, mental health problems, major depression, suicidal attempts ect... Well this is an interesting claim. It's completely refuted by a 2009 study that shows that for issues of substance abuse, the correlation is between abuse and NEGATIVE RECEPTION of homosexuality. For example - some correlations between different receptions and substance abuse: Cigarettes - Positive Reception (No Sig. Correlation); Neutral (> 90%); Negative (> 90% correlation) Frequency of Alcohol Abuse - Pos (Not Sig.); Neu (Not Sig.); Neg (> 95%) Quantity of Alcohol Abuse - Pos (Not Sig.); Neu (Not Sig.); Neg (> 99%) Freq. of Marijuana - Pos (Not Sig.); Neu (Not Sig.); Neg (> 99%) Quant. of Marijuana - Pos (Not Sig.); Neu (Not Sig.); Neg (> 99%) Number of Substance Abuse Problems - Pos (Not Sig.); Neu (Not Sig.); Neg (> 90%) (Disclosure of sexual orientation and subsequent substance use and abuse among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: Critical role of disclosure reactions. By: Rosario, Margaret, Schrimshaw, Eric W., Hunter, Joyce, Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 0893-164X, 2009, Vol. 23, Issue 1) In each case, substance abuse is only correlative to negative reception by others of homosexual tendencies. Furthermore, the correlation between substance abuse and homosexuality isn't even 95% significant when NEGATIVELY RECEIVED. 95% Correlation is the threshold in most scientific fields for consideration of a relationship. Simply put, being homosexual is NOT related to substance abuse except in cases where their being homosexual is received negatively. Even then, it is not statistically significant, which entirely refutes my opponent's claim. ***************************************************************** As far as sources go... When speaking of a matter wherein a particular worldview (read: Christianity) has a dogmatic stance on the matter, sources that are explicitly pro-that-worldview are biased and generally inadmissible. For example, Biblical Family Advocates and Journey Christian Ministries are not good sources in a debate about homosexuality because at the end of the day, their mission is to present the Bible and not Science. Why is the Bible inadmissible? Simply put, because it is another biased source. The Bible gives no REASON for why homosexuality is immoral other than it is an "abomination," which actually means (in Hebrew), "foreign practice." That's not compelling. Eating dogs is a foreign practice (China, other Asian countries), but this does not make it IMMORAL. Morality is also clearly independent of what is espoused in the Bible. If you refer to this debate (http://www.debate.org...), I have put forth a very good case about this specific matter. In short, God is not required for moral reasoning. The edicts of God are simply another moral code. One can appeal to God, but one can also appeal to utilitarianism, conventionalism, or some other form of objectivism like Kant's categorical imperative. The Bible is not a "trump card." ***************************************** NEGATED.