Resolved: Disney World ought to continue hosting gay days.

I'll start off by dropping Contentions 1 and 2 because my opponent does not seem to understand them as well as I hoped. It was a simple argument, but Pro seems to have thought too much about it, and I'd rather not get into as complex arguments as these. This overall does not affect this debate, so I urge no votes to be decided over this drop. Contention 3: My opponent here is simply arguing that I posed no warrant for my argument. However, this being (genuinely) a moral debate, I need no warrants for the point I am trying to make. In a sense my argument is that these "gay-days" are just a form of conditioning. Pro mentions teens and adults, where my main point is of 4 and 5 year old's that are going to this park. Surrounded by gay people would be a change for these children. One that will ultimately confuse them as to where they are. Disney world, being a place they look to for entertainment gets these young children consumed in political messages that they don't need to be concerned with. It is a topic that is not essentially for these children, and ends up confusing them, and tries to mold their political ideals. You are not teaching the children anything, you are surrounding them with people they are not used to. You are concentrating their surroundings with one type of sexuality, which would ultimately confuse anyone. Contention 4: Pro decides to tell us the intention of gay-days as if he created them. This is funny because he didn't and ultimately does not even argue my point. All he does is reinforce his own ideals. My point is that if there are gay-days, why aren't there straight-days, or transsexual-days, or the like? This is discrimination. Favoring one sexuality (for even a day) sends out a political message. That message, not being Disney's to send out, is one that we should accept gays, and I understand that, mainly. However, at a deeper level we MUST realize that there is no acknowledgement of any other type of day. This leads us to the conclusion that these days are ultimately immoral for the simple reason that they show a preference to gays. Gay pride parades are different, however. They celebrate the pride of being gay, not the sexuality itself. Parades express the joy, and acceptance. Gay days do something much different in that they concentrate the certain sexuality in order to favor them. It makes them a holiday. Equality would have us assume that there is complete equality. If gays are to be treated equally, why give them a day that no other sexuality has? Asexuals don't get their own day. Heterosexuals don't get their own day. Only homosexuals get their own day. Giving one sexuality its own day and the other not is not equality. Contention 5: Politics are complicated. Politics are something that an organization as a whole should keep to themselves. For, by exposing their political ideals, Disney world loses an entire group of goers. The recent protests of J.C. Penny for posting an ad with two gay males prove that interest is lost by entire spectrums of people just because of preference to a political idea. This will serve as my argument against the economy point as well. by expressing a political idea, an organization subjects itself to criticism and loss of revenue from certain consumers. Gay-Pride: Pro attacks my point that ANY organization or activity that expresses gay-pride is one that is discriminatory. However, I have already explained how gay pride parades and Disney world are two completely different thing, so Pros arguments will be thrown out, here. The difference between the two is that Disney is a child theme-park that's primary purpose is to entertain. As I've already stated, it is not to express or idolize political messages. Celebrating homosexuality and surrounding 5 year old's with it is not education, as Pro would love to think. Economy: I have already proven how Disney World can just as easily LOSE money overall because of this celebration. It loses an entire political spectrum of consumers. Just because it brings in homosexuals, does not mean it brings in a net total more than it would if it didn't. The homosexual population is more rare than parties that believe homosexuals in themselves are immoral. On NET average, Disney World is more likely to lose revenue.