July Beginner's Tournament: Same Sex Marriage should be recognized.

I thank Con for partaking in this debate. Framework For this debate, my burden is to prove that my proposal is superior to my opponents. Therefore, my arguments will largely focus on its comparative benefits rather than its independent benefits. C1: Homosexuality is not a choice One of the most common charges against homosexuality is a conclusion derived from asserting that it is based upon nothing more than choice. This context allows for any perceived negative impacts, no matter how minute or invalid, to be massively amplified by downplaying the reasons behind their actions. However, this contention has a powerful corollary in favor of my case. If homosexuality is not a choice, then contentions against its acceptance must be pitted against a stronger foundation. This point will be displayed in three ways.1. It occurs among other species. A article on homosexuality in the animal kingdom (1) displays numerous species which engage in same-sex sexual behavior and courtship. This information shows how homosexuality will occur in nature, which, by definition, makes it natural. This displays a framework rooted in more than mere choice. 2. The biology of homosexuals and heterosexuals are different. A separate study (2) displays similarity in the brains of homosexual men and heterosexual women, as well as homosexual women and heterosexual men. From this, it may be inferred that homosexuality is a predisposition rather than a choice. 3. A prediction based on this is faulty. If homosexuality was, indeed, a choice, it would then follow that a sexual preference is a conscious decision. An individual could then simply choose to be straight or homosexual. Because this would be observable if this claim was true, it is the null hypothesis. Therefore, since no proof has been shown either way, it can therefore be concluded that it does not exist (support for this conditional statement shown in premise 3). What this information proves is that homosexuality is not a mere switch to be turned on and off at an individual’s discretion. It is naturally occurring and rooted in their biology; it is who they are. As such, arguments against homosexuality are, by comparison, lessened, due to the strong foundation of the trait. C2: Homosexual marriage complies with the no harm principle. This point will be displayed with the following two premises. P1: An action should only be rejected by society if it is shown to be harmful. This is a paraphrase of the “harm principle” by John Stuart Mill*, which should be upheld in a just society. It allows for the maximization of individual freedom by limiting only those actions which breach the freedom of another person. It allows for autonomy to be consistent with order. From this framework, in order for homosexual marriage to be rejected by society, some flaw must be shown. P2: Homosexuality has not been shown to produce harm. Though this statement is a negative claim, its impact is no less than if I claimed it to be impossible, at least in this context. This is because if a society barred all things that have the potential to be harmful, all things must be barred. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, meaning that just because harm is not shown to be possible does not make it impossible for any action. Therefore, a negative impact must be displayed to be considered. In an attempt to avoid poisoning the well, I will wait for my opponent to make his case. Conclusion: Because homosexual marriage has not been shown to be harmful, it should be allowed by the harm principle. C3: The alternative has a negative societal impact. This statement is proven by one single source (4). This study displays a staggering rate of suicides amongst LGBT individuals with households that reject homosexuality, 8.4 times more likely than those without this circumstance. This alone displays a highly negative effect. _____________________________________________________________________________ Conclusion: Because my case has been shown to positively benefit society in comparison with my opponent’s, the resolution has been affirmed. I eagerly await my opponent’s response. Sources1. http://www.faculty.ucr.edu... 2. http://www.pnas.org... 3. http://www.biomedcentral.com... 4. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...