Is sexual orientation determined at birth?

Sexual orientation IS determined at birth. How? You can easily see whether a baby has female or male genitals. A penis is for the males and a vagina is for the females. Simple.

Sexual orientation is determined at birth.

Pro's argument about the female and male genitals seems to be a non-sequitur. Read what one is here.[1] The genitals have little to do with sexual orientation. While the genitals determine biological sex and biological sex correlates with sexual orientation, biological sex is not the cause of sexual orientation. If sexual orientation was determined at birth, then all identical twins would have the same sexual orientation. However, it is not the case that when one twin is homosexual, the other twin is also homosexual. As has been established by several studies on this matter, not 100% of twins have the same sexual orientation as the other, in fact it varies from as little as 20% of twins sharing the same sexual orientation, to as much as 60% in some studies.[3, pg 271] Source:[1] https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...;[2] https://genepi.qimr.edu.au...;

People are born with their sexual orientation already determined, just like they are born tall or short, it may not be apparent at birth but it is there.

People are Born Gay

Sexuality is determined at birth, but it may take a while for one to figure it out. As for people going from gay to hetero, this is just them trying to figure out who they are. They could even be bisexual. Here I speak from personal existence. I grew up in a conservative Christian household, so anything other than heterosexuality was frowned upon. I hit the teenage years when I begin to learn things about myself, and I began to question my sexuality. I simply realised, "hey, I don't really like anyome" and go to talking with some friends and I figured out that I'm asexual. Did I choose to be this way? No. Did my environment influence me? No. I was asexual at birth, but only recently realised it.

Sexiality Isn't a Choice

Sexual orientation is something that people are born with.

Sexual Orientation is a choice.

Let's get stuck in: -Not Born with a personality- The personality at that stage of life is unlikely to make the conscious or even unconscious decision. When was the first time you have been aroused? When you were a baby? I highly doubt that. Therefore, at the start personality can't determine sexuality immediately. - More open and loving to sexual desires- I completely agree. I have the right to indulge my fetish. -Straight people think gay people are seduced into the lifestyle- A quite large generalization. Who's to say they aren't dragged kicking and screaming, finally accepting themselves. Something we aren't all born with is the self esteem to accept immediately. Study: https://americanvision.org...

born a way

The only people who ever argue that you aren't born gay, but get 'seduced' into the lifestyle are people who say they are straight. Since they aren't gay, how do they have the first clue what is going on inside the head of a gay person? How did straight people become the experts on gayness? People can be born gay. I think a lot of new research has suggested that sexual orientation can be influenced by hormones the fetus is exposed to during pregnancy. Sexual attraction is something innate and something you cannot change, even if you wanted to. It's determined early in our development.

born a way

I believe it is a combination. Many are born that way and others choose to be that way. Those that are born that way were an accident of nature. The same as many other deformity's like being born with one arm, blindness, etc. If you love someone you try to mend their handicap, not accept it as normal. Those that choose it are just sick.

Sexual orientation

I mean its soooo obvious. ITS SO OBVIOUS. what you said about the man with the brain of a woman, that's a disorder, its not genetic. There is no confirmed or discovered gene that determines who YOU decide to be. Its somebody choosing their own lifestyle, genetics for the 5000th time cannot possibly effect sexuality. the parents of the offspring that is a homosexual, in this case, are straight, and their entire line of ancestors are straight. How come none of them are homo or some other sexual. Oh that's right, BECAUSE YOU CANT PASS DOWN A "POSSIBLE HOMO TRAIT OR GENE" DOWN TO OFFSPRING. because there isn't one and if it is, don't you think they would have found that out by now?

There is strong evidence that sexual orientation can be effected by genetics.

Assigning children the title "male" or "female" at birth only harms them in the long run. For transgender children, assigning them a gender at birth only leads to pain and confusion. They don't understand why they don't feel like the gender they were assigned and feel like there's something wrong with them. For cisgender children, having genders from the start reinforces gender stereotypes (pink rooms for girls, blue for boys, etc.) It also harms transgender people by putting forth the idea that cisgender is normal, while transgender is not (much in the same way that homosexual "coming out" does. i.e. You're assumed to be heterosexual or cisgendered until you specifically state otherwise, instead of them both being seen as possible options.) In this debate, we are debating gender, not sex. Sex: The biological makeup of an individual's reproductive anatomy or secondary sex characteristics Gender: Social roles based on the sex of the person or personal identification of one's own gender based on an internal awareness. Transgender: A person who's sex (or gender assigned at birth) does not match their true gender Cisgender: A person who's sex (or gender assigned at birth) does match their true gender

Assigning children a gender at birth is harmful and restrictive

Please Note: I'm NOT attempting to offend anyone, nor am I against those who are other than heterosexual. I wish the best of luck to me and my opponent. Sexuality in my honest opinion isn't wired into one's brain at a very young age, nor do I believe one is automatically heterosexual when born. I believe it was taught someway, somehow weather through society or media. I seen people go from straight to gay vice versa, I've heard many say biologically it's naturally weird into one's brain, but honestly I find that false due to the fact a child doesn't yet have the knowledge on the meaning of sexuality. When children view television, magazines, movies, cartoons, etc. It's influencing children in some kind of way.

Sexiality Isn't a Choice

Since it is only a one round debate, I'll just give it all I got. I have done some researching and studying regardings this topic and here I will post my findings and prove that you are indeed born gay. Scientific researchers specializing in human sexuality have shown that homosexuality is genetic (and that people are born gay). I am unaware of any study that has ever suggested that sexual orientation is a choice. Scientific research from October 2004 that was replicated in June 2008 stated that scientists have found that women tend to have more children when they inherit the same genetic factors linked to homosexuality in men. This fertility boost more than compensates for the lack of offspring fathered by gay men, and keeps the “gay” genetic factors in circulation. A lead researcher said "You have all this antagonism against homosexuality because they say it's against nature because it doesn't lead to reproduction. We found out this is not true because homosexuality is just one of the consequences of strategies for making females more fecund" and that their findings offered "a solution to the Darwinian paradox and an explanation of why natural selection does not progressively eliminate homosexuals. " A 2005 study reported genetic scans showing a clustering of the same genetic pattern among gay men on three chromosomes - chromosomes 7, 8, and 10. The regions on chromosome 7 and 8 were associated with male sexual orientation regardless of whether the man got them from his mother or father. The regions on chromosome 10 were only associated with male sexual orientation if they were inherited from the mother. A study published in Human Genetics in February 2006 examined X chromosome inactivation in mothers of gay sons and mothers whose sons were not gay. Researchers found extreme differences between women who had gay sons and women who did not. A study from 2006 said that researchers have known for years that a man's likelihood of being gay rises with the number of older biological brothers, but the new study found that the so-called "fraternal birth order effect" persists even if gay men were raised away from their biological families & that "the research suggests that the development of sexual orientation is influenced before birth. "Seeing the overwhelming evidence, I hope that the audience agrees with me! Thank you.

Your not born gay

"You've informed me it's determined at birth, but you also say it takes one a while to began to realize who they are." This is silly statement. One does not normally realise their sexuality immediately. It's set in stone at birth, but it may take a while to figure it out. Thank you for debating me. This was a good one.

Sexiality Isn't a Choice

I propose people are born definitively one sex or the other, not misdiagnosed at birth assuming a full term pregnancy. To clarify further, any person can be scientifically proved either make or female.

People aren't born the wrong sex, or transgender.

Just posting to avoid forfeiture as, as I said previously, I won't argument further as Pro won't be able to respond.I hope everyone's having a good enough week.

If homosexuals really are born that way, we should work out a way to kill them at birth.

The relevance of causes of sexual orientation to policy is dubious

Gay adoption

Have a nice day.

Children raised by same-sex parents are not more likely to have same-sex orientations themselves.

Gay adoption

. American Psychological Association (Resolution on Sexual Orientation, Parents, and Children) "There is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation: lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children"; and "research has shown that the adjustment, development, and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation and that the children of lesbian and gay parents are as likely as those of heterosexual parents to flourish."

The sexuality of parents has no effects on a child's future life

I will be on the Con side (against), the harmful/restrictiveness of assigning a gender to a new born. Pro brings up a great point about Transgender and Cisgender, and how they're genetic makeup, or even they're personaly preference may cause them to believe they are assigned to the wrong gender. Men may believe they are women, vice versa. Those born with a different genetic make-up having both male and female sexual organs may feel different then what their parents decided. However, being assigned a gender is in no way harmful or restrictive to the respective child. -Only 6 states in the US restrict birth certificates from being ammened for gender changes. -25 states allow birth certificates to be ammended for gender reassignment without the need of a sexual reassignment surgery. . http://en.wikipedia.org...Therefore, if someone feels they are the wrong gender, they have every right (in 44 out of 50 states) to lawfully change their gender and be recognized as the gender they see fit. Feeling or being different than others is not harmful. It is simply how you were made. People can either accept the gender they were assigned and live life to the fullest, or choose to change their gender, legally, and live life to the fullest. The US has made great strides in accomodating those who may not be, or feel, simply male or female.

My opponent has not made any separate points, therefore, no rebuttals from me. My conclusion: APA states: "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles...."[1] VOTE CON Good luck Pro [1]http://www.onenewsnow.com...

Homosexuality is Genetic

Some babies are born with a predisposition to homosexuality

Gay adoption

sexual orientation is not limited to the attraction felt to a specific gender, granted these forces are never stagnant and cant be measured however they can be scoped on to a scale of sorts by intensity and direction. sexual orientation can point to other spectrum like age. it is most common for people to have an attraction to adults aged 20 - 40 just as it is common to be attracted to the opposite gender. however it isn't common but accepted that there are a few people who's orientation point higher or lower than the average, some people are attracted to younger people gender regardless from the ages of 6 - 13 and some people like older people 50 - 70. sexual orientation can point at different levels of different spectra such as gender, age, inter species, intellect, masculinity, femininity and desire. these cannot be decided upon, they occur based on subconscious decisions by past experiences and not conscious decision making, or genetic inheritance.

Sexual Orientation is a choice.

The sexuality of parents has no effects on a child's future life

Gay adoption

You've informed me it's determined at birth, but you also say it takes one a while to began to realize who they are. I'm not able to process that through my head correctly, one because determined means strongly felt and mostly likely not to change it. So, say one's into women and all of sudden one figures themselves out due to whatever the reasoning may be, you mean to inform me that one isn't changing their mind or ways? You began to question your sexuality, right? But you also said "I simply realized hey I don't really like anyone" You're making a change. You said "As for people going from gay to hetero, this is just them trying to figure out who they are." No, that's one changing their ways.

Sexiality Isn't a Choice

Um. .. ..

Sexual Orientation is a choice.

First I would like to point out that Con's position is not based on evidence or reason but on a gut feeling he has or a misinterpretation of anecdotal experiences he's had. Sexual orientation deals with preference and attraction which don't bend at will but are conditioned through a combination of genetics and environment. As a sort of tongue and cheek demonstration that sexual orientation doesn't change at our whim I would ask our audience to force themselves to find this thing attractive(of course applying to people that don't find it attractive) [IMG]. http://www.funnypica.com...[/IMG] . http://www.funnypica.com... In a study it was found that 52% of cases in which an identical twin was homosexual, the other was also a homosexual. You may say, yes but that's because they're raised in the same environment, but the same study showed that only 22% of cases in which a fraternal twin was homosexual the other was homosexual. This is clear evidence that there is a genetic basis for homosexuality. . http://www.nytimes.com... Studies have shown that the long arm of x chromosome Xq28 increases the odds that a male will be homosexual. . http://www.nature.com...

Being born gay means that you at birth are attracted to the same sex, which, is not true. Being gay is about how you perceived life and your ethics and codes that you now live by.

born gay

In my personal opinion, I am neither pro-homosexuality or anti-sexuality, I do however believe in the fact that individuals are not able to change their identity in order to conform to the traditional agenda. Scientifically, we have not yet identified a certain link between brain structure or genetic make-up in relation to a person being homosexual. Although in a quarterly biology review, a group of scientists from NIMBioS discovered a link in epigenetics and homosexuality which supported the theory that sex-specific epimarks in the early developmental portion of fetal development that spur atypical amount of testosterone or estrogen to develop. These abnormal levels of either of these hormones cause a man to be more feminine or a women to be more masculine, which is what society typically labels as "gay" or "lesbian." In short, there is a very strong biological reason for one being homosexual, that reputes the claim that they make the choice to be heterosexual or homosexual. Needless to say, a fetus that is only a few weeks along cannot make a decision whether or not it will be homosexual. Source: http://www.eurekalert.org...

are people born gay

I believe that sexual orientation DOES originate from biology that is, it depends upon biological factors such as genes and hormones. I think the burden of proof is shared here.

Sexual orientation doesn't originate only from biology

Really, genetics? okay well first off, homosexuals has NOTHING to do with genetics no matter how much evidence there is. A straight guy can easily go homosexual or any other sexual by his choice. Choosing which role you want to play as has nothing to do with DNA and it doesn't run thru the family.

This is long.

Some babies are born with a predisposition to homosexuality (both human and in other races), and their upbringing will not be affect their sexuality. Attempting to suppress this genetic predisposition has resulted in great misery for many people. Rather, we should accept this and look to embrace all gay people fully – which must include celebrating gay role models, especially as responsible parents.

Some babies are born with a predisposition to homosexuality (both human and in other races), and the...

People claim they are born gay I think it's absolute BS! If that's the case I can be a pedophile and be sexually attracted to children and use the same cop-out that I was born this way and have a genetic disposition to be attracted to minors!

There's no such thing as being born GAY!

. http://www.youtube.com...

Some babies are born with a predisposition to homosexuality (both human and in other races), and the...

Adoption of Children by Same Sex Couples

I disagree that people can be "born homosexual" because it doesn't make sense for a baby to have feelings towards their same gender at their time period. Its imposable to be born as anything. If people are homosexual maybe its because of their experiences in their life but it makes no sense for a person to be born as a homosexual.

People can be born Homosexual.

All sexual orientations are determined by a complex interaction of traits, with no single gene acting as the "signal" for whether you like members of the same sex, members of the opposite sex, or both. Therefore, essentially your environment plays a role in deciding what sex(es) you end up being attracted too. For example, lets say I'm a gay male, I can choose to date, have sex, etc. with women (doesn't mean I'll like it) but, nonetheless I can choose to do it. On the other hand, I can't choose to be attracted to them because I'm gay, no matter how hard I try, I can't choose to be unattracted to men.

Homosexuality is not a choice

After reading popular opinion, I feel like I'm arguing the tough side here, but I WILL PREVAIL. Before I continue the debate I want to make sure everyone that might read this debate understands that I have nothing against homo-sexual people, I simply am participating in this debate out of opinion. On to the debate. I believe that sexual orientation is a choice, because of three key points: the way people are raised, what they experience in life, and what they choose to become. My first point is the ways we are raised. Every experience that we go through, affects the choices we make throughout life. From the moment we are born things start changing us. One of the ways I believe sexual orientation is chosen, is through the orientation of the parents. If you are raised by to gay parents, I am sure from the moment you are adopted they will teach you that being gay/lesbian is perfectly fine, If not even normal. Another example is if you have very lenient parents. I don't mean to say that strict parents wouldn't let their children be gay, but let's say you were raised with only one parent who had to work long hours. You would be very free to make a lot of your own choices, including sexual orientation. If you are raised and grow up with gay friends and/or family you are very likely to possibly wonder about what being gay/lesbian is like. Another example is life experiences. Many people that are "born" straight may feel confused if they grow up seeing mostly straight people, then go out on their own and see gay couples. They may "experiment" with the same gender and ultimately chose to switch orientation. As we see laws and rules regarding homo-sexuality change around the world, many people may feel like they would be more accepted if they changed sexual orientation. I understand my opponents point about trying to change my sexual orientation. I am straight , and when I thought about this I realized that I would not be able to. However, I make the point that had I been raised in a different situation I may have felt confused growing up and changed orientation. My last point for this round is the ultimate decision. What sexual orientation you chose is one of the largest choices in your life. It decides how you will act socially around other genders, and your own. If you get married, sexual orientation decides who you will possibly spend the rest of your life with. I believe that there is one moment in each of our lives when we decide what sexual orientation we are. This may occur during the anytime, but is usually during the first half of our lives. Our parents may have personal opinions, and try to raise us a certain way. This usually succeeds, because we are taught during a young very impressionable time in our lives. Our parents are the only ones around during these early years and their opinions matter the most to us during that time. I urge my opponent and others who may read this to look at their opinions and decide whether some of them may have come from your parents, because I know a lot of them have for me personally. In conclusion for this round I believe that sexual orientation is a choice. Whether this choice is made by our parents in the way they raise us, or by us after confusing life experiences depends on your personal life. Back to my opponent now.

Sexual Orientation is a choice

Well most people are born with arms and legs and a brain, for most people with these ligaments or a muscle in their head, it is up to them to determine how they will use it. Unless there is a birth defect in them that handicaps the child at birth or later on in life then that I guess one would say is an act of the deity to punish his or hers parents. These deities did not tell them anything, man wrote the Bible, Koran, and etc. How can we trust mans word if it lies constantly, we cant, we just cant. Take everything people say with a grain of salt because the underlying fact in this is that man lies and can write anything in a fancy way and say "god made me do it" same thing in regards to if man kills someone. It cannot be an act of god if he says "god made me do it" god (or deities) harming his own children. The creator (god) does not have to be removed. Just the church's of these gods need to conform a little. I am know catholic but I sure as heck think the pope is heading in a right direction in his new papacy. God is good, to an extant that everyone is equal just close minded people who run religion like to brain wash people into thinking that it is wrong.

Rights for All sexual orientations

While some exceptions occur with homosexuality the social norm in nature is that babies are taken care of by mother and father. To legally allow adoption by gay couples is to encourage what is an unnatural upbringing.

are you also saying that your not born with a personality??? none of my family members or friends are trans or gay and I have always been gay. Yes it's in the genes Most homosexual people are in fact born that way, others may pick to be gay or have things that occur during their life that takes them that direction sexually. There is so much proof that people are born gay these days that people that do not believe it really just have their heads stuck in the sand, we need to be more open and loving to everyone's sexual desires as long as they are legal. Only straight people don't think so. The only people who ever argue that you aren't born gay, but get 'seduced' into the lifestyle are people who say they are straight. Since they aren't gay.

born a way

Discrimination is present in every race.However, general acceptance of those who are transgendered is a huge step which soceity is taking.You have stated that Transgender is considered the "Other" gender in today's society, and that this is a problem.You are also stating birth certificates are to be left blank, and to let the child decide (at adulthood I can only assume) Despite having the ability to change.You cannot elave a birth certificate blank. That would then cause even more confusion to those who need to verify you by your birth certificate. So you are essentially posing the idea that an "Other" slot be put on birth certificates. or a "To Be defined later" option (which is essentially 'other')This unforuntately contradicts itself. They don't want to be considered the "Other gender" to the cisgender, but they want to be able to be listed as another form of "Other" on their birth certificate. Thank you for the debate

Though I agree that it should not matter how we are oriented, whether from birth or from choice, and that our access to equal rights should not be contingent on us being 'born this way,' I do believe people are born gay for this reason. If it was a choice I'm sure people would opt out. There choice to do so but statistics say people do have a choice and some peoples choice would have not chosen this for their own reasons.

Born gay part 2

Also the report in the Chicago-sun Times excludes "ALL" GAY people and uses the term "SOME" which leaves out a number of exempt Homosexuals with no scientific, genetic or biological explanation for being GAY." I have another study to prove my point, as even though the specific page does use generalizing words, others do not. A review of current research shows that there is no evidence supporting a social cause for homosexuality [1]. There are multiple studies, both with animals and humans, demonstrating the causative relationship with the pre-natal testosterone during a critical stage in "defeminization". [2] Since sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which can result in transsexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain. There is no proof that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation. There is more evidence that the orientation of a person occurs before they are born than afterwards. In addition, another study proves that sexual orientation is uncontrollable. Just like the analogy that is used in my evidence, it is simply like being left handed. It was viewed as being possessed by evil. Now, scientifically, we know that is not true. The developing male fetus receives too little testosterone, which causes the sexual orientation. [3] In 1972, a study was done by Dr. Ward, who found that androstendione in male pregnancies would prevent the hypothalamus to develop into a healthy male brain. [4] The brain makes its gender commitment very early in development and, once committed to either male or female, it cannot change. These are all studies and examples that sexual orientation is, in fact, proved to be ingrained within a person before birth. "Second you specifically stated verbatim that "No families or ancestors were GAY because IT WAS NOT COMMON." I would like to point out this was taken out of context, as I did conclude to say that it was not common for people to express if they were homosexuals because it was inherently looked down upon. I did not intend for my point to be taken out of context and that it was uncommon in the sense that people were not. I intended for that to mean it was uncommon because of society, it was not something someone willingly came out to say. "Being GAY is none other than an example of "HERD BEHAVIOR" it is not genetic, biological, psychological or hereditary. As society shifted from old-school values and conservative traditions we entered into an era where the world and the lifestyles of people evolved and drastically changed as they always do. You also stated that homosexuality was looked down upon but the problem with that statement is that it neither proves or disproves whether family members or ancestors were or were not GAY... All that proves is that it was less liked by society so that is not even worth commenting on." My multiple sources of evidence off of my first point proves that sexual orientation is not because of herd behavior. It is because of the brains development. My statement about how homosexuality was looked down upon proves that even if people were gay, there would be no way to know. Even if we did disregard that comment, the evidence proves people are born gay. If we do or do not know if ancestors were gay, it really does not matter. Looking at current evidence and data, it is hereditary and biologically, and would negate your statements otherwise. This is definite proof. "Also these "Same-sex" behaviors expressed in animals by researchers, zoologists, and scientists alike have determined it to be demonstrations of platonic courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting; also the motivations for and implications of these behaviors have yet to be fully understood, since most species have yet to be fully studied which leads us back to the merry-go-round of constant guessing and justification but no definitive proof of anything." I need sources. I cannot assume your sources are reliable. I need actual evidence and sources. However, all of the same- sex behaviors you mention and what they demonstrate fully prove my point. It is ingrained in their minds. Also, my opponent has contradicted a previous argument of saying most instead of all, when my opponent did it themselves, by saying "...most species have not been fully studied..." Without a quantified amount, I cannot trust this statement as being reliable. Looking back at the previous round, a close species to humans, bonobos, have been studied and have same- sex behaviors. This is not guessing. This is solid and proved evidence. "First you said verbatim that "there is no way to prove someone went from being gay to straight, and was scientifically proved to be a homosexual. You cannot prove that someone decides to be gay and go straight on their own free will." If you cannot prove that someone is specifically homosexual then neither can you prove what makes a person homosexual." Again, this was taken out of context and misunderstood. I was talking about a previous argument made, about people changing their sexual preference. Relating sexual preference to what I said, it makes sense that no one would be able to prove if someone was actually meant to be gay or meant to be straight by the methods we have today. It does not contradict my point at all. If we had that evidence today, this would not even be a debate today. However, on newly watched studies with children I provided earlier, that is how we can prove if someone is gay. Someone cannot simply look at someone and assume if the person is homosexual. It takes a long- term study. This is the point I was trying to make. Lastly, homosexuality is about pride because homosexuality is a topic not all people are comfortable with. Even with contradicting religions and churches going against gays, it is about pride to stop gay stereotypes. Heterosexuality does not need parades or support because it is a relationship that is common. "There are sooooo many GAY people that it would have to mean that every single person in the entire world would literally have to carry this inborn trait. To say people are born GAY you would have to affirm sympathy for pedophiles and grant them the same clemency and extenuation not limited to but including scam artists, thieves, rapists, bigots..." I am very confused about this statement. First, again, my opponent is contradicting themselves again. My opponents argumentation was I am using words like most, but my opponent is saying statements that are using generalizing terms. Since you state there are so many gay people, every person would need to carry this trait. I would like evidence for this statement. Right now, my opponent cannot prove this, as my opponent gave no quantified amount of how many homosexual people are in the world. In regards to your second statement, I am shocked. It is unreasonable to compare homosexuals being born the way they are to relate pedophiles and scam artists to the same cause. There is no way you can justify this. Actually, you could never justify that statement even if you tried. You are going into a different issue. Lets keep in mind that we are talking about sexual orientation, and not actual choices and poor decisions people choose to make, like scamming or being a rapist. I have tried to be as civilized and respectful as I can possibly be. I expect the same respect towards the gay community in return. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... [3] http://www.rrcstaff.com... [4] http://www.viewzone.com...

But not because of their sexual preferency and a long dream that they had about having a family, raising a child not become real just because they are gay. Still they have the same rights and sometimes the gay parents raise in a better way the children!

Gay adoption

See Debate: Homosexuality Sample argument: Homosexuals are born gay, have no choice Ted Olson. "The conservative case for gay marriage." Newsweek. January 12, 2010: "Science has taught us, even if history has not, that gays and lesbians do not choose to be homosexual any more than the rest of us choose to be heterosexual. To a very large extent, these characteristics are immutable, like being left-handed."

Homosexuals are born gay, have no choice

I do not think being gay is as simple as a choice, but I believe that when you're a child you are still trying to form connections and gather facts about the world. During this time you form your basic fundamental traits, although some genes do make some traits prominent than others, but you form what you think is socially acceptable, and you aren't even close to figuring things out about sexuality. I believe that during this time when you are so open to what you're parents tell you and what facts you are gathering, later in life you may develop certain personality traits that may make you homosexual, due to the basic fundamental connections you have formed as a child.

Born gay part 2

First, Before I start my argument I need to define certain words. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Gender identity can correlate with assigned sex at birth, Or can differ from it. Sexual orientation is a person's sexual identity in relation to the gender to which they are attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, Homosexual, Or bisexual. Genital is a sexual organ. I will now present my argument. Argument From Genitals to multiple gender identities. P1. A society states that a gender comes from a person's genitalia. P2. There are two different genitalia. P3. So, There must be at least two genders. P4. However, A person can have one genitalia, No genitalia, Or both genitalia. P5. So, There are at least four genders. P6. However, A person can change their genitalia to another. P6. So, There are at least eight genders. P7. If P3, P4, Or P3 and P4 are ture, Then there must be more than two genders. C. There more than two genders.

transgender is not a gender/sex, Only 2 genders

I will be arguing that there is strong evidence that genetics play a huge role in the sexual orientation of homosexuals. Burden of proof will be on me.

I understand my opponent had some difficulties so I will end with my round 3 argument and then a closing statement. -Round 3- "As we see laws and rules regarding homo-sexuality change around the world, many people may feel like they would be more accepted if they changed sexual orientation." Do you think that this could be because they were afraid of being persecuted before hand? In Iran the threat of hanging may lessen homosexual activity, but there are still plenty of gays. (Some are forced into a sex-change because, curiously, transsexualism is more acceptable to the State.) There is a tribe in the New Guinea highlands called the 'sambia', where the practice (until recently) was for younger boys to be isolated from all female company and to fellate older boys in order to ingest their virility. The early teens were spent performing fellatio and the later teens being fellated. If any cultural pressure was going to create homosexuality surely this would be it - only it didn't. Come adulthood, most Sambia males emerged as married heterosexuals - with only around 5% of "backsliders" continuing to seek boys to fellate them (Herdt, 1981). This is much the same as the proportion of gay males in Western society. "Another example is life experiences. Many people that are "born" straight may feel confused if they grow up seeing mostly straight people, then go out on their own and see gay couples." One of the first clues that people are born rather than made gay is that sex role behaviour, interests, toy and play preferences that relate to adult sex orientation can be observed from the earliest years. Some girls are described as "tomboys" and boys identified as 'sissies' when very young, usually by the age of 3. This is technically known as childhood gender nonconformity and it is strongly predictive of homosexuality in adulthood (Lippa, 2008). About 75% of CGN children grow up to be gay or lesbian. This would seem to place the origins of sex orientation much earlier than any supposed incidents of seduction and contagion in the early teens. There are actually differences in the anatomy of the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men and women. Where there are characteristic differences between male and female brains, these are often reversed in gay men and women. For example, LeVay (1991) found that a hypothalamic nucleus concerned with sexual behaviour (INAH-3), was smaller in gay men than straight men (indeed, more like that of women). Part of the conduit linking the left and right sides of the brain (the corpus callosum) is larger in homosexual men and straight women (Witelson et al, 2008). The brains of straight men and lesbians are larger in the right hemisphere than the left, but in gay men and straight women the two sides are symmetrical.). The amygdala, a mid-brain area important for emotional learning seems to be wired for a greater fight-flight response in straight men and lesbians than gay men and straight women (Savic & Lindstrom, 2008). Ponsetti et al (2007) found less gray matter in the perirhinal cortex in lesbians compared with straight women but no comparable differences between gay and straight men. [1] In regards to my opponents point that our parents have an affect on sexual orientation, I'd just like to place this link here to be observed. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...... I personally have a slight doubt that this father never gave off the opinion that he accepted homosexuality. it is clear that sex orientation is embedded within a bio-psychological context that goes beyond the simple question of who or what turns us on. It is a fundamental part of our nature that is not easily tilted by social events during development. Being raised by homosexual parents does not alter a child 's sexuality and those who fear their son can be initiated into homosexuality by an encounter with a paedophile priest or scoutmaster may sleep easily. [2] Recognition of the inborn nature of sexual orientation may underlie increasing acceptance of homosexuality in Western countries. [1] http://www.gresham.ac.uk...... [2] Wilson, G.D. & Rahman, Q. Born Gay: The psychobiology of Sex Orientation. London: Peter Owen, 2005. -Closing- I'd like to thank my opponent for the debate, this is a topic I dwell over quite often. I believe that sexual orientation IS NOT a choice. The evidence I have provided will hopefully sway some of you (the voters) in my direction. Thanks for reading/voting!

Sexual Orientation is a choice

I was walking down a sidewalk and found myself behind a boy who dressed like a girl and holding hands with a girl who was dressed like a girl. Obviously for me to make any assumptions (which i guess I already have.. sorry!) about that particular situation is wrong, but it did spark this question in my mind: If a person who was born a male and has a sex change to female has sexual relations with a person who was born female and is still female, who if anyone, is gay? I believe that the female is gay because she is not having sex with a partner with a penis, but the boy who now is female is in fact straight because he was born a male, therefore he is having sex with the opposite organ of which he was born to. Thought are appreciated though!

the validity of transsexuality and identification

"Affidavit - United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts" Michael Lamb, Ph.D. 2009

Children raised by same-sex parents are not more likely to have same-sex orientations themselves.

I'd kind of agree with that. My theory is that gays are born gay. I think that maybe you can decide that you're gay if you're questioning but for the most part they are born with it. Haha this is more like a conversation not a debate!

Gay Rights.

"As we see laws and rules regarding homo-sexuality change around the world, many people may feel like they would be more accepted if they changed sexual orientation." Do you think that this could be because they were afraid of being persecuted before hand? In Iran the threat of hanging may lessen homosexual activity, but there are still plenty of gays. (Some are forced into a sex-change because, curiously, transsexualism is more acceptable to the State.) There is a tribe in the New Guinea highlands called the 'sambia', where the practice (until recently) was for younger boys to be isolated from all female company and to fellate older boys in order to ingest their virility. The early teens were spent performing fellatio and the later teens being fellated. If any cultural pressure was going to create homosexuality surely this would be it - only it didn't. Come adulthood, most Sambia males emerged as married heterosexuals - with only around 5% of "backsliders" continuing to seek boys to fellate them (Herdt, 1981). This is much the same as the proportion of gay males in Western society. "Another example is life experiences. Many people that are "born" straight may feel confused if they grow up seeing mostly straight people, then go out on their own and see gay couples." One of the first clues that people are born rather than made gay is that sex role behaviour, interests, toy and play preferences that relate to adult sex orientation can be observed from the earliest years. Some girls are described as "tomboys" and boys identified as 'sissies' when very young, usually by the age of 3. This is technically known as childhood gender nonconformity and it is strongly predictive of homosexuality in adulthood (Lippa, 2008). About 75% of CGN children grow up to be gay or lesbian. This would seem to place the origins of sex orientation much earlier than any supposed incidents of seduction and contagion in the early teens. There are actually differences in the anatomy of the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men and women. Where there are characteristic differences between male and female brains, these are often reversed in gay men and women. For example, LeVay (1991) found that a hypothalamic nucleus concerned with sexual behaviour (INAH-3), was smaller in gay men than straight men (indeed, more like that of women). Part of the conduit linking the left and right sides of the brain (the corpus callosum) is larger in homosexual men and straight women (Witelson et al, 2008). The brains of straight men and lesbians are larger in the right hemisphere than the left, but in gay men and straight women the two sides are symmetrical.). The amygdala, a mid-brain area important for emotional learning seems to be wired for a greater fight-flight response in straight men and lesbians than gay men and straight women (Savic & Lindstrom, 2008). Ponsetti et al (2007) found less gray matter in the perirhinal cortex in lesbians compared with straight women but no comparable differences between gay and straight men. [1] In regards to my opponents point that our parents have an affect on sexual orientation, I'd just like to place this link here to be observed. http://www.huffingtonpost.com... I personally have a slight doubt that this father never gave off the opinion that he accepted homosexuality. it is clear that sex orientation is embedded within a bio-psychological context that goes beyond the simple question of who or what turns us on. It is a fundamental part of our nature that is not easily tilted by social events during development. Being raised by homosexual parents does not alter a child 's sexuality and those who fear their son can be initiated into homosexuality by an encounter with a paedophile priest or scoutmaster may sleep easily. [2] Recognition of the inborn nature of sexual orientation may underlie increasing acceptance of homosexuality in Western countries. [1] http://www.gresham.ac.uk... [2] Wilson, G.D. & Rahman, Q. Born Gay: The psychobiology of Sex Orientation. London: Peter Owen, 2005.

Sexual Orientation is a choice

I believe my point may have been misunderstood: Sexual orientation doesn't originate ONLY from biology. Sexual orientation is a multivariable dynamic process. Of course there are some biological factors that influence sexual orientation, such as: - Genetics - Epigenetics (prenatal androgen exposure) - Brain structures Biology has a great influence on sexual orientation. But not everything is as it seems. 1) A study from Denmark proves that the environment increases or decreases the proportion of heterosexual and homosexual weddings. What did this study find? - Demography: People in cities are more likely to marry a same-sex partner and less likely to marry heterosexually. - Family issues - Having no brothers http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... 2) Younger men from the Sambia tribe fellate other adult men as a rite of passage. 3) The greeks were equally comfortable with the same-sex and that helped the formation of more "men on men" action. And finally this one, which i think isn't that good but can raise an interesting topic: 4) Homophobia is for some a latent homosexuality. By now all i can say is that homophobia correlates with homosexual arousal. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... Are the people in 4 homosexual? Is homosexuality defined by conduct or is it enough if we consider physiological response? I believe sexual orientation is a social construct. So it doesn't really matter how you identify yourself, what matters is whether or not you are taking every aspect of yourself into account, or maybe just letting it be.

Twin StudiesMy opponent claims that because identical twins share the same DNA, they should both have the same sex orientation, but they don't. Therefore, he claims, it must be environmental. This has a number of problems to it. First, making a point against the notion: "Homosexuals are born that way" does not automatically prove your argument. For example, I could say "Because identical twins don't have the same sexuality, it can't be genes, it must be flying dinosaurs.", and it would still follow the same logic you have used. Second, people who have gay siblings are more likely to volunteer for these types of scientific studies, which can cause the results to become skewed.I agree, sexual orientation is not entirely due to DNA. That does not mean, however, that it is automatically environmental. Hormones play a major part in determining gender as well as sexual orientation, namely, the hormones the baby is exposed to in the womb. When in the womb, all babies are female, and in order to become male require hormones, namely testosterone. It is entirely possible that in the case of twins, one twin is exposed to less testosterone than the other. This is how you get fraternal twins. If for whatever reason onebaby was exposed to less testosterone than the other but both came out as male, the one who received less testosterone is more likely to be gay. The flip side applies for girls. Gay ParentsMy opponent claims through this study that gay parents are more likely to have homosexual kids than straight parents do, and therefore the gay parents must somehow influencing their kid to also become gay. There are also a number or issues with this conclusion. First, again, gay people are more likely to volunteer for/agree to these kinds of studies, again making the test pool skewed. Second, it is also entirely possible that the child is biologically related to one of the parents, and that "homosexual gene" (to kind of over-simplify it) may have been passed down to the child.Reorientation TherapyThe way reorientation therapy works is that they give the "patient" a positive stimulus when they have lustful thoughts for the opposite sex and negative stimulus for when they have lustful thoughts for the same sex. They also may fill them up with estrogen/testosterone in an attempt to make them find the opposite sex more attractive. However, it has been shown time and time again that this does not work. The first and main reason is that homosexuality is not psychosis. Again, if my opponent is saying that homosexuality is mutable, he is also implying that it is some sort of disease. Homosexuality is NOT a disease, if it was a disease, psychologists or doctors would be easily be able to discern them from straight people. But they can't, as seen in a study of I can't recall the name but it was mentioned in a This American Life's episode 81 words. I will however, provide a similar study below.A recent APA task force did a study on this and found in their 2009 report that the participants in their study went through gay conversion therapy and came out negligibly more attracted to the opposite sex and remained just as attracted to the same sex. On the other hand, what did change was the patients state of mental health, as the side effects of such therapy's were loss of sexual feeling, depression, suicidality and anxiety.A lot of these studies that my opponent mentioned have a number of issues. From 1960 to 2007 only 83 studies confirm my opponents case, of which most had biases such as a court ordering that compelled them to take the therapy or a very small, low budget test pool. Also, a lot of footnotes here, did you just copy and paste this stuff? Because if you did, please stop, I will not debate with a website.Animals "There is a difference between homosexual behavior and homosexual orientation. There are no known animals who have *long term* homosexual relationships. What occurs in animals is not directly applicable to what occurs in humans."This statement has a number of issues. First, there are known animals who have long term homosexual relationships, a lot actually, namely geese and duck (who mate for life), dwarf chimpanzees (all of which, that's right, all, are bisexual), swans (also mate for life), domestic cats (mate for life), and lions (mate for life), to name a few. Second, my opponent forgets that humans are also animals. What applies to animals may also apply to humans, we are not suddenly above anything animal relate just because we are humans. This is why we do drug tests on mice; they 80% related to humans.I forgot to put sources last time, I put them here this time. Sorry!http://listverse.com...http://psychology.ucdavis.edu...http://www.livescience.com...http://www.frc.org...http://www.bestmedicaldegrees.com...http://en.wikipedia.org...http://www.wehonews.com...http://www.thisamericanlife.org...

Resolved: Homosexuals are 'born that way'

I feel that yes people are born a certain way and shouldn't be judged by that, it is not a choice they made, it's how they are. acceding to pink news, "Yes, we have a choice in life, to be ourselves or to conform to someone else"s idea of normality, but being straight, bisexual or gay, or none of these, is a central part of who we are, thanks in part to the DNA we were born with." and for me, I was born this way, God chose this path for me to take. according to CARM "HomoSEXuality is a behavior, an action. It is not the same thing as a genetic condition, such as skin color, height, or gender. Homosexual intercourse (is there homosexuality without it?) is a behavior and is, therefore, something people choose to do. Actions are what people c

born a way

Before I begin, I want to say I am fiercely PRO-LGBT AND HUMAN RIGHTS. Because of this I am going to ignore your first argument, and other arguments except for the second because that does not seem to go into the terms of being gay is NOT bad sort of thing. What is choice ? Choice - an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities When I was young and navive, I want to be left-handed because I was convinced that left-handed people were smarter (which is obviously not true in all cases). But, I was born right-handed, however that doesn't mean I don't have a choice. So, even though I was right-handed doesn't mean I couldn't be left-handed. Because really wanted to be left-handed. But couldn't sadly speaking. I could always fake it untiI make it. Applying, my brief anecdote to my own sexual orientation, I could want to homosexual and I could fool myself into thinking, I am gay, but I wouldn't be gay. Because I simply wasn't born that way. However that doesn't mean I don't have a choice in the matter. Just like people that don't have a choice in their sex, but do have a choice in their gender identity. We all have a choice in what we could be and who we are. This is called freedom. Or If you are simply implying that choice is the freedom to choose what we want to be or be who we are, then that's for the next round. Please clarify and be as specific as you can. I do so love a good round of wits! 😀😀😀

Sexual orientation is not a choice

A child’s primary role models are his or her parents. Bringing a heterosexual child up in a gay household gives them a distorted view of a minority sexuality, just as a girl brought up by two men would fail to benefit from a feminine influence.

Seriously? For real. Are you serious? Obviously being a homosexual is a choice. No one is born gay. You said ones sexual orientation is based on their parents. You are right That doesn't mean that it is not a choice. It is their parents choice thast they make their kid gay. As for the kid. As young as 12, they know that being gay is a very controversal thing, and their parents have no right to tell them whether or not they can dig Women, or Shlongs. I am keeping this short, so heres a summary. 1. The parents decide if the parents are gay 2. The kid can decide his own sexuality 3. The parents choice doesnt matter 4. And it doesnt matter because this isnt only about children, but gayness in general 5. That being said, I know plenty of gay people who decided to be gay on their own accord.

Being gay is not a choice made by the individual.

Con In recent years we have witnessed a lot of arguments over the issue of gay marriage and homosexuality in general. However I feel like people are not paying enough attention to the real debate at hand are people born gay? main debate points to discuss A)Society dictates how the majority of people interact with one another sexually and non sexually. B)at birth a child does not understand the difference between male and female nor the complexity of a modern day relationship. C)before a children reaches puberty there are no distinctive exterior differences between males and females, except the way they dress and the image they portray. the "image" is also dictated by society for example if a group of 6 year olds all cut there hair short and dressed in the same clothes could you tell the difference. D)the world would be a better place if we accepted the fact that being gay is a choice E)homosexuality is a freak idea created by society because the whole basis of it is on the principles of gender stereotypes if a boy likes the color pink for example it does not mean that he is gay. Note I am not anti-gay in my opinion it is your choice however, I am against the way our society currently views homosexuals, they are not accepting them but they are making an excuse for there homosexuality by saying that people are born gay. This is a bad thing for are society because it makes being gay seem like an abnormal condition that mutates a gene. In my opinion I think it would be better if we just agree that it is an individuals choice to be gay. This would be better for society because people would over time become more accepting of homosexuals, just as people have become more tolerant for the most part of other religious groups. Forcing people to accept homosexuals by using the excuse that they are born that way and that you must accept them is not a solution.

people are born gay

"Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships in the United States : A social science perspective." American Psychologist. 2006 "The relevance of this question to policy is dubious because homosexuality is neither an illness nor a disability, and the mental health professions do not regard a homosexual or bisexual orientation as harmful, undesirable, or requiring intervention or prevention."

The relevance of causes of sexual orientation to policy is dubious

(both human and in other races), and their upbringing will not be affect their sexuality. Attempting to suppress this genetic predisposition has resulted in great misery for many people. Rather, we should accept this and look to embrace all gay people fully – which must include celebrating gay role models, especially as responsible parents.

Some babies are born with a predisposition to homosexuality

First off, I don't see how any of my arguments are in the terms of "being gay is not bad sort of thing". I keep reading through my 1st, 3rd, and 4th arguments trying to figure out where you get this idea, and I can't find it. Please point it out in your next argument. What you're saying is that it is possible for it to be a choice, and yes it absolutely is. If I wanted to, I could begin pursuing men and give up women. Now that's not what I want, but I can do it. Like when I said I don't like deviled eggs; I could eat them if I wanted to, I just wouldn't enjoy it. I'm sure that there is at least somebody out there who chose to be homosexual, but just because choosing who you sleep with it possible doesn't mean you were born attracted to that gender. It's possible for me to begin sleeping with dogs, although I wouldn't enjoy it. That doesn't mean I was attracted to dogs, it just means I made a choice for whatever reason. Choice-an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities Yes, who you sleep with is a choice. But that doesn't mean when you were born, you were faced with that choice. I don't see any reason to believe it is a choice, and no reason has been presented to me, only the obvious possibility that people can sleep with who they please.

Sexual orientation is not a choice

It is true that often times traits can be passed over from generation to generation, which would explain why they have similar mannerisms. However this does not provide an argument for homosexuality being a choice because society dictates are idea of the difference between feminine traits and masculine traits; society also dictates the idea of the roles men and woman play in society. For example what are you taught at young age? that pink, purple, light green etc. are feminine colors and blue, red, green are masculine colors. In other words society and the world around you dictates your traits and what you consider masculine and feminine.

people are born gay

First and for most before I start this argument I will state that I am NOT going to cite sources or back up material for a lot of information that I use for several different reasons; either it is common knowledge, common sense, or the information in my argument can easily be verified and looked up at any time on any search engine. It is not rocket science but any information I use can be searched and confirmed on your own time. First I will start by saying that there is no definitive proof that lower levels of testosterone effect sexual orientation. You never mentioned the female hormone estrogen which some females are born with lower levels of but are not Lesbians. You stated verbatim that "The developing male fetus receives too little testosterone, which causes the sexual orientation," yet there are lots of heterosexual men born with lower levels of testosterone so if what you are saying is accurate then these men should be GAY. On the same note as stated in Wikipedia testosterone is a steroid hormone not a sexual orientation hormone and it plays a key role in males in the development of their reproductive organs as well as promoting secondary sexual characteristics such as increased muscle, bone mass, and the growth of body hair. Also falling in love is scientifically proven to lower levels of testosterone in males and increase testosterone in females which means that testosterone levels have intermittent highs and lows throughout the lifetime of a human being. It is our natural affinity to constantly go through hormonal changes all throughout life so why would something that is permanently innate in human development "SUDDENLY" have an affect on sexual orientation even if it happens prematurely during birth? Also on Wikipedia nowhere does it say TESTOSTERONE has "ANYTHING" to do with gender attraction nor in Human Biology which I took in college. The course covers over several chapters of detailed research and scientific information on different hormones, their effects on the body, and what they mean to our anatomy but there is not ONE reputable source that definitively confirms and proves without a doubt your claims about Testosterone having anything to do with sexual orientation; it is all speculation and not fact. Then you said, "The developing MALE FETUS receives too little testosterone, which causes the sexual orientation." So I guess only males are born GAY??? And females get to choose... yes I see your logic! Second I love hypocrisy in debate it's great because I love how you said "In addition, another study proves that sexual orientation is uncontrollable," then you said "Just like the analogy that is used in my evidence, it is simply like being left handed." How is this statement any different from my pedophilia, scam artist, thief analogy? But I will get back to that later in the argument now is not the time lol! I want to address the fact that you said a study proves that sexual orientation is uncontrollable... how so? I would have loved to know which study this was and how they were able to prove something like that and what was the deciding factor that proved it, but as expected you couldn't offer anything more than just an enigmatic statement. You also stated verbatim that... "A study was done by Dr. Ward, who found that androstendione in male pregnancies would prevent the hypothalamus to develop into a healthy male brain. The brain makes its gender commitment very early in development and, once committed to either male or female, it cannot change. These are all studies and examples that sexual orientation is, in fact, proved to be ingrained within a person before birth." "Androstenedione" as it is correctly spelled is the common precursor of male and female sex hormones as also stated in Wikipedia. It does lots of things in the human body but nowhere does it say that it has ANYTHING to do with sexual orientation or gender commitment however there is speculation that it may have estrogenic side-effects but that has yet to be proven because no one has ever had a high enough intake. Second Androstenedione was manufactured as a dietary supplement, often called andro for short. Andro was legal and able to be purchased over the counter, and, as a consequence, it was in common use in Major League Baseball throughout the 1990s by record-breaking sluggers like Mark McGwire. The International Olympic Committee in 1997 banned Androstenedione and placed it under the category of "androgenic-anabolic steroids" and for this reason it is banned by MLB, the NFL, USOC, NCA, and by the NBA. If Androstenedione has the ability to "prevent the hypothalamus to develop into a healthy male brain," as you've stated then why have none of these athletes who habitually have taken this supplement have displayed any homosexual-like behavior or characteristics in any way what-so-ever?? Odd don't you think? And you use this estranged person called Dr. Ward? I looked him up and couldn't find a Dr. Ward only someone named Dr. Ward F. Odenwald if that's who you're talking about who did his research on HOMOSEXUALITY in 1995!! I was 9 years old!! Which was almost 20 years ago! So his research is null-and-void and means nothing because everything he "THOUGHT" he proved has yet to come to fruition! His so-called GAY discovery Androstenedione which was banned 2 years AFTER his research has not had the effect that he claimed it has on MALES and almost 20 years later and counting no athlete who took Androstenedione on a regular basis as a supplement has yet to experience changes in their sexual orientation. You also stated that sexual orientation was in-grained at birth yet you told me in the last argument that you cannot prove that someone who was GAY actually turned straight... that statement is a contradiction yet people do it all the time and YOU KNOW IT! In-grained my AZZ! I've had friends who were GAY and turned STRAIGHT and when asked about their decision to become heterosexual they said at one point they were attracted to the same gender and now they're JUST NOT!! I'm a female and I was attracted to other females for almost 6 years and now I'M NOT!! I'm attracted to guys and have been dating them ever since! People change their sexual preference all the time not to mention I CHOSE my sex partners thus choosing my orientation and was not in-grained with it. It is a personal choice just as simple as one day wanting Cheese cake and the next day Apple Pie! Lastly I'm going to skip arguing a lot of the stuff you said because it's pointless and I've already won so I will conclude this round by replying with a rebuttal to a statement that you made when you said... "It is unreasonable to compare homosexuals being born the way they are to relate pedophiles and scam artists to the same cause. There is no way you can justify this. You are going into a different issue. Lets keep in mind that we are talking about sexual orientation, and not ACTUAL CHOICES and POOR DECISIONS people choose to make, like scamming or being a rapist." My response to that is no it is not unreasonable because the basis of my argument is that there is no such thing as people being born gay... it is a personal choice! I am not going into a different direction by naming people that live these other various lifestyles because this has everything to do with my argument because being GAY is ALSO a lifestyle and it is a lifestyle choice. And you consider people who live as pedophiles, scam artists, rapists and so forth to be "ACTUAL CHOICES" and "POOR DECISIONS" yet being a guy and WANTING to suck another guy's wiener is not? LMAO Get out of here! There are STRAIGHT men who even do this for the money and solely for the money so get the heck out of here but in your biased logic it can't be an ACTUAL CHOICE or male prostitution it's an "epi-mark" no wait it's too much "Androstenedione" at birth, no no it's "lack of Testosterone"!! Wait it's in the "BRAIN"!! HAHA Which one is it?? Pick one! LMAO!!

Hello. == Definitions == Homosexuality: In this debate, we will be specifically be focusing on orientation. Same-sex behavior is different as it is often distinguishable from orientation. Thus, homosexuality will be defined as "an enduring pattern of romantic or sexual attraction (or a combination of these) to persons of . . . the same sex or gender." -- http://en.wikipedia.org... 'Born that way': The theory argues homosexuality is inborn. Homosexuals are born that way, and their orientation is immutable. Genetics, epigenetics, or antibodies in the womb cause homosexuality and cannot change through therapy or different environments. --> I will be arguing homosexuality is caused by multiple things. Genes have *some* effect, but the effect is moderate to weak (less than 50%). Environmental factors are the main reason homosexual tendencies develop. I am NOT arguing it is an (intentional) choice. No one chooses these factors: they just happen. I will also argue change is possible, and therefore mutable. == Structure == R1: Pro accepts and presents case R2: Con presents case, Pro rebuts R3: Rebuttals/defense for both R4: Rebuttals/defense for Con, Pro writes "no round as agreed". I have made this impossible to accept. Accepting without permission = forfeit. No trolling, semantics, stuff like that. gl

I don't really understand your argument. are you saying that sexuality just can't be as easily defined as race? If so, you kind of can. You can be straight, meaning you are attracted to the opposite sex, gay, meaning you are attracted to the same sex, bisexual, meaning you're attracted to both sexes, or gender fluid, basically meaning other. could you please clarify your position?

Nobody Can Determines Someone's Sexuality.

Hi, I will be arguing that homosexuals are "born that way"When my opponent says that homosexuals are not "born that way", he is implying that such a sexual orientation is artificial in one way or another. He says that "Environmental factors are the main reason homosexual tendencies develop". Now if this were true, we would see a certain demographic of homosexual people. For example, if exposure to, say, pine trees gives people a higher chance of being gay, then we would see people who live near pine trees or are otherwise regularly exposed to pine trees would be statistically "more gay" than people who aren't very much involved with pine trees. My point is, all gay people would have something in common environmentally, be it where they live or how they were raised, etc. However, we don't see that. There are homosexuals from an enormous range of demographics, such as from poor gays to rich gays to Chinese gays to American gays to famous gays to celebrity gays to atheist gays and to religious gays. If homosexuality was not inborn but was affected by environmental factors, there wouldn't be homosexuals with such a diverse array of backgrounds. All homosexuals do have something in common with each other, however, and that is their chromosomes. Scientists tested 400 gay men and found that homosexuality can be associated with at least two chromosomes, which affect a man's sexual orientation. In 1993 Dean Hamer studied the family history of 100 gay men and found that homosexuality tended to be inherited. More than 10% of brothers of gay men were also gay (compared to 3% of the population), and uncles and male cousins on the mother's side also had a higher chance of being gay. Hamer, upon analyzing the X-chromosome, found that 33 out of 40 gay brothers had similar marks on a certain region on the chromosome. That is not to say that homosexuality is entirely genetics, it also involves other factors such as the amount of hormones the baby was exposed to in the womb.If homosexuality was affected by environmental factors, lesbians would be the same in every way biologically to straight women, and gay men would also be in every way biologically the same as straight men. However, this is not the case. Testosterone is commonly associated to spatial reasoning. When put under a spatial reasoning test, gay men tended to do worse than straight men, and lesbians tended to do better than straight women. Gay men are 31% more likely to be left handed than straight men, and lesbians are 91% more likely to be left handed than straight women. The more older brothers a male has, the higher chance that male has of being gay. This is because after giving birth to a male, the mother's body may resist the production of another male baby and can change the sexual orientation of that baby. The way this happens was explained above throughout the chromosome region. In gay men and heterosexual women, the two sides of the brain were about the same size, while in gay women and heterosexual men, the right side of the brain was slightly larger. What does this all suggest? Gay men share traits with straight women, and gay women share traits with straight men. As such, homosexuality cannot be a product of the environment.When my opponent says that homosexuality is mutable, he implies one of three things: 1. Homosexuality is a choice 2. Homosexuality is a disease. 3. Homosexuality is evolutionarily advantageous.My opponent clearly states that he is not arguing that homosexuality is a choice, so #1 is out. Homosexuality is definitely not evolutionarily advantageous, as homosexuals can't mate, so #3 is out. What we are left with is #2, which says homosexuality is a disease. Now this may be a little provocative, and I hope not to insult anyone, but this is what I have deduced from my opponent's claim that homosexuality is mutable. This was my thought process:-Opponent claims homosexuality is mutable, or can be changed-Other things that are also mutable in terms of humans are choices, diseases (both biological and psychological), and some evolutionary adaptations.-Opponent clearly states that he is not arguing homosexuality is a choice. Cross choice out-Homosexuality is not evolutionary advantageous, as homosexuals can't mate. Cross that out-Disease is left. -Ergo, the statement "homosexuality is a mutable" implies that homosexuality is a disease.Now I don't know if Pro meant to imply this, and I'm sorry if he didn't, but homosexuality is clearly not a disease as proven by the above evidence. Gay conversion therapy exists, but these programs have a 3% percent "success" rate, and these success tended to be religiously correlated, whether it be the "cured" converts to a religion that disallow homosexuality or he/she is already involved in a religion that disallows homosexuality.To extended the diversity argument, over 1500 species have been found to have homosexual tendencies. Now these animals range from dwarf monkeys to lions to bison to geese to penguins and to dolphins. Now all of these animals live in completely different parts of the globe. How would it be possible that homosexual tendencies can be found in 1500 species from all over the globe if environmental factors are responsible for it?

Gay parents "tend to be more motivated, more committed than heterosexual parents on average, because they chose to be parents," said Abbie Goldberg, a psychologist at Clark University in Massachusetts who researches gay and lesbian parenting. Gays and lesbians rarely become parents by accident, compared with an almost 50 percent accidental pregnancy rate among heterosexuals, Goldberg said. "That translates to greater commitment on average and more involvement." And while research indicates that kids of gay parents show few differences in achievement, mental health, social functioning and other measures, these kids may have the advantage of open-mindedness, tolerance and role models for equitable relationships, according to some research. Not only that, but gays and lesbians are likely to provide homes for difficult-to-place children in the foster system, studies show. In a 2010 review of virtually every study on gay parenting, New York University sociologist Judith Stacey and University of Southern California sociologist Tim Biblarz found no differences between children raised in homes with two heterosexual parents and children raised with lesbian parents. "There's no doubt whatsoever from the research that children with two lesbian parents are growing up to be just as well-adjusted and successful" as children with a male and a female parent," Stacey told LiveScience. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Homosexual adoption

are people born gay

You admitted that sexual preference was only 40% based on genes and that how you are raised accounts for the other 60%. However, this argument can go in my way. Just because you are raised in a certain way doesn't mean that you believe a certain thing. You can be raised by straight parents and decide that you are gay without having a gene. Take my friend's sister for example, I know she was straight for a while as when my friend and I were younger, she would always talk about how great her boyfriend was and she went through two or three boyfriends. However, she then decided that she was going to be gay. Your sources help with your gene based side but people do have the choice. You also mentioned only men, and not once did you mention women.

It is a choice to be gay or straight.

By born gay I don't mean that people are born with a sex drive, that develops later in life. "What you ARE born with is a predisposition to what you will be attracted to when you begin your sexual awakening. " " "American Medical Association Official Website:" http://www.apa.org... (You'll want to read each section of this article on homosexuality divided into the drop boxes) "Here is an article from Cornell University : https://confluence.cornell.edu... " here is the article released by The American Psychoanalytical Association Official Website:" http://www.apsa.org... "is a link to The American Pediatric Associaton Official Website's article on Homosexuality:" http://pediatrics.aappublications.org... "of these sources say that homosexuality is not a choice. "It is something you are born with. "Can I see your links now? " Take or leave the one from Cornell University or any other University. "Similar conclusions have been found by Yale, Oxford, and several other Ivey League Schools. "Those articles are also publicly available. "The American Psychological Association, The American Psychoanalytic Association and the American Pediatric Association Trump any University statement anyway. So many world leading doctors, scientists, biologists and psychologists say being gay is not a choice. (Let's hope I can get a decent opponent this time)

people are born gay

I do not believe that homosexuality is genetic disorder, rather it's a mental disorder. The American Psychological Association has deemed sexual orientation to be fluid, or changeable throughout a person's lifetime. Sexual desire is not genetic, it is in the mind.

homosexuality is a genetic disorder

Thanks for clearing that up, I was a little confused. In response to your points, I would like to address a major concern in that you brought up in your second argument. According the the American Psychological Association, "many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. [1]" The key here is that it is widely accepted that the vast majority of the population do not choose their sexual orientation, whether that be heterosexual or homosexual. Instead of accepting that it is a choice, which it is not, a better focus of accepting homosexuality would be to educate both sexualities on prejudice and discrimination. The psychological effects of accusing someone of choosing their identity could lead to depression, social anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Instead, great efforts could be made to celebrate the homosexual community and combat prejudice. A great example of this would be the ruling that the students at Baylor University decided that the inclusion of homosexual acts in the misconduct policy should be removed. [2] Society has not created the way everyone views homosexuality, because not everyone views it the same way. In the past few years, homosexuality has become increasingly accepted and supported by people of all different faiths, religions, and ethnicities. If more people are accepting homosexuals, it would not have any direct correlation to the number of homosexuals, except for any individuals that may feel less threatened by coming out. Initially, it may appear that there would be a higher number of homosexual individuals, however, that number would only increase do to the fact that if society is accepting of homosexuality, they wouldn't feel the need to hide their true identity. Sources: [1] http://www.apa.org... [2] http://www.usatoday.com...

are people born gay

"There is no evidence that anyone within the LGBTQ+ community would make lesser parents than any heterosexual". I completely agree, but the issue isn't really that they would make lesser parents. It's not a matter of a gay father being a worse father than a straight father, but rather the fact that there isn't any mother. From an evolutionist or religious standpoint, humans were either created or evolved to have a mother and a father, each with their own unique traits. When it comes to homosexual parents, there is no balance of these traits. You either have 2 females, which tend to be emotional and caring without any of the traits of a father, or the other way around. It's not that they would make bad mothers, it's that you need more than just mothers. Not to mention, it's unfair to the child to be forced to have homosexual parents, and, in a society that discriminates against homosexuals, the child could be made fun of or bullied for it, which is unfair to them. Children deserve to have the balance of male and female, rather than leaning too heavily towards the emotional female traits, or the more serious, staid male traits.

Gay adoption

Homosexuals are born gay, have no choice

Gay marriage

Thank you for my first debate. Secondly, I'm assuming my opponent is giving arguments for sexuality as opposed to the general alternative. Sexuality is a choice because we start out with a clean slate. Are we born murders/lawyers? No. As we grow, there will always be influences around us ranging from parents to friends to associates. These are effects on our personality, that cannot be predetermined at the womb or birth. By ignoring influences such as these, we suggest our fate is predetermined but then, nothing would really change, we couldn't be saved, hope would be minute. Human nature would most likely win etc. "Choices can be made in the present, nature is background or recessive" the philosopher said to the biologist. I'd argue so.

born a way

The argument is extremely relevant. Depending on the artificiality of how gender is determined at birth for intersex people, how they self-identify may not conform with how they were "gendered". For many of these people being asked to declare a gender so as to judge their qualification for a opposite gendered marriage is unfair. With the legalization of same sex marriage, gender is no longer an element in the marital equation, therefore sparing intersexed and transgendered individuals the trouble of choosing and declaring a gender to get married.

Rebuttal: More than gay rights

I wanna start off by saying thank you for accepting.Now I will start going into depth about how homosexuals can make great parents. My first argument stated they are more open minded and tolerant of others. This is a true fact because homosexuals know what it feels like to be descrimnated against because of there sexual orientation. They teach there children to be excepting of others because they know how it feels to be looked at diffrent. Children of homosexuals often tend to make friends better than children of heterosexuals. My second argument stated that they are very motivated. According to guttmacher institute about half of u.s pregnancies are unplanned, and half of those unplanned pregnancies end in birth rather than abortion. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying parents of unplanned children aren't good parents because they can be however some are in dire circumstances. Studies show two-thirds of unplanned births were paid for by Medicare or other low income insurance programs. This is where homosexual parents motivation come in to play. In contrast homosexual parents have to plan there children before having them whether it be adoption or artificial insemination. Homosexuals on average tend to be more commited and motivated because they choose to be parents. My final argument stated that they express them selves however they please. What I mean by that is that they don't conform to gender rolls in society. Judith Stacey, a professor of contemporary gender studies found that children of lesbian parents showed greater interest in both masculine and feminine qualities unlike children raised in heterosexual households. She also found that girls of lesbian parents had higher aspirations to occupations that are not traditionally female. She found that boys of lesbian households were less aggressive and violent and more nurturing and affectionate towards others. That is the end of my arguments until further notice. I look forward to hearing your arguments. (1)http://www.narth.com...

Homosexuals make great parents

People are born gay. I believe that guys are born with a certain chromosome that lets them believe that they are gay and are suppose to be gay such as suppose to be a girl or boy.

born gay

Children raised by homosexuals may become more tolerant individuals.

Gay adoption

Thanks for responding.Rebuttal/DefenseAddressing my opponent's remark on religion, I'll say it again, it is irrelevant and futile in this debate because the United States has a seperation of Church and State that is protected under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution (http://www.usconstitution.net...). But then agaoin, my opponent made no reasonable rebuttal to refute my argument which states that gay adopion is against the Bible. The Bible only prohibits gay sex. Again, please disregard any religious arguments.Next, my opponent tries to rebut my argument that LGBT parents have no influence on children, which is true. My opponent's reponse is by sending a link to an opinion article of an unpolular website and not even care to argue what's being said there. You need to elaborate what you cite in an online debate. Bottomline, there's nothing to refute if there's no official argument, please extend.Oh, and since my opponent is being to mean and wants Wikipedia articles disregarded, I'll back up my argument by showing genuine and official documents published by the APA:**http://www.apa.org...In here, the APA officially states that, "There is simply no sufficiently scientifically sound evidence that sexual orientation can be changed."This basically trashes the ludicrous claim that having gay parents can make you gay.**http://www.apa.org...APA stated that "there is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation: Lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children"Finally, my opponent never really convincingly rebutted my argument on preventing bullying and depression and continues to claim that we ban LGBT adoption because it's the only way. He didn't explain why thoroughly enough. CON also argues that homosexuals cannot produce offspring naturally and therefore shouldn't have children. Weak arguments needs improvements.Once again, I ask the readers to please extend my previous arguments since they weren't adequately refuted by CON. Thanks.

Let me ask a clarifying question. By "predisposition" do you mean that they have a certain likelihood to be gay, or do you mean it's more or less CERTAIN that they'll be gay? To make it more concrete, say a child is born. Would it make sense to you to say that the child might end up either straight or gay, but the odds are 70% towards gay? (weak version) Or do you mean it more like the child is pretty much 100% going to go straight or gay, and which one is already determined? (strong version) If you take the weak version position, you might want to reset the debate. I don't intend to dispute that. If you take the strong version position, then it'll be a pleasure to debate you.

people are born gay

The evidence you had was a theory, not a proven fact. I mean its like saying that a person who is a comidian, his reason for doing so is in his genetics. It's in our instintics that every one of us, yes including the other sexuals, was to be paired with the opposite sex. If it is indeed in the genetics the why would the genetic makeup of a gay man not have the qualities of a woman. He can't reproduce if he is only attracted to men so why would his DNA make him a guy? The thing is, it doesn't make since for a GENETICALLY homosexual not be able to reproduce with other GENETICALLY homosexuals.

There is strong evidence that sexual orientation can be effected by genetics.

It seems I have eaten more than I could chew. Great points there, here is my rebuttal 1. Right to adoption At law Adoption refers to the act by which an adult formally becomes the guardian of a child and incurs the rights and responsibilities of a parent. -So legally speaking any person irregardless of sexual orientation has the right to adopt, provided they meet the legal requirements. Denying a person based on sexual orientation or giving preference to others based on sexual orientation is a form of discrimination which is against the UN Universal Bill of Rights. Thats my reasoning on how it is the right of a gay couple to adopt. In society we cannot choose our parents, so in effect a child has no right to choose their parents since there are no legal provisions to make this possible. 2. Environment There is no scientific proof to prove that there is any negative effect on a child if they are raised in a gay family, there is evidence to support the fact that a gay family setup will result in all children being gay, since the very essence of sexual orientation is the fact that a person is born as is. Until the day there is peer reviewed research that proves that there is a problem with a child being raised in a same sex marriage then we should not discriminate, which beings my next point. 3. Fairness/Level playing field/Discrimination What I am saying we should level the playing, a qualifying same sex married couple should have the same chance of adopting a child as a mixed sex couple. 4. Rights of a child As I mentioned earlier on a child cannot choose its parents, so it follows that in any setting such a right to choose what environment they grow up in is not enforceable as it does not and cannot exist. 5. Moral issues When you say natural family, you imply that being gay is unnatural which is unfounded except in religious jargon. Morality is subjective, which is why we cannot create laws based on moral standards. I hope I have addressed you points adequately, thank you

Homosexual adoption

I am grateful that you respect my opinion as I do yours. Hopefully our differences won't affect that. My point is that homosexuality is not normal. My biggest problem is with the gay agenda. I don't believe it should be promoted as a normal life style. Because it clearly is not. Having said that does not mean anyone should be denied the right to love whom they want as long as it is "mutual". But there are consequences when we try to normalize something that is primarily based on an abnormal sexual preference. In the case of same sex interaction you cannot have offspring. When it comes to marriage the argument is why can't I legally marry the one I love. I submit that the reason that the state got involved with marriage in the first place was because of offspring. It's a contract between a man and a woman that puts children first and their love secondary. And it is my opinion (but not just mine) children need a mother and a father. If you are gay maybe you cannot see that. Yes gay couples are capable of loving children too. But the need for a mother and a father trump that argument. Also the sexual nature of that kind of union is not healthy for nurturing children. In their attempt to normalize Homosexuality the gay agenda has forced it's belief on The Boy Scouts of America. Something I feel was completely unnecessary. It's supposed to be a free country. The idea that their political motivation was more important than preserving the values that the scouts held is indicative of who they are. To be clear, I am talking about the those that belong to the gay organizations that promote these political ideals. To me this just strengthens my belief that homosexuality should not be treated as normal.

Sexual orientation

Thanks for your response. I’ll make this quick and simple. Rebuttal It seems that my opponent’s R1 argument was solely based on weak assumptions, appealing to religion and his irrational personal belief of what the outcome may be (which is flawed). One of CON’s claim is his belief that (the Judeo-Christian) God created people to be with the opposite gender, to keep up with traditional family values. Fact is, it’s not simple nor is it fair. If we would be using the obsolete teachings of the Bible as an argument, there is no verse which prohibits LGBT adoption, and isn’t it God’s and Jesus’ teaching to forgive and love your neighbor? But of course, religious Scripture is irrelevant and futile to this debate and it should be disregarded. CON then argued that having a father & mother creates an impact since it serves different purposes or influences to a kid’s life, meaning that heterosexual parents have better parenting skills than same-sex parents. So what? We live in a society where children need love, compassion and care first. Parents are role models of the children, regardless of sexual orientation. CON’s next argument is that children are more likely to be gay when they have gay parents. My opponent did not cite a source to adequately support this claim, but it doesn’t matter, because LGBT parents have absolutely no effect on influencing or changing the sexual orientation of the child, there is no scientifical evidence to support it, and this is according to the American Psychological Association. They further stated that the development and well-being of children of same sex couples have no relation whatsoever to the parents (http://en.wikipedia.org...) (http://debatepedia.idebate.org...). Next issue is that the child of an LGBT couple may result to being bullied and depressed because of their parents’ sexual orientation. This is not a valid argument. I will argue that the solution to solving this problem is to enforce more laws against hate crime and bullying. The parents are not to blame if the child’s the victim. It should be the school’s fault and the responsibility of the state and the system to improve enforcing anti-Bullying laws. Case Equality This is obviously a matter of having equal opportunity and promoting LGBT rights. Certain countries have allowed adoption because it’s becoming recognized and acceptable by society. Progress is happening, and the traditional family structure is no longer the only acceptable structure. And I agree, it should be more liberalized for society’s sake. Not allowing gay couples to adopt is like a form of discrimination, a hate towards sexual orientation, it is homophobia, it is bigotry. It has to stop. Heterosexual Parents vs. Homosexual Parents According to psychologist Abbie Goldberg, gays are likely to become better parents than the average heterosexual couple, because they are more motivated and committed on the role because they chose to become parents. LGBT couples rarely become parents by accident, unlike the high unwanted pregnancy rate among straights (http://www.livescience.com...). American gay dads are found to be more fit parents than straight dads, according to the opinion of the American Psychological Association (http://en.wikipedia.org...). Compare two loving well-educated homosexual men with an abusive 46 year-old male redneck and a dumb 19 year-old whore. Which couple is more competent? What makes an LGBT couple less desirable parents than a kid who’s only being raised by a single mom working at the minimum wage? Or being in foster care or raised by incompetent relatives? Depression & Bullying - Who’s to blame? Sociologist Brian Powell argued that the parents’ gender has got nothing to do on the disadvantage of kids raised by LGBT parents (http://www.livescience.com...). Which means, and as I said, if the child is depressed and being bullied, it shouldn’t be the parents’ fault. We need to fix society and their poor reaction to LGBTs. Schools need to be more liberal on issues like this and the government should protect the children being victimized by the hatred. That’s all for now, I’ll expand some contentions later on.

1.Since the source you mention leads me to the general website I've tried to find the latest article on gay gene(https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org...) it claims it cannot be said there exists a gay gene as it has not been proven however it does say 'it is tempting to claim that this study is concrete proof that sexual orientation is entirely genetic. To say so would be simplistic and, well, wrong. But it does constitute evidence that homosexuality has a biological basis.' 2. The source mentioned(TrueOrigin) makes claims about the 'twins study' that if there was a gay gene both twins would always be gay and since that is not the case it does not exist however genes can be 'inactive' (http://medicalxpress.com...) so it is therefore still possible for both twins to have a possible 'gay gene' but have it simply be inactive.

Homosexuality is a Choice

"Natural" label doesn't imply a preferable choice.

Gay adoption

It is very hard to find reliable statistics on gender identity, I will concede that, however it is not up for argument that the amount of people who identify as heterosexual, is different between generations and demographics, as well as over time. Why do people of different demographics and ages identify differently? Are genetics mutating more rapidly? Are babies exposed to more toxins in the womb, than before? I argue the change in the percentage of population identifying as heterosexual is because of the effects of peoples upbringings, environment, and education. All attributes of nurture. To address your question of why I used sexuality in my contention, it is because gender identity and sexuality are different, however mutually inclusive. Thus if gender identity is primarily determined by nature, then sexuality would surely be to. In your last contention, you go on to state "The problem with this concept of gender identity is that it promotes the idea that you are what you feel, and that you can be anything you think you are." However this, and your whole contention have no relevance to the debate. One does not have to concede that nature is more of a determinant in gender identity, to agree that just because one identifies as a certain gender, does not mean they are that gender. This debate is not on the validity of ones identification, but on the causes of why they choose to identify by that. Many teenagers choose to identify as a different gender or sexuality because it is cool, or they have had sexual abuse happen to them in the past, or they are just confused. All of these reasons, and any other ones, are primarily caused by nurture rather than nature.

Gender Identity is determined primarily by nurture, rather than nature.

Yes, we have a choice in life to be ourselves but being straight, bisexual or gay, or none of these, is a central part of who we are, thanks in part to the DNA we were born with.

born gay

First I would like to begin my final statement by saying I have enjoyed this debate and think that you put up a good counter argument, and ultimately I think it is up to the voter to decide who had a better argument. I would like to make it clear to the voters to leave any bias or personal opinions out of there decision and to read both arguments and make a decision on who had a better argument. In conclusion, I think people are gay by choice to an extent, that being I believe that the environment you are raised in and what you are taught to believe from a young age will play a role in which sexual orientation you choose. However no person is forced to be gay, there are many cases in which people who have said they are gay later say they are straight also if you say people are born with sexual preference you would also be saying that people are born interested in certain fetishes or kinks which is impossible because these are things created by society. Similar to how you could say people are not born Catholic or Jewish they are raised in families and in an environment which makes them that way. By being raised to believe something you generally are more inclined to lean in that direction when choosing between other religions. Think about how difficult it is for someone immigrating to another country to accept that countries customs, when people are brought up to believe something it is difficult to embrace change. However it is never impossible to choose to be part of a different culture or group of people it is always an individuals choice. When a baby is born do you think at birth a girl is going to be interested in purses, clothes, dolls etc. and all the other things that are society has come to associate with a female. People are born with a blank slate, they are not born evil or good nor are they born gay or straight this is something society created. Society also created the institution of marriage and they defined the difference between a masculine and feminine. In Ancient Greece men had sex with each other and were taught at an early age that this was normal men had sex with other men because they viewed woman as slaves and in there society to have sex with a man was almost a holy event. When a child is born they do not understand the difference between a boy or girl all they know is what they are told and what they see, hear and smell by that I mean what they view as normal is what society teaches them to be normal. You mentioned how family members sometimes share traits, This is because they are part of the same family and the same distinct blood line. Also there is no proof to show that there traits are simply coincidently similar and therefore this is not a viable argument. "taste buds"? the food all tastes the same regardless, weather you enjoy the taste or not is something that varies from person to person. The reason it varies is because the way food tastes is all about mind set if I had not eaten for days and I was giving a food which I normally hate to me it would probably taste like the greatest thing ever. From a young age we are taught that candy taste good and vegetables and fruit are terrible the reason for this is mind set. When you are very young every cartoon depicts vegetables as being a terrible tasting menace that is truly vomit worthy, for example I hardly ever ate vegetables at a young age simply because I assumed it tasted terrible. Also the reason people are so unique is because all people are raised in very different environments and have different experiences which make them unique. Imaging a white board which represents to newborns minds now 2 lines are being drawn in the same direction one green one red for everything that they do differently the line bends and swerves now imaging how distant those lines would be by the age of 1 think of how different there lives may have been up to that point. People are not born unique it is there life experiences that make them that way all people are born with a blank slate. For this reason I think it is truly a matter of coincidence in which someone ends up choosing to be homosexual or whatever sexual orientation they choose. If when we where born we where immersed in a world where being bisexual was normal don't you think must people would be bi and see nothing odd about that? I thank you on being a good competitor and wish you good luck!

people are born gay

1. My opponent in Round 2 mentioned some environmental and physical conditions under which people's sexual orientation is affected. What I tried to prove through queer animals is that the factors mentioned for sexual orientation in case of humans are absolutely absent in animal world. Therefore all animals should have similar sexual orientations as they grow up under similar condition unlike humans. Parents of animals do not have divorces, some of them dont live in cities and some in forests and yet there are a range of sexual orientations in animals. 2. The sexual fluidity as mentioned by opponent seems as if he has assumed that sexual fluidity is change in sexual orientation. No! http://www.scienceofrelationships.com... Sexual fluidity is not a change in sexual orientation. Sexual fluidity does not imply that a person is homosexual for a given period of time and then turns heterosexual for a certain period of time. It also does not equal to bisexuality. Kindly donot confuse fluidity with bisexuality. 3. The fact that conversion therapy does not work is itself a proof that environment is not a factor. If I were depressed due to something bad happening to me (a physical factor) I could be cured by therapy but sexual orientation is not.

What should be done in order to change adoption policies in the United States to included same-sex couples? While many states have already conformed to the norms of today's lifestyles, there are still some states (like Utah and Mississippi) who have outlawed homosexual couples from adopting. The best way to fix this is to make sure the screening process isn't gender biased. For example, it shouldn't matter if it is a heterosexual couple trying to apply or a homosexual couple. As long as the couple has a stable environment for the child and can pass the regular screening process they should be able to adopt children who are looking for a family. Many children nowadays don't even see the problem with having parents who are the same sex, as long as they feel like they are loved and cared for!

Adoption by same sex couples

Being born gay is not an instinct. You are not born with the thought of loving your mother, for example. You love her because of the fact that she cares for you when you are hurt, calms you when you are angry. Love is acquired first through the process of friendship, and as you develop a strong trust and bond between yourself, then you begin to love. Any type of love is formed this way, whether it is gay love or straight love. Love is an acquired behavior, not an instinct, as love cannot be taught. If two people of the same sex meet each other and after getting to know each other slowly develop feelings for each other, then they begin to feel love. You can't fall in love with a person of the same sex once you meet them, which further supports my argument that love is an acquired behavior.

Resolved: Being gay is a learned behavior

What your stating that if homosexuals were to adopt it would mean welcoming a random baby into their home. But the child would still be welcomed into a random home, as they had already been put up for adoption in the first place. Having a children doesn't matter if you're gay or straight. You can still have a child no matter what, even heterosexuals can't have kids forcing them to adopt or have a someone else have a baby for them. They won't have a biological union with their kids, but should it matter because they would love and nature the child the same.

Gay marriage

According to the 2007 medical journal article entitled ,, Neurological control of human sexual behavior insights from lesion studies which published in the journal of neurology,neurosurgery,and psychiatry : Kolarsky and colleagues54 examined the relationships between "sexual deviation", age of lesion onset and localisation of lesion (temporal vs extratemporal). The authors defined two diagnostic categories: (1) "sexual deviation", involving a deviation of sexual object (for example, paedophilia). Homosexuality was included in this category, which would now be considered inappropriate, and (2) "sexual disturbances other than deviations", including orgasm in response to stimuli unrelated to the subject's sexual preference, hypersexuality and hyposexuality See. . http://www.conservapedia.com...

Homosexuality is natural

I'm in a bit busy right now so I'll start with rubuttals. The short answer to the identical twin question is that while there is a very strong genetic heritability component (the 11% and 14% are probably the lowest estimates of it I've heard; some place it at 50% while others place it in between) identical twins do not share the same prenatal environment. Each exists in their own amniotic sac and the environment within each one can be quite different. Even minor changes in difference can change the ways in which the genes activate, causing epigenetic differences in traits. This point can't be stressed enough: there is no consistent correlation between post-natal childhood factors, like lacking a father-figure or sexual abuse, and being gay. Moreover, the attempts at gay conversion are utterly abysmal. Here's from one review of the available studies: "From the available data, four studies reported a "success" rate during conversion therapy of 0.4%, 0.0%, 0.5 and 0.04%. That is, conversion therapy has a failure rate in excess of 99.5% during each study." http://www.religioustolerance.org...

homosexuality is an unchangeable trait that you're born with