Debate: Is homosexuality good for society?
Side: It depends

Well first off I would like to say hello to everyone, I am new to the site and this will be my first post. I guess I will look at three possibilities in regards to this topic. This is why I have stated that this will depend. This is a moral question and thus one must ask the question "Are there objective moral values and duties in the world?" the three possibles of this are;No, there are only subjective moral values and duties in the world.Yes, there are objective moral values that are ordained by God.Yes, there are objective moral values that are ordained through the social evolution of our species.I will now adress the issues on each of these answers.If you answered no, there are only subjective moral values and duties then the question becomes irrelevant and creates the "it depends" element. You see if we only have subjective values then what we believe personally has no weight and thus is no better nor worse than anyone else. And because what we believe personally is not a concensus of the whole then there are no objective values of good and bad and thus what is good or bad for society becomes impossible to answer with any rational objective basis.Now if you answered yes, there are objective moral values and duties that are ordained by God then it would depend upon the religion, however in the general homosexuality is seen as a regression of the human state. With a regression of the human state would inevitably include the regression of society thus it would be seen that homosexuality would not be good for society.If you answered yes, there are objective moral values and duties that are ordained by social evolution then it turns more into the way in which society deals with homosexuality and the evolutionary and biological implications of homosexuality. In terms of society it would depend on the society, if you believe that objective moral values come from the social and evolutionary development of people then it could be stated that religion, being the majority of the world would mean that it is wrong or seen as wrong socially considering religion would be considered a social construct under this model. In terms of evolution and biology the purpose of us having moral values as a species is to work together and to propagate the species. In almost ever society the rate of homosexuality usually hovers at around the 5% area. Also to note is that under natural circumstances homosexuality does not contribute to the overall propagation or survival of the species, rather as being a burden, taking resources with no return (Same could be said of heterosexuals who choose not to have children). So by this we can make a rational conclusion that homosexuality is a mistake of biology, a probability of error that sits at around 5%. Considering natures only purpose is propagation then the existence of homosexuality is only a strain on society by the ideal of evolutionary morality.In conclusion the answer is that by a two thirds rationale it can be asserted that, assuming there are objective moral values and duties then homosexuality is not beneficial or "good" for society, rather that they are a strain and a mathematical error of biology. if morality is subjective then this topic would never have been started because the topic would be no more than someone saying homosexuality is good or bad for society based on thier own merit.