azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

The parts about a flat earth, stoning disobedient kids, and slavery failed horribly at that.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

That is totally your opinion. Christians believe the entire Bible is inspired by God because that is what it tells us. It is not written by authors with their own cultural beliefs of the times.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Christians believe the entire Bible is inspired by God because that is what it tells us. And this is your opinion.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

No this is what our faith tells us. It would be an opinion if it were our personal views vs the Bible. We believe that the Bible is written by God. Now if we disagreed with what the Bible says, it would be our opinion coming from our own thoughts.You can say you believe the Bible is written by men and that is fine, but for Christians it is our faith that says the Bible is inspired by God, not an opinion. When a person takes someone's faith and tries to turn it into a bunch of opinions, it is their way of twisting someone's faith to your own beliefs. It's fine to say you don't believe it and it was written by men. It is something else to tell other's their faith is not inspired by God and therefore the verses are not relevant to today's culture. Those verses are very much relevant to us.I have a problem with other's trying to tell someone how to believe and telling them that their faith is nothing more than words written by men. Quit trying to tell people their faith is worthless. Your faith is evolution and you think you have the right to indoctrinate our captive children in school with your so called scientific religion. It is very arrogant to do so.I won't tell you that you are an idiot to not believe in God, so give us the same respect.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

It was indeed written by authors, Christians just believe those authors were divinely inspired.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Try not playing the ludicrous devil's advocate once in your life and admit the intent of the argument. This is why I try to ignore most of your posts.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

...Wait, what? I was not playing devil's advocate, I was pointing out a key different in what the previous poster said that was relevant to the conversation. If someone was arguing that the authors of the bible had an effect on the bible, then recognizing that there were indeed authors is part of the intent of the argument.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

The Bible condones slavery in multiple passages, so the same argument can be made for slavery. The text is out of date on the cultural side. This doesn't mean you have to throw it all out! That would be a reactive thing to do. For example, I disagree with Freud on a number of issues but I would never throw his books out. Some is valuable theology, and some is not so valuable. You can see Jesus following this logic in his rejection of specific laws in the Old Testament. Jesus rejected the sabbath and even told his followers to disobey it. He also rejected "eye for an eye", and openly altering the law into "turn the other cheek." He wanted to write the law in hearts instead of on stone, which is a more moldable attitude.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Jesus never rejected the laws of the old Testament, he fulfilled many of them for us in taking our punishment.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Jesus rejected the sabbath and even told his followers to disobey it. He also rejected "eye for an eye", and openly altering the law into "turn the other cheek." He wanted to write the law in hearts instead of on stone, which is a more moldable attitude. One key passage that shows his attitude clearly is in John's gospel. When he committed blasphemy, and when they went to stone him he made clear that human beings are equal to God, not just himself….John 10:33 The Jews answered, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you, but for blasphemy, because you, though only a human being, are making yourself God.” Jesus answered, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods'? If those to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’—and the scripture cannot be annulled.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

We don't care what Jesus said. There is little evidence he even existed.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

There are passages in the Bible that do not condone homosexual acts between men. I have not seen anything specific to women. However, the Bible instructs us not to judge as it is not our job. In fact, it states that being judgmental will only cause more trouble in the end. Gay rights are a facet of human rights. Human rights are of the utmost importance. The Bible instructs us to love our neighbor. It instructs us to honor others above ourselves. Any true Christian who follows the Bible is not judgmental, does not harm others, does not oppress others, and helps others, regardless of who they are or what they believe in.So to all the fake Christians out there... Start getting real. You have no right to judge, but if you choose to, you will be judged harshly. Also, if you choose to judge and do it intentionally, stop claiming that you are a Christian. Do I believe in homosexuality? No, that is why I am straight. Do I believe that people are allowed to have sexual relations with whoever they choose? That is up to them, not me.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

They should have rights, they're also humans in case you forgot. They should be allowed to do what they want as long they don't hurt other people or break laws. The Bible didn't mention that being gay is prohibited. Who are we to judge? We're not God. One day we're all gonna die, whether you're straight or not we will all get judged by God.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Since the Bible says to love everybody, this order gives the O.K. to Gay Rights.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Since the word "Gay" is not in the Bible nor in the U.S. Constitution, only contemporary standards in society can apply.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

We are all humans whether we gave a penis or a fucking vagina it doesn't matter if somone is attracted to another person sexualy who gives a damn not everyone is gay so the population will be fine anyway the world is already overpopulated gay marrige would even help that. Why is it anyone's buisness what somone does in there own home especially if it hurts no one. Stop labeling people as bad because of who they like.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Yes homosexuals may live a lifestyle that not all people are comfortable with, myself including, but homosexuals are still people. The bible can't change that. They deserve to have rights just as much as heterosexuals. Someone's sexuality should not define anything about them other than that- their sexuality. It's absolutely ridiculous that a homosexual should be denied rights because of their sexuality. They aren't doing any harm and already have faced so many struggles with being targeted and such for no acceptable reason. They deserve rights, end of story. If you say they don't, that's the same as saying as a people, we don't deserve rights either.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Gay rights are immensely important and should go ahead regardless of some evil, twisted millennia old book.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

The Bible is neither evil nor twisted and there are many proofs against gay rights outside of religion.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

You clearly haven't read Leviticus or Deuteronomy have you? There are no proofs of it outside of religion.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Can you cite some "proofs against gay rights outside of religion"?
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Evolution will have weeded out homosexuality, should it have ever been a gene etc., as it does not give those with it a higher chance of surviving or producing offspring. Either this is a new phenomena for humans and so cannot be extended to the rights of the long-standing tradition of the marriage of two genders, or it is a process entirely of the mind and so falls under the category of several other mental illnesses and should be treated accordingly, and should not be given the ability to flourish as we do not allow severe sociopaths to murder or those with severe depression commit suicide.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

1. "Either this is a new phenomena for humans and so cannot be extended to the rights of the long-standing tradition of the marriage of two genders," What? Something being a new phenomena does not in any way indicate it cannot be covered under equal rights. Otherwise, women would not be protected by the majority of the Constitution, seeing as how female equality was a "new phenomena" within human social standing in the Western world. 2. "or it is a process entirely of the mind and so falls under the category of several other mental illnesses and should be treated accordingly, and should not be given the ability to flourish as we do not allow severe sociopaths to murder or those with severe depression commit suicide." Seeing as how homosexuality does not harm anyone, any comparison to "sociopaths" who murder is illogical. Even if it were a mental "illness", we do not deny those with mental conditions equality under the law.Do you have any legal arguments against legal and civil equality for homosexuals?
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Evolution will have weeded out homosexuality, should it have ever been a gene etc., as it does not give those with it a higher chance of surviving or producing offspring.Evolution is not about passing your own genes, but anyone passing your genes. It is possible that the homosexual gene can be spread through evolution. If raising children becomes difficult it might be more helpful to have extra "parents" to raise the children. If your sibling is gay they won't be out trying to find a mate and can help you raise your children. So, the gay genes can be passed through your children while your gay sibling doesn't have children. So, it is possible to pass gay genes.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

While I usually like to politely disagree, in this instance I feel compelled to say that you, sir, have nary an idea of what you're saying.Evolution does not occur socially, not unless you're talking about the evolution of culture or languages. Physical evolution, that is, the passing of genes to future generations, involves the transfer of one's own genome, which is made up from deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), to offspring (plus the combining of one's own genome with that of your mate). DNA is a physical substance, and the transferring of it to the next generation is the result of the combination of the sperm and egg cells to form a zygote.In other words, if there is a gay gene, it cannot be passed down through having extra "parents", which would be a social factor, not a biological one.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

You should have just politely disagreed, because you are 100% wrong.Evolution does not occur sociallyI didn't say it did. I said a gay sibling helping pass along some of their own genes. The genes that siblings share since all siblings should share some genes.In other words, if there is a gay gene, it cannot be passed down through having extra "parents", which would be a social factor, not a biological one.What if there are multiple gay genes? Most of our genetics are a combination of genes. If the straight sibling has some of the gay genes their children can be carriers for gay genes and the homosexual uncle or aunt can help raise the child to spread their genes.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

i would like to contest one of your point here sir:for my situation i am not particularly religious or atheist, but the use of your sentence grinded my gears. The Bible book is not accurately evil, i mean as an example, when you are cooking yourself a delicious meal and at the time you use knife and cut yourself, it is ridiculous to say that the knife is evil and intended to harm you. The bible is a book, a tool for spiritual need which as been rewritten several times during our history
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

As current lack of scientific research is present to the cause of homosexuality, I currently am against homosexual rights. I believe the platform that homosexuality rights is being advocated on is purely a sympathetic humanitarian ideology which is illogical when the behavior is not even scientifically understood. Homosexuality is clearly unnatural in the sense, that within the human specie, there are only two genders naturally created and are created with parts that when combined have a sexual purpose. Thus, the only remaining purpose for homosexuality then, would be a neurological purpose... The need, satisfaction, or mental security felt when loved but, even that purpose is fulfilled between opposite genders! That leaves the unanswered questions of what happens in the human brain that causes one gender to be attracted to the same? What chemical processes occur when this behavior feels natural to a homosexual? As homosexuals claim that the way they think and feel is a result form how they were born, then common sense would dictate that something different happens during the maturing stages to the brain of an embryo to a born baby that causes this. With that being said, why hasn't any medical institute, university, or official raised the question like bipolarity, or any other neurological disorders, could homosexuality be caused by a chemical imbalance or by a neurological deformity during the stages of creation from conception to birth and is it something that can be corrected through a medical procedure or medicine? As for what the bible might entail, I could care less because the bible itself was written by men, not God himself.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Look at the hands of gay males and you will see scientific evidence of the cause of homosexuality. They have feminine hands. Males are naturally both male and female. A man has a sketched feminine side of his body with nipples and breasts. A women also has a sketch masculine side with the clitoris. Freud theorized that the natural state was bisexual and that we learned to be attracted to whichever sex when we were growing up. Most all the scientific evidence points to genetics.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Without watching the video, I can already discredit any of it's said evidence because evolution is nothing but a theory! I'm looking for hard evidence with scientific models demonstrating the process, not some old hypothetical theorist.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

You don't understand science at all. Evoloution has been proved.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Wow really? No it hasn't... What people are calling evolution in this instance, more closely follows corruption.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

How does it "more closely follow corruption", and what is your answer to transitional fossil records?
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

That it follows corruption doesn't mean anything in terms of whether or not it is true or false. For specific individuals it may follow corruption, like a Hitler for example. But there are also great evolutionists who talk about Mutual Aid as a factor in evolution. It's not all survival of the fittest. If you accept that as an argument against evolution you would have to concede that the same is true with the Bible. The Bible has been interpreted in terrible ways also.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Scientific theory and literary theory are two different things. Evolution is a scientific theory with tons of evidence from many branches of science. There is even DNA evidence for evolution. Gravitation is also a scientific theory, comparable. Check to see if you can find a world renown scientist alive today who rejects evolution. There are none alive today who would dare do so. The greatest scientist alive today who calls himself Christian is Francis Collins, and of course he is an evolutionist.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

1. Homosexuality is clearly natural, as it occurs within nature. That is, after all, the definition of natural. 2. There is much about human behavior that we do not understand, but how is that a justification for denying individuals who partake in said behavior equal rights? None of your post explained any sort of basis for opposing giving homosexuals the same civil rights as the rest of us.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

There is also rape, murder, and theft in nature. Just because animals do it, does not mean it is fine for a human.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Can you point to where I said something is "fine" because it is natural?Because it seems pretty clear to me that I simply questioned how something that is, factually speaking, natural, can be referred to as unnatural. It makes little sense to change the subject and make it seem like that is an endorsement of any particular behavior.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Are you not using its classification as "natural" to be an argument for gay rights, and by fine I meant natural as it is natural for a human to be moral and avoid such things that are results of the rash lusts of animals.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

No, I am using the classification of "natural" as a counter to the claim of it being "unnatural", and that's all. A person claimed it was unnatural, I brought up the fact that it occurs in nature and thus is natural, and that was it.My arguments in favor of equal civil rights for homosexuals are completely separate from that, as the idea that "unnatural = bad" is pretty absurd, especially when it is being argued on a computer over the internet.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Haha, So whats you're position on homosexual equal civil rights then?
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

They are not harming anyone by being together and deserve the same civil and constitution rights as anyone else. Them being married does not harm you or me, so what right does anyone have to stop them?
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Haha, because it's not just about you!!! It has to do with how it publicly affects society as a whole.. That's what civil rights are all about! For example, if everyone just excepts the narrative (and again, that's all it is "a narrative" not a scientific fact) that homosexuality is natural, then the potential of corruption is at stake... Suddenly people start making the choice to be gay rather then being gay from a birthright! That's the whole problem!!! That's what it all boils down to!
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

First, can you show me any evidence of homosexuality having a negative effect upon society?Second, one does not make the choice to be gay. Sexual orientations are not conscious choices. You and I do not walk down the street and "choose" not to find members of the same-sex attractive, just like how homosexuals do not walk down the street and "choose" not to find members of the opposite sex attractive. One can not suddenly decide to be of a different sexual orientation, which means there is no risk of "corruption" as you put it.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

OMG!!! You are so wrong and out of touch! People make the switch all the time these days! Some purely because they've just had enough "drama" with the opposite sex... Oh man!!! Not to mention what parents have to go through trying to except their children whom choose to be gay because they got brainwashed into thinking it's okay or "fine."
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Can you provide evidence of this? And I don't mean evidence that bisexuality exists, because it does, and bisexuals will prefer one sex over another depending on a situation.And can you provide evidence that children get "brainwashed" into "choosing to be gay"?
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

I just realized that being moral is actually unnatural. Ha, that's funny.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

You claim homosexuality is natural and you support it so that must mean you think it's fine.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

That is true, I do think it is fine. I don't think that pointing out that it is natural is evidence that it is fine, I think those are separate issues. But I see no reason to take issue with homosexuality.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

You're definition of natural is skewered... There is a different nature within every species of animals and there is no universal naturalism. Also, you're not clear in what kind of rights you're accusing me to be against... You mention equal rights and civil rights which are two different things. The publisher did not mention any specific rights to argue for or against so you can't just assume I'm against all or one or the other but, to clarify, I'm not against equal human rights between hetero and homosexuals. It's civil rights that I'm against as civil rights pertain more to the civilization of a community and it's laws which are supposed to be created for the safety and peace of a community.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

My definition of natural is "occurring or existing within nature". That is THE definition of natural. If it occurs in other species, where is your evidence that it does not occur naturally within humanity?
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Where is the evidence that it is natural within humanity? You can't just point out to some other specie (which you have specifically failed to do) and say, "See it's perfectly natural." Some species produce offspring without even mating... If a virgin human became pregnant would you say that is natural? Naturalism by the way is dictated based on how a specie behaves by the majority within itself.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

"natural within humanity" How about the fact that it exists? If it exists in other species in nature, that makes it objectively natural. Then if you also point out the existence of it in humanity, that would indicate it is indeed natural within humanity.And "naturalism" is a philosophical school of thought pertaining to empiricism, and a literary trend. Not sure what word you are trying to refer to with a definition on statistical normality.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Against Gay Rights

Yes, it exists but that doesn't make it natural. If it was natural then there wouldn't be an argument. It would just be subconsciously accepted .. The fact that it's rejected makes it an unnatural behavior.
Debate: Gay Rights (In the Bible)
Side: Pro Gay Rights

Rape is rejected in society, as is murder, yet both are natural. Again, if something exists within nature, it is natural. It really can't be argued that homosexuality itself, devoid of any association with a particular species, is natural. As for arguing that it is not natural in humans, that is difficult, since "natural" refers to outside human influence. If you want to claim that homosexuality is unnatural in humans, you would need to present some evidence or an argument for that. But saying that because a behavior is rejected, it is therefore unnatural, is contradicted by countless examples.