azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

so what if a person is homosexual, it does not effect you in any way at all. its their life and their choice, so stop butting into other peoples life and being all emotional about what they do when their are other problems needed to be attended to....u fags
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

There's no such thing as sin.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

If judged using the standards of the bible homosexuality should be considered a sin. But the bible should not be used as a code of moral ethics period.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Lamb chops, it you want to follow the writings of 2000 - 5000 year old writings by old men that is your business. These writings were edited by the church and they picked and chose which books to include in "The Holy Bible". If this is what you follow, then follow ALL the laws: sacrifice a goat each week, throw dung on dishonorable children and put menstruating women outside the city walls. You can't just pick and choose. Besides, how do you know the church didn't throw out books applauding gay life? You don't. What gays do in no way effects the marriage you are going to eventually suffer divorce from anyway. So chill.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

As a non-religious, I disagree with the idea of sin, but regardless, I do not find homosexuality to be socially deviant behavior.I hold the belief that there are biological reasons for homosexuality, and there are many studies and examples to back this up, from studies that have discovered discrepancies in the brain between homosexuals and their heterosexual counterparts, to studies observing animals engaging homosexual behavior.With all this support for the idea that homosexuality has biological causes, coupled with how, by way of observing it in animals, I find it ludicrous to condemn it as "a sin," or "unnatural."
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

"...studies that have discovered discrepancies in the brain between homosexuals and their heterosexual counterparts..."I don't think sexuality can be just explained by genetics, that would be way too simplistic. "Some are born gay, others aren't." What about bissexuals? Do they also have their own brain pattern? What about guys who spent most of their lives honestly liking girls and now honestly like guys? Have their brains changed? Are they "wrong", because they weren't born gay?I see sexuality as just a matter of taste and preference, we don't need to explain it biologically the same way as we don't have to explain why some guys (straight, if you want...) like pink.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

One needs to think back to who actually wrote the bible. Christians are taught that it was written by men who were inspired by God, BUT they were only men, who were also subject to sin. It is a possibility that they wrote in their own views as well as what God supposedly inspired them to write. In my own interpretation, the bible does not specifically say that being gay is a sin. It's more saying that homosexual actions are a sin; however, this would also be a sign man's sin. Man has been homophobic since the beginning of time because supposedly homosexuality is "weird". I'm straight but just because I want to be with a woman doesn't mean another guy should go to hell because he wants to be with a man. Besides, research shows that homosexuality could be a chemical imbalance. That's part of God's doing, no?
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

First of all, sin is the act of deliberately turning from the will of God. It requires an act of will on the part of the sinner and, as such, an act can only be defined as sin by the actor and God. There can be no such thing as objective sin. At worst an act might be deemed objectively amoral. Second, how can love, being acted out by two people in the way God made them, be a sin if, as St. John tells us, "God is Love, and he who resides in Love, resides in God."?
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

I have been dating a boy for nine months now, and it isn't about sex or a lifestyle, its about love, and I hope to spend this life and the next life, in his arms.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

The entire basis of this argument is subjective not as to whether you personally think that homosexuality is right or wrong but as to your interpretation of the major religions' teachings.If it should be considered a sin by what the Church teaches i would say yes. If on my personal moral code it should be considered a sin i would say no. However when you take into account the Church condemns it it also condems infanticide which the benevolent God (of Catholic scripture) commits.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

"Should" is the operative word in the question, not "is"
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

The act of sex other than in the missionary position is against the law but we do it and no one complains. So if the bible says it is a sin at least it isn't against the law. Further more why do we care let people live their lives the way the want to and makes them happy. If it is a sin then are you the one to save them or put them down or crucify them? In fact you asking this question makes me wonder if you are free of sin yourself.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Christianity is a nosey religion in the first place. Always worried about what others are doing they can never just leave well enough alone. Who cares what people do in their own homes. If you are a christian, then yes it is a sin, then again so is murder and christian groups are some of the biggest supporters of the war in iraq. Christianity needs to end, the negativity of that close minded religion has brought more harm than good over the past 2000 years. So think on this, Jesus was 33 year old man who was never married and hung out with about twelve guys, and they kissed each other alot. So i think that Jesus was gay, and yes, I am asking Christians to prove to me that he was not. Nothing is worse than a preachy christian in your office or work place. Stay out of people's bedrooms and focus more on yourselves.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Religion is a load of a rubbish.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

No chance, and more importantly there is only one that can pass judgment and so unless you are Jesus, you are sinning by claiming to know what is a sin is in his eyes.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Sin is not determined by organized religion, but by one's personal beliefs. It is not a sin to eat shellfish, and it is not a sin to be homosexual.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

sin IS determined by organized religion. This is the official definition of sin:sin1. transgression of divine law: the sin of Adam. 2. any act regarded as such a transgression, esp. a willful or deliberate violation of some religious or moral principle. note the first meaning DIVINE law
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Whose "official" definition is that? You left out the 3rd definition, whether by accident or by design I do not know:3. any reprehensible or regrettable action, behavior, lapse, etc.; great fault or offense: It's a sin to waste time.Here is websters:Main Entry: 1sin Listen to the pronunciation of 1sinPronunciation: \ˈsin\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English sinne, from Old English synn; akin to Old High German sunta sin and probably to Latin sont-, sons guilty, est is — more at isDate: before 12th century1 a: an offense against religious or moral law b: an action that is or is felt to be highly reprehensible c: an often serious shortcoming : fault2 a: transgression of the law of God b: a vitiated state of human nature in which the self is estranged from GodPlenty of room in this definition to interpret the question as " Should homosexuality be considered (against moral law) or (highly reprehensible) or (a serious shortcoming or fault)?Once again I suppose we should ask the OP to clarify the question instead of arguing with each other over which definition of "SIN" we like best.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Why are you questioning the divine law I believe in? Are you saying that I am believing in the wrong God?Is this question really about whether homosexuality is a sin, or are you just using it to push your beliefs?
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

He's not question your believes, he's challenging your knowledge of the word 'sin'. By it's very definition, which he provided, 'sin' is NOT a personal belief. Thus the argument you made against homosexuality being a sin is moot.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

whoa....I am totally not questioning your belief in God....I am simply saying that sin is related to religion. You said:Sin is not determined by organized religion, but by one's personal beliefs. It is not a sin to eat shellfish, and it is not a sin to be homosexual.I showed you by definition...sin and religion ARE linked. I personally see nothing wrong with homosexuality. I don't believe in sin either. It doesn't apply to me, because I don't believe in god at all and sin is linked to religion. However, I do respect and understand the need for those who belive in religion. And I accept that. The question of this debate is "IS homosexuality a sin" ....the answer is..."Yes" because the Church has decreed it so. Finally, you are on a debate site EVERYBODY is pushing their beliefs!
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

You showed only part of the definition of sin. Once again, I quote:3. any reprehensible or regrettable action, behavior, lapse, etc.; great fault or offense: It's a sin to waste time.A question that simply asks whether or not the Bible lists homosexuality as a sin is a RESEARCH question, not a DEBATE, in my opinion. The answer is as simple as opening the book of Genesis. Certainly not worthy of any discussion. However, if one considers the 3rd definition of "sin", he could debate whether or not he considers homosexuality a "reprehensible action." Perhaps we can agree to disagree on the meaning of sin and ask the poster to rephrase the question once more with more clear wording.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Who determines what "the church" is?
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Not sure, I understand your question....the church is a private institution. It is determined by its followers. There are many different types of religious groups that form many types of "churches".
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Furthermore, you should realize that the original title of this debate was "IS homosexuality a sin"my initial comments were (if you read above) that there is no doubt that in most religious groups homosexuality is considered a sin...so the debate title should be changed...and the moderatorchanged it to "SHOULD homosexuality a sin".
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: Yes

It is easier to agree with what you are saying in regards to the original question; however, I did not see the original wording so I was responding based on the current phrasing, my mistake. There is still much room in the oringinal question as well, if you use the definitons of sin I have provided in my other posts instead of the truncated one you were looking at. I suppose we will not know the intent of the questioner until he/she explicitly states it.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: Yes

Agreed, I had thought from the beginning that this was a poorly worded debate, I left out the 3rd definition, because I knew that the intent of this debate was the religious form of "sin". And debating on this topic without proper clarification of its intent is pretty unproductive.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

So where in the Bible or any other book of religion does it say it's a sin?I'm familiar with the 10 commandments. It's not there. If it is a sin, which I doubt, then it did not even make it into the Christian Gods top ten.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Wikipedia has many pages related this topic, that provide many quoted passages from the Bible. Here is one main one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality A quick google search will also turn up many many pages dealing with this topic. This being a very objective one, analyzing the question from multiple angles: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: Yes

Thanks Grey and Black.Ok...I gotta comment...It would be so appropriate if there were a 'white' somewhere to help me out too.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: Yes

totally agree with Rocknwow - someone please tell me EXACTLY in the Bible it states that Homosexuality is a sin. Please. I've been looking and looking for YEARS and have never found it.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: Yes

It is generally agreed that Leviticus 18:22 in all flavours of the bible since King James condemns homosexuality between two men.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Actually, King James hardly condemns homosexuality, because he was a flaming queen himself. Go look that up. Sorry, guys. And since you're all about Leviticus, you might want to start practicing it yourself by going strictly Kosher and throwing all your clothes away that aren't made out of just one fiber. What's that? Leviticus doesn't count anymore? Oh, that's just YOU. My bad. Didn't realize God excludes me from his love too. Hmmm. Wonder if he knows that too?
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

I think that sin goes beyond the 10 commandments. I don't think you are arguing with me that Christianity, Judiasm, and Islam (excluding certain sect of each of these) don't find homosexuality abhorrant and sinful.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

I think people within those religions find it sinful. But I'd also be willing to bet that there are people in those religions that engage in Homosexuality.The Christian God has said what sin is and it didn't even mention it.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: Yes

Absolutely, But many of people who find it sinful are people of High power...preists, rabbi, shaman, even the pope, etc. Who read parts of the bible, koran, etc. and interprets it to suit their own needs (i.e. run a congregation, get followers, group people, etc.)I personally believe religion to be nothing more than a superstition. Religion can not be proven nor disproven with the information we have at our disposal. So therefore, laws and social standards cannot be based on what is "sinful".
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: Yes

I would just love to see the quotes. How does the Koran condem same sex playuhs. The Hindus, Christians, etc.Do they say no to just sodomy, marriage or both? How do they define marriage? How do they define sodomy.Any religions have any colorfull euphemism. I mean it would be cool if Hindus said something like two lotus petals shall not touch to create heavenly bliss?C'mon clue me in.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

Leviticus 18:22"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This is the quote. But apparently it could be interpreted in multiple ways:-All homosexual behavior, by either men or women, or-All sexual behavior between two men, or-Only anal sex between two men, or-Only anal sex in a Pagan temple ritual, or-Sexual activity between two men in a woman's bedAlthough I think it sounds pretty clear. Below is a discussion site.
Debate: Should be homosexuality considered as a sin?
Side: No

(King James version) Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Leviticus 18:29 For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people. this is just one example of the bible shunning homosexuality, here is another:Romans 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:  Romans 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.  Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:  Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. While you are right, it never calls it a sin; I don't know what else you equate "abomination" to. The bible is certainly anti-gay and, unfortunately, so many people subscribe to it. The bible and other religious texts are a unfortunate blemish on our society.
Debate: Is homosexuality good for society?
Side: Yes, it is good

In no measurable way could we say that it is "good", but I find it good for the sake of chaos.You see, society likes to create rules. These rules will often not make much sense, but hey, it's morality, so who cares?Homosexuality is one of the many lifestyles that has challenged the tyranny of the moral majority. While for so many years the monotheistic religions have kept gays in their place, we finally find it that maybe these moral rules are doing more harm than good. To me, I find it great when the majority are challenged for something they've been doing for centuries. and now, we have a huge following going after those who don't tolerate homosexuality. What was once just seen as an immoral minority is all of a sudden seen as an abused and sympathetic minority.Chaos is winning. DOWN WITH ORDER :)
Debate: Is homosexuality good for society?
Side: Yes, it is good

I would prefer a rebuttal following a down vote... but what can I expect from stupid people?
Debate: Is homosexuality good for society?
Side: No, it is not good

This seems like a counterargument more than anything. Society is, in effect, just the coalescence of accepted morality, no? Without a moral code that everyone agrees with, society can't function. Therefore, something that undermines that moral code would be bad, not good, for society. Yes, change can make a society stronger, but it is also the only thing that can destroy it, so I wouldn't consider this a strong argument.
Debate: Is homosexuality good for society?
Side: Yes, it is good

Society is, in effect, just the coalescence of accepted morality, no?No, you're wrong. According to the OED, "society" refers to "he state or condition of living in association, company, or intercourse with others of the same species; the system or mode of life adopted by a body of individuals for the purpose of harmonious co-existence or for mutual benefit, defence, etc." This is vastly more complex than the adoption of an "accepted morality". Perhaps having an "accepted morality" might be part of adopting a "system or mode of life", but these terms are not synonyms.Therefore, something that undermines that moral code would be bad, not good, for society.Your argument is very weak at this point since this statement contains very ambiguous terms. What are you referring to when you say, "something"? How does that undermine the "moral code"? Moreover, what is the "moral code:? And is something that undermines the "moral code" necessarily bad?Yes, change can make a society stronger, but it is also the only thing that can destroy itAgain, you've used very ambiguous terms here. What do you mean by "change"? If there is no point of reference given in your statement, how can we tell what has changed? And are you sure that "change" is "the only thing that can destroy it"? If you are sure, then why don't you explain that?
Debate: Is homosexuality good for society?
Side: No, it is not good

-Actually, I'm looking at "harmonious co-existence". In order to have a harmonious co-existence, a society needs to have an accepted code of behavior. From the dual codes of law and social norm in America, to the heirarchy of alpha to omega in wolf packs, this is true of any society. Living a harmonious co-existence requires a level of accepted morality, because if there is not one, there is nothing to stop murder, rape, etc. To live and work for mutual benefit, people need to agree what is right and wrong in their society.-You're not really making a counterargument, just expressing confusion at definitions. Allow me to enlighten you. "Something" is a pretty standard word which is commonly used to present a hypothetical situation; therefore, I wasn't saying that anything in particular undermined the moral code, just that a hypothetical "something" that did would be bad for society. The moral code is the set of norms accepted by a society.To get to the second point in that statement, yes, something that undermines the moral code is bad for society. If there is not clarity in what is right and wrong, then there is nothing to stop people from doing anything. Murder, theft, child abandonment, wanton violence; the abhorrence of all of these are parts of the moral code which keep society functioning well and people questioning those rules is obviously not a good thing.-At this point, I begin to question your literacy. Change is a word meaning "to achieve variance from the established." The point of the statement was to say that anything, if it works in its current state, will continue to work in that state if all the givens remain the same. This is true of anything, societies included. It is only when an element of change, such as, for society, a shift in the moral code is introduced that things can go awry. I honestly did not believe that needed clarification.