debate on sexual preferences

[aman_dig]

So for my critical thinking class at my college, we have to come up with a controversial topic for our argument which grade 35% for the subject. One thing lead to the other , I have to argue about sexuality preferences and to be specific is about homosexual. Obviously I took on the topic on why I don't think it's wrong since I am one and there is nothing wrong with me , but the boys on the other side look like they're going to chew me this Thursday. I hope I could find a good solid points for it by then so wish me luck guys

 

[ihno]

"critical thinking class"? Interesting. Would love to join that for an hour or two.

What are your arguments then? If you want to test your arguments, post them here.

 

[tonka]

It's been debated all over the internet for a decade, so the arguments are all out there.

The good thing about your side is...you're right!

If you have time, check out Andrew Sullivan's writing on the subject.

 

[Sinnerr]

Discussions on this topic are mostly not much factual. You will need a lot of patience and diplomacy, rather than arguments. - Thats the main point
In ideal world you wouldn't need to argue that it's ok to be gay cos no one would doubt about it. But we don't live in ideal world and people think it's not ok, mostly because they don't know any open gay and some who they know told them that it's not ok. So first what you will tell is probably that you're born this way and another guy is born this way too and you both are old enought and so why you couldnt kiss, hug, fuck, suck and love each other. And you're right. Lot of people agree with that, but homophobes don't. Arguing with them is almost impossible, cos they are irrational cos they mostly have latent homosexual crush - but you cannot be so open to tell it them cos they tend to be aggresive...

 

[ihno]

But isn't a "debating class" about "debating"? Where you get a topic like "Piece Noble Price for Lucca Rocco Magnotta - yes or no?" I've never been to a "debating class", maybe I should have.

So, aman_dig, let your argmuents come.

 

[tonka]

One good thing is that there is data. Data is great for debates.
Are gays mentally defective. Psychiatry says no.
Are children of gay couples messed up? Data says no.

On and on. Data says we are no more screwy than everybody else.

 

[bluefish22]

One good thing is that there is data. Data is great for debates.
Are gays mentally defective. Psychiatry says no.
Are children of gay couples messed up? Data says no.

On and on. Data says we are no more screwy than everybody else.

Well, since it is a critical-thinking class I figured I'd respond to one of your statements. Data doesn't say no when it comes to being mentally defective. People do. There is data to support that there exist neurological and physiological differences in homosexuals compared to their heterosexual peers (the obvious of which involve a number of stimuli-reaction arousal states) though currently these differences have come to be considered just that - differences. In the past, and in many parts of today's world, these differences simply are what constitute mental defectiveness.

Appealing to data in this way won't get us very far when confronted with our opponent. An honest exploration into what "defective" is would be a more promising and fruitful endeavor, I think.

p.s. Also, in a critical-thinking exercise it usually won't do to list off a bunch of supporting claims (psychology says this, modern medical practitioners say this, society says this...). They may be right or they might be wrong. It doesn't matter. The emphasis is on the argumentation. Can you provide a clear and sound argument to support your claims?

 

[Tjerk12]

I am not an addict of numbers. They can easily fool you. The answers can be influenced by the question and there is always the danger of socially desirable answers. I think it would be more interesting to discuss human history and learn from it. Our worldview is formed mainly by modern history, which is characterized by MONOTHEISM and large and rapid social change. Modern man seems proud of its high standards and values, but one may wonder whether this is justified.
In the beginning of our era even in the Catholic church gave polygamy and homosexuality no problem. In early paintings the black kings were as prominently displayed as the white.
It seems that our current problems have been formed in the middle ages. As if we live in a state of persistent confusion, in which we do not know what to do with these so-called social problems.
But there is hope. In the more open minded societies as the Scandinavians, Germany and The Netherlands homosexuality is not really an issue anymore. Not that all problems are over. There is still a minority that causes trouble on that matter.
For the next Gay Parade in The Netherlands the President of the National Soccer League (the KNVB), the coach of The National Team - Louis van Gaal - and several players of the National Team will be present on their own boat, to support acceptation of homosexuality in sports.
And let us not forget the position of women. In The Netherlands we have now a woman as Defense Minister. An absolute brake through!

 

[gorgik9]

Hello my friend!

You say that for your "critical thinking class" you have to "argue about sexuality preferences" and to be specific "about homosexual[ity]".

If this truly is to be a question of critical thinking, I think you should seriously demand another question!!! While "sexual preference" might be used in sexology textbooks, in everyday language and in society at large "sexual preference" is just a polite expression for bi/homosexuality = sexual deviation. While the glorious heterosexuality of course is - wham bam, thank you ma'am - normality itself ! So lets do some serious critical thinking and question the almighty heterosexuality itself!!!

If that's not possible, you should instead question if there really exists such a thing as the one and only homosexuality. The most famous sexologists of the 20th century, Alfred Kinsey, constructed a seven degree scale 0-6 from nothing but heterosexual experiences (Kinsey 0) to nothing but homosexual experiences (Kinsey 6). The big point is, that the Kinsey scale doesn't permit the homo/hetero-dichotomy.

 

[topdog]

gorgik9 has a good point. The topic, as you presented it, is not debatable. First, I haven't heard the term "sexual preference" used in years. It is so narrowly focused on having or anticipating sexual acts. There is so much more to human sexuality that that.

"Sexual Orientation" is the broader term, because it treats all sexual psychology (falling in love, partnering, establishing a family, breaking apart and finding new partners, sexual fantasies, sexual activities, sexual hangups and dysfunctions) as a part of the human experience.

Then you add on top of that the few unique characteristics that make male-male, male-female, and female-female couples different. However the underlying similarities vastly overwhelm the differences.

So, I think that there is more to this topic than you have shared so far. What is the specific statement that is being debated?

 

[gorgik9]

I'm absolutely agreeing with topdog - aman_dig's teachers at college got some serious explaining to do. Or they're not doing their proper job - and that's a bad thing...

 

[aman_dig]

Sorry for the late reply guys , I was overwhelmed with tests this weekend..Firstly I never thought this post has some encouraging replies (which I really appreciate) and secondly topdog I don't really have a say in this since I live in a country where homosexuality is still a taboo so bear with me that people surround me right now are quite bigot and bias where it come to homosexuality thus referring to our life as "preferences" and shockingly regardless to their religions (I have christian, muslim and budhist friends share the negative opinions toward gays and lesbian). Since my argument held postponed for tests (continue in two weeks) i know i have to be civil about this and show even the slightest chance where we are not wrong..Ooh plus since I'm doing this topic , there is a boy in my class approach to me and mention that he was proud and excited for my turn..which made my day

 

[trencherman]

It's been debated all over the internet for a decade, so

If you have time, check out Andrew Sullivan's writing on the subject.

Thank you for not linking.

Btw, there should be no debate about being gay and straight. There may be a debate about preferring hairy or smooth but it all boils down to taste where
there should not be any dispute either.

 

[topdog]

I still think that your debate topic has gotten lost in translation. If you can give the proposition, we may be able to point you towards specific data or resources to help you out.