Debate: Should we criminalize homosexuality?
conservapedia is ridiculous
I believe homosexuals are equals. I am a top contributor of conservapedia and condemn all of my views I am extremely sorry to those whom I have mislead
In order to save our economy, we must criminalize homosexuality. Punishing them by death is a bit too extreme, as we Americans need to show that we are more moral than those who punish homosexuality through death. Instead, I suggest we deport them any communist/socialist state (Cuba, Venezuela, China, and North Korea). These countries are definitely more tolerant towards their gay population since there is never any communist state that criminalizes homosexuality. Or maybe we should send the entire gay population in America to Japan. Since many anime portray homosexuals in a more positive light and Japan happens to be the gay friendliest country in the world, we deport homosexuals there instead.--JacobMS 23:42, 5 July 2011 (EDT)
- I am afraid to say that unfortunately JacobMS, you seem to not understand the difference between correlation and causation. --DamianJohn 01:22, 6 July 2011 (EDT)
- Homosexuality wasn't legalised until well into the 1970s in Britain, the empire was crumbling well before then TonyB 21:48, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
Christianity clearly prohibits homosexuality, and since America is a CHRISTIAN country, we need to outlaw homosexuality to protect the country from sin. ---DennisR 07:32, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
- According to the Treaty of Tripoli of 1796, America is not a Christian nation. See: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html. And I quote: "Art. 11. The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;" From the founding fathers themselves, practically. John Adams was president at the time and proudly signed and announced it, and it, along with the rest of the treaty of course, was unanimously agreed upon by the senate. I needed to point that out. --NSmyth 19:28, 28 August, 2011 (EDT)
Yes. After Roe v. Wade, Lawrence v. Texas is the worst Supreme Court Decision in the history of the United States. It needs to be overturned and a federal anti-Homosexuality law passed. --OliviaB 17:02, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
Yes. Please see: Homosexuality and murders, Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence and Homosexuality and health. When one looks at the homosexuality and health article, it is really not that surprising that Indian lady Christian dancers are far more graceful than the obesity infested lesbian population.  :) Conservative 17:18, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
- There's also Mental Health and Homosexuality and Gay Bowel Syndrome --OliviaB 17:28, 28 August 2011 (EDT)
- I believe homosexuals are causing our economy to decline. Just look at India, a country that barely tolerates homosexuality, and it's GDP is steadily increasing and becoming an economic. Many other countries like Portugal, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, and Spain are suffering economically and they have either legalized same-sex marriage or have more liberal "gay rights." And many empires have collapsed due to the acceptance of homosexuality (Roman Empire, Mongol Empire, and the British Empire).
- I believe white people are causing our economy to decline. Just look at India, a country that doesn't have many white people, and it's GDP is steadily increasing and becoming an economic. Many other countries like Portugal, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, and Spain are suffering economically and they have either legalized being white or have more liberal "white folks." And many empires have collapsed due to the acceptance of white people (Every place colonized by Spain and England before 1900).
- I think you're onto something. SEdwin 01:55, 4 June 2012 (EDT)
The last thing we need in this country are more liberal, nanny state policies like this. The only thing criminalization of homosexuality would accomplish is more spending on law enforcement and increased governmental control of our lives. There would also be no way to enforce it, since making love in the street is already illegal, and homosexuals could just claim public displays of affection as political statements protected by the first amendment, which would clog our court systems even worse than they already are. There is no objective way to prove homosexuality outside the bedroom, so that throws a giant wrench into any possibility of enforcement.
Government control is a slippery slope. It starts with the criminalization of deviant sexual practices, and before you know it, the government is controlling who breeds with who and when. Homosexuality may be sinful and immoral, but it is the lesser of two evils. FCapra 00:19, 6 July 2011 (EDT)
Technically, Homosexuality is not in major violation of the majority of the country's morals, and so there's not reason to criminalize it. What happens in the bedrooms of a loving, consensual couple should not be of any concern to anyone else. Geosurgeon 16:19 PM August 28, 2011 (EDT)
No. Even if I did agree that homosexuality is wrong(which I don't), I don't think it could make it through the house or senate. Evidence from both sides is way too shaky, and the religious motive behind it would be dangerously close to being unconstitutional. It would also bring up many comparisons to Nazi Germany, where they criminalized homosexuality, by punishment of death, and while I'm fully aware that even if such legislation was to be written up, it wouldn't be nearly as terrible as Nazi Germany, the comparison would stick the moment it became public. Furthermore, the amount of money such legislation would cost(sinking money into already overzealous law enforcement, and the prison system for a completely ridiculous piece of legislation would be a terrible idea no matter how you look at it) in the end would be enormous and a terribly unnecessary and unaffordable burden on America and Americans in today's economic climate. NSmyth 19:37 28 August, 2011 (EDT)
No. We should prevent homosexual marriage, but while America was founded a Christian nation (see William Penn), it was founded on the understanding that other views should be allowed to coexist. As Thomas Jefferson said in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom,
|“|| "Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free;
That all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do, That the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time... That to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own;"
Jefferson believed that while government should imitate the style of the Bible, God did not force others to believe through coercion, and neither should we. So long as their lifestyles don't affect the rights of others to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, they should be allowed to live as they please. Marriage should not be allowed because it affects the public sphere but what they do in the privacy of their own homes ought to be their business.
If you look at what the Bible says, it says we can't justly judge others according to the Mosaic Law because by it, we ourselves are guilty. Only God can judge by such a Law, because we ourselves are all guilty of death before God, and cannot expect God to forgive us if we can't forgive others. We cannot cast the first stone without being sinless ourselves.
|“|| Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Romans 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
Romans 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Matthew 6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. 14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: 15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Homosexuality is just one of a number of sexual sins that include divorce, adultery, and lusting after the wives of others in one's heart. All are guilty of death before God, and cannot cast the first stone if not sinless themselves. Those who judge others according to the Law will not be forgiven by God their own guilt; and all are guilty. --Jzy 02:45, 4 June 2012 (EDT)
Although I do not approve of homosexuality, I believe criminalizing it won't work in practice. It will lead to unnecessary spending, and if the offenders are imprisoned they could still perform homosexual acts in prison. A better way to reduce the extent of homosexuality is by teaching its dangers to our children (See homosexuality and health), and show just how magnificent it is to be attracted to the opposite sex. That way the future generations will have little if any awareness of homosexuality. We can also act against the root causes of homosexuality (e.g. the liberal media, sex education) and without these homosexuality will become even rarer. C12Elliot
Absolutely not. It is a government intrusion into private life. The founders believed in personal freedom; our country was based on those freedoms. If it were to be criminalized, it would have to be a constitutional amendment, due to Lawrence vs. Texas.-Alpine
I think a top notch question that you all to ask yourselves is? If the bible teaches acceptance, then why do you all see gays as not even people? Please provide an actual answer to this question without trialing off onto something totally unrelated please.
I need to also say, like it or not that America isn't completely cristian, we aren't in the 19th century anymore, America is completely multicultural with many different races, religions and sexualities. I mean we have a black president now, get with the times. America is no longer a nation just for white Christian people that stick to the bible like super glue. I can't believe I read a suggestion to deport all homosexuals, if you wanted to deport all people that disagreed with your conservative views you wouldn't have a very big nation would you? Of course, when someone on conservapedia prevents an argument you can't rebut you just block them as a troll right? Well in this case that would only serve to prove my point, rather than see someone actually debate with me on this like a real man will you just leave the judgement up to your "god" to do? He made me this way if he hates it so much, why create gay people to begin with? --ZacB 22:07, 23 February 2013 (EST)
- Wow, so many distortions in just two paragraphs. Nobody here hates gay people, it's just that we don't accept that kind of lifestyle. I find your insinuations that conservatives are racist somewhat bizarre, as it's always been the Democrats who were supportive of segregation.
- The diversity of "sexualities" is one of the major problems of the modern western world. Once homosexuality is fully legitimized than next we will say that incest is OK, followed by pedophilia, bestiality and whatever sexual acts man's perverted mind can think of. While none of us hate homosexuals, we realize that their behavior poses a threat both to their lives and to the lives of others. I've seen on your user page that you identify yourself as a homosexual. If you'll skim through this website you'll find out that this lifestyle can only leads to tears and misery. I hope you'll get help as soon possible, I'm really worried about your physical and mental health.
- Anyway, in regards to question of this debate, I think that homosexuality should be criminalized, but first time offenders should be able to get lenient sentences so long as they are willing to receive treatment. - Markman 22:26, 23 February 2013 (EST)
- "Once homosexuality is fully legitimized than next we will say that incest is OK, followed by pedophilia, bestiality and whatever sexual acts man's perverted mind can think of." That's an example of one of the oldest and stalest fallacies in the book (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/slipslop.html) and as such not helpful to the debate. (By the way, the fallacy is very easy to produce. Here's one of mine: "Once homosexuality is fully criminalized, then next we will say that atheism should be criminalized as well, and not going to church on Sunday, and masturbation and whatever acts conservatives abhor").
- If some homosexuals do happen to lead an unhappy life, I think it's mostly because vocal parts of society don't accept them or even (like Markman) are eager to criminalize them. However, criminalizing homosexuality would constitute a government intrusion into the private life of its citizens, which runs counter to the very freedoms America was based on. Onestone 08:37, 24 February 2013 (EST)
- The fact that legitimization of homosexuality will eventually lead to the legitimization of incest is not a slippery slope fallacy but a simple use of logic. If we say that it's OK for two men to have sex each other so long as it's consensual, why not say that it's OK for a brother and a sister or mother and her son to have sex with each other so long as it's consensual?
- And anyway the founding fathers never intended to have a right for sodomy. Thomas Jefferson advocated for castration as a punishment for sodomy, which just to clarify is not something I or anyone else on this website advocates (not even the parodist who started this debate).
- Finally, homosexuals live a miserable life not due to oppression, but due to the fact that their behavior is immoral and unhealthy. There's ample of evidence on this website regarding that. - Markman 09:01, 24 February 2013 (EST)
- It's still a slippery slope fallacy, Markman. If your example is inherently logical, then the next statement is just as logical: "If we adopt the logic that it's OK for a man and a woman to have sex with each other so long as it's consensual, why not say that it's OK for a brother and a sister or mother and her son to have sex so long as it's consensual?" Or: "If we adopt the logic that is okay to criminalize homosexuality, why not say that it's okay to punish homosexual acts with the death penalty?" Using that kind of logic everything can be "proven".
- You are right that Jefferson's proposal was not exactly gay friendly, but it should be added that he intended to liberalize the sodomy laws in Virginia at that time, which prescribed death as the maximum penalty for the crime of sodomy.
- Finally, if homosexuals happen to lead a miserable life, it is mostly due to to the fact that they are oppressed and not accepted by people who think they have an immoral and unhealthy lifestyle. The information on this website doesn't really qualify as evidence. Onestone 10:32, 24 February 2013 (EST)
- Look, homosexuality from the traditional notion of how sexual relations should be conducted - between a married man and woman for the purpose of procreation. If one deviation can be justified under the excuse of consent, than all deviations can be justified. You cannot be a conservative and condemn pornography, prostitution, premarital sex, but of all of a sudden make an exception for sodomy.
- I'm glad that you concede - although only implicitly, it would seem - that the founding fathers never thought that people had a right for sodomy. Anyway, in regards to the mental and physical health problems that accompany homosexuality, see: Homosexuality and murders, Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence, Homosexuality and health, Mental Health and Homosexuality, Homosexuality and alcoholism, Sexual abuse being a contributing factor for homosexuality, Homosexuality and Illegal Drug Use, Gay violence, Lesbianism and obesity. All show that the source of homosexual misery is the lifestyle itself. - Markman 00:21, 25 February 2013 (EST)
- "If one deviation can be justified under the excuse of consent, [then] all deviations can be justified." You are still sliding away on the slippery slope, Markman. Anyway, in a truly free society an adult has the liberty to engage in any consensual activity with another adult as long as they don't harm anyone else. Societies where government prohibits gay or non-married couples from having sex are ipso facto not free, as they intrude on the lives of their citizens. Incidentally, if sexual relations should only be conducted between a married man and woman for the purpose of procreation, how about sterile married couples? Would their sexual activity also be a "deviation"?
No. Just help if they ask for it. Cases that are product of vice should be pointed. Education is important to prevent it in young people. Same sex marriage is wrong in my opinion. --Joaquín Martínez 10:56, 24 February 2013 (EST)