An interesting video I found on the subject

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/imycL_8fqJs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

My Conclusion

Conclusion

After several arguments I have come to the conclusion that it is rather difficult to argue the morality of homosexuality.  In every case, excluding radical religion, each argument is proven to not be sound at all.  The task of making a statement valid can be traced to simple word manipulation.  That being said I do not find Homosexuality, in any case, to be morally wrong.  I would however, like to state that I found that the average life expectancy of people engaged in homosexual relationships is significantly lower and many lesbian relationships evolve into abusive relationships.

 

Argument 5

Argument 5, Detrimental to society by way of litigations

Again I will state (H) as being the act of same-gender marriage.  If homosexuality continues to be accepted by state law the economic status of that state will fall.  Discrimination cases would cause an overwhelming amount of businesses being sued for the refusal of service due to personal or religious reasons.  I believe this to be true based on the media fueled fire recently unleashed on Chic-fil-A for simply taking a position in opposition of homosexuality.

Consider the following syllogism;

 

The legalization of (H) would cause litigation

Any act that institutes a means for litigation against businesses is wrong

If (H) provides means of litigation against business, then (H) is wrong

Unfortunately this valid statement is a rather weak case due to the already piling amount of litigations against businesses due to racial discrimination as well as gender discrimination.  If we deny (H) then we would have to also deny African Americans the right to be black.  Another reason this premise is false is that most businesses are aware of their own rights and can also take the proper legal steps required to honestly defend themselves against most allegations, thus making this argument not sound.

Argument 4

Argument 4 Imposes itself on Educational Systems/Syllogism

Once a state legalizes (H), that is the act of same-sex marriage, teachers are forced to enlighten students on the subject which I believe to be wrong because many parents would prefer explain the subject themselves, or in some cases parents would prefer their child not know about (H) all together for religious/personal reasons.

(H) is imposing on society

Any act or state of being that is being imposed on society is wrong.

If (H) is being imposed on society, then clearly (H) is wrong.

 

The problem with this logically valid argument is that many ideas and acts are imposed on society, but we do not consider them morally wrong.  There are many murders in America each year, and though some may want to educate others in a private manner, it is important that we teach our children that acts such as this are inexcusable, and that there are mandatory consequences for committing such acts. This is definitely not a sound argument.

Argument 3

Argument 3 Can leave a child without mother/father/Syllogism

Homosexuality(H), in this case being the act of same-sex marriage, is wrong because it leaves some children without a father or mother.  This act is wrong because children may not get the proper upbringing, which means a son will have no father to teach him how to be a man and visa versa for a daughter.  Consider this syllogism

(H) denies children a mother or father

Any act that denies a child a mother or father is wrong.

If (H) denies a child a mother or father then it is wrong.

Therefore, (H) is wrong

Though logically stated, this premise is false because not all people who marry ever have children.  Given this information some homosexual relationships do not even consider children.  Another counter argument would be that we do not restrict the rights of single parent homes so how could we say that same-sex parental guidance is wrong?

Argument 2, Procreation/Modes Ponens Method

For the sake of this argument we will define homosexuality(H) as sexual intercourse with the same-sex/gender.  That being said, homosexuality is wrong because it does not contribute to reproduction.  I believe this to be true because without adequate reproduction the human race would die. Consider this argument;

Any sexual act that does not lead to reproduction is wrong

(H) is a sexual act that does not lead to reproduction

Hence, (H) is wrong.

Unfortunately, this is not a sound argument due to the fact that there are many heterosexual couples who engage in intercourse while participating in contraception.  Does this make their act of sexual intercourse wrong? The answer is not in today’s society.  There are also cases of some women being infertile. Does this too mean that they cannot enjoy the benefits of being married?

 

Argument 1 STDs/Modes Ponens Method

Many would agree that homosexuality (H), that is the act of being sexually involved with the same gender, is wrong.  I have reason to believe that such is true because the act (H) contributes towards the spread of STDs.  Consider the following:

All acts that spread STDs are wrong

(H) spreads STDs

Therefore, (H) is wrong.

Using the method of Modus Ponens this is a valid statement.  However, a counter example may be given as such; Well (H) can spread STDs but that doesn’t necessarily mean it always does.  Another objection would be that heterosexual sex also spreads STDs, but we don’t consider this wrong because without this type of sexual behavior most of us would not have been born and married couples would not be able to be as affectionate. Consider this counter example;

All acts that spread STDs are wrong

The act of reproducing spreads STDs

Therefore, it is wrong to reproduce

When put in these words the above premise now seems a little silly.