(August 10, 2015 at 3:57 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(August 10, 2015 at 3:46 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Why isn't an instance of creating life without harming anyone not sacred if life is sacred?
And why is heterosexual married sex sacred, and all the rest immoral?
Because we believe the means of doing it was not.
Because we believe sex is sacred, period. And it is sacred because it is the means by which new human life is created, and also by which a union is consummated. It is because it is sacred that it should remain in the context of a husband and wife who love each other and are committed to each other for life.
You know this gives me an idea, if the act of producing life itself is what makes sex sacred in your eyes then what about when the act is committed between a husband and wife without the intention of reproduction? Would that not also be a violation of the sanctity of sex? If not, this would bring into question just what IS the basis for violating the sanctity of sex. If two straight people can have sex without the intention or perhaps the capability of reproduction and not have it be unholy, why would two people of the same gender who can't procreate through natural means be any less capable of getting jiggy with it and avoid committing blasphemy all the same?
I realize you don't intend to morally proselytize to anybody that disagrees with you and if gays want to cozy up to each other behind closed doors, it's no skin off your back, you're just sharing your personal beliefs on how you feel about sex and marriage. This is just some food for thought (whether you wish for it to be a potato, sandwich, or something else I leave to you).
freedomfromfallacy » I'm weighing my tears to see if the happy ones weigh the same as the sad ones.