(June 29, 2015 at 5:25 pm)Anima Wrote: As stated, the purpose of a thing should be argued according to its teleological end and not simply to other functions of it. While I would agree procreation may be used for other purposes than procreation such as pleasure, torture, authoritative dominion, etcetera... We would be gravely mistaken in not recognizing the teleological purpose of sex is procreation (as it is the only means by which natural procreation is achieved).
As you may observe in my post I did not say anything about gays. I simply said those who do not serve at least a procreative purpose if not a productive purpose. In which case gays or the infertile may not be summarily eliminate due to their productive purpose. But this is not to say they have a procreative purpose to that surves society which would warrant the need to recognize their unions on par with those who may serve a procreative purpose for our society.
They're people. Their relationship deserves to be equally as valid as that of other people.
So infertile straight couples shouldn't be allowed to marry, yes?
You didn't address what I said. What is the problem with same sex relationships? Procreation, slippery slope and religion aside.
