(October 7, 2011 at 2:07 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(October 7, 2011 at 8:15 am)Epimethean Wrote: So, what is your actual point then, fr0do? How do you want to tie that to homosexuality? They have sex, so they are not defective-any more than someone who masturbates is.I'm just trying to sort this one out in my head before I move on to other questions.
We have sex because of the natural function to reproduce: The purpose of sexual enjoyment is rooted in the need for the species to proliferate.
Any sexual act which falls outside of the clear function of sex isn't following its natural function.
I'd agree that any non productive sex act is similar, if not identical. My point was that this is a basic moral objection to all of those acts.
So ANY sexual act that is not directly related to producing babies is immoral? be it hetro or homo it's against god?
So presumabably older couples who can no longer have babies because of simple biology are sinners destined for hell if they have sex of any description.
cool, I get it.
.
.
.
.
.
If you're not supposed to ride faster than your guardian angel can fly then mine had better get a bloody SR-71.