Sabio said:
You have not proved that doing "what are bodies weren't designed to do" is moral.
No, I haven't. Nor did I ever intend to prove that, nor do I believe it to be true. Let's review:
1) You suggested that homosexual sex is wrong because the body is not "designed" for it
2) IF the "design" of the body is a valid criterion for judging whether an activity is right or wrong, THEN all activities which we are not "designed" for should be wrong.
3) Assuming that we are not "designed" to do the splits or do many other activities which ballerinas and athletes enjoy and....
4) ....assuming that doing the splits or engaging in other enjoyable athletic activities are not wrong.....
5) THEN not all activities that we are not "designed" for are wrong. THEREFORE
6) Whether or not we are "designed" to do something is NOT a valid criterion for judging whether or not an activity is wrong.
Every step of the above is pure logic, except #3 and #4, which are assumptions. Do you agree with the assumptions made in #3 and #4?
Sabio said:
Do you and your girl compliment each other? Do you live in harmony with one another? Are you a good fit?
Yes. I also know gay couples who compliment each other, who live in harmony with one another, and who are a good fit. So?
Sabio said:
Then you know what the definitions mean, they are defining terms not circular.
I know what the definitions mean, I just don't see anything "inharmonious" or "uncomplimentary" about homosexual couples.
Scott1 said:
you don't believe in God=super ... but let those of us who do carry on a conversation without this kinda stuff.... please?
Never! I won't go down without a fight...once I get started on something, I just keep-- hey, The Simpsons are on!