Originally Posted by
SkStu
Firstly, I want to make it clear that I have no problems at all with homosexuality, support their rights and so on. However, from the perspective that sex is for the purposes of procreation, gay sex is an unnatural act (whether it's humans, monkeys or dolphins).
Who has prefigured that the sole purpose of sex is procreation? Or that the purpose of anything is anything? How do you decide or define an exclusive purpose for something? Existence precedes essence, thereby leaving us free to decide or formulate our own personal essence. If someone wishes to engage in sexual intercourse solely for fun, that doesn't render their behaviour unnatural. Not all heterosexual sex is performed with procreation in mind either anyway, nor do we spend every minute of every living day engaging in sexual intercourse because we might feel that our human purpose is to procreate or whatever. Emotional bonding can be an entirely valid purpose to intercourse too, no? Besides, the purpose of gay sex, by its nature, obviously isn't procreation. It doesn't have to be compared to or judged against the perceived standard of heterosexual intercourse. Can't it be defined or viewed on its own terms?
"Actually, there is no such thing as a homosexual person, any more than there is such a thing as a heterosexual person. The words are adjectives describing sexual acts, not people. The sexual acts are entirely normal; if they were not, no one would perform them." - Gore Vidal.
Bookmarks