Yesterday, I quoted a twit priest who mentioned the "authentic truth
about human sexuality". So, what kind of sex does the church consider
"authentic"?
I mean, think about it. What type of sex gets the church's approval? They seem to be fanboys of the sex that occurs between male husband and female wife in a marriage -- as long as the couple avoids all thefun sinful positions while doing the deed. This kind of sex is not only great, it's holy!
And, judging by their actions rather than their words, we must infer that the church has no problem with the sex that priests force on children. If memory serves me correctly, it wasn't the priests, bishops and popes who railed against this common practice. It was outsiders who were horrified by priests raping kids, and brought the abuse to the attention of the media. So I guess the church is fine with that kind of sex, too. It must be "authentic".
The characteristic that these two instances of "authentic" sex share is that the sex is viewed (by priests) as "forced". After all, no "good woman" enjoys marital sex. The husband forces it on the wife and it's her duty to comply with his illustrious, husbandly wishes. No fun, no foul. (And never you mind if the men enjoy it; that's what men do: they enjoy. It's their god-given right as menfolk!)
But in a gay marriage, neither partner is forced to have sex with a more powerful partner. The power issue is very important. If a man doesn't get to lord it over a less powerful creature, it's not god-approved.
Gay marriage, by definition, involves equality. And in the eyes of the church, people who are equal can't have "authentic" sex. Only the sex a man forces on his wife (or a priest forces on a child) is godly, good and above all else, authentic. If neither partner honors god by forcing sex on the other, how can the relationship be holy? Given these parameters, gay marriage will always be a sham. So say the priests.
I think this idea has wings. It's all about the forcing. What do you think? Does this argument ring true for you?
I mean, think about it. What type of sex gets the church's approval? They seem to be fanboys of the sex that occurs between male husband and female wife in a marriage -- as long as the couple avoids all the
And, judging by their actions rather than their words, we must infer that the church has no problem with the sex that priests force on children. If memory serves me correctly, it wasn't the priests, bishops and popes who railed against this common practice. It was outsiders who were horrified by priests raping kids, and brought the abuse to the attention of the media. So I guess the church is fine with that kind of sex, too. It must be "authentic".
The characteristic that these two instances of "authentic" sex share is that the sex is viewed (by priests) as "forced". After all, no "good woman" enjoys marital sex. The husband forces it on the wife and it's her duty to comply with his illustrious, husbandly wishes. No fun, no foul. (And never you mind if the men enjoy it; that's what men do: they enjoy. It's their god-given right as menfolk!)
But in a gay marriage, neither partner is forced to have sex with a more powerful partner. The power issue is very important. If a man doesn't get to lord it over a less powerful creature, it's not god-approved.
Gay marriage, by definition, involves equality. And in the eyes of the church, people who are equal can't have "authentic" sex. Only the sex a man forces on his wife (or a priest forces on a child) is godly, good and above all else, authentic. If neither partner honors god by forcing sex on the other, how can the relationship be holy? Given these parameters, gay marriage will always be a sham. So say the priests.
I think this idea has wings. It's all about the forcing. What do you think? Does this argument ring true for you?
