Replies

It's true -- it was clear in a Judaean religious/cultural milieu that heterosexuality and fertility were the obvious goods. It was so obvious it didn't need to be constantly re-explained or re-negotiated.

As far as I know --- and somebody correct me if I'm wrong -- in Scripture there isn't a single instance of married, man-woman sex in the procreative form which is ever condemned, nor a single instance of sex in a non-procreative form, which is ever blessed.

So why do some Biblical-minded people support contracepted sex while drawing the line at homosexual sex?

Both contracepted sex and homosex treat fertility as a discarded option, a design flaw, a bug, not a feature.

I think that once you erode (via conraception) the implicit understanding that sex is connected to fertility and that that's a good thing, heterosexuality has been corrupted and homosexuality is the obvious next step.

If every act of sex produced a child you might have a point....you make sex an after the fact sin if each act is not blessed by God with a child per act...Abraham had sex with his wife at an age he reason it was impossible to conceive...was that a sin?....is sex after change of life for a women a sin

Does a man divorce a sterile wife because its a sin to be with her?...if so King Henry the 8 in fact had a point with the Church