People think it is hyperbole or insulting when I say that the goal of the sex positive agenda (which uses the homosexual agenda as a battering ram to society’s laws and mores) is to end ALL moral judgments over ALL sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of parter(s). And our tax dollars fund this agenda, whether it is through SIECUS, public universities, or publicly funded hospitals and the like.
"I'm not saying this is an absolute but in a way, if you’re not having kids – who gives a damn?" --- says Cassavetes.
In a way --- he's right. But maybe not in the way he thinks.
He's 'right' because as soon as you split procreation away from sex, you've shriveled its meaning. It's disabled. It's shrunken. It's small.
The commitment of sexual intimacy itself, still intact, still procreative, is sacred. It means:
"I'm no longer mine but yours. You're no longer yours, but mine. We belong to the children who may come, and to the 10,000 generations before us and after us, and to God with whose creative powers we now cooperate. His are the times and ages: To Him be glory and dominion, through all ages of eternity. Amen."
You didn't think of it that way? Maybe, like most of us, it took you awhile. But that's what it is.
Split off the procreative significance, and what's left? Insignificance.
"I'm, uh, in love. I guess. Or I was."
"Whatever."
"Meh."
Or in Nick Cassavetes' words, "Who gives a damn?"