Apparently you're of the opinion that consenting adults can never engage in perversion - you're tossing the dictionary definition of perversion, tossing the definition used for thousands of years and making up your own definition.
Scripter: I understand where you are headed with this semantic trickery but I don't buy your false argument. Yes, words have commonly accepted meanings. And if one applies that commonly-accepted meaning to a category of people, then obviously a conclusion is being made about an entire group.
Someone convicted of a crime (such as sexual abuse of children) has been found guilty of something that a dictionary would describe as "perversion". That criminal caused harm or injury to another human being and society exacted punishment.
By contrast, there is the separate matter of group defamation. Group defamation can occur when you characterize persons whom you DO NOT KNOW and whom have not caused harm or injury to anyone, and whom have not been convicted of any crime, and whom consensually engage in intimate acts in private --- characterize them in terms designed to evoke fear, hatred, disgust, and revulsion. History is full of examples where group defamation ultimately resulted in violence against persons perceived as "sub-human" and undeserving of respect or kindness or protection of law.
What you seem to be suggesting is that terminology first used centuries ago (and perhaps even applied differently) MUST continue to be APPLIED in exactly the same manner throughout all times and all circumstances. In short, history and knowledge and human experience are irrelevant to contemporary humans. We need only consult what was first decided 2000 or more years ago.
Shall we start invoking practices discussed in the Bible which we would never find acceptable today --- but, in your scheme of things --- we should be mindlessly implementing because, after all, that was THEIR definition of "moral" behavior?
You are being inconsistent in your logic and I'm pointing that out. While I can understand why you don't like it, that doesn't mean I'm doing anything other than pointing out your inconsistency.
Do you consider the following sex perversion: brother/brother, sister/sister, father/son, mother and 3 three sons, grandfather and 4 grand daughters?
You brought up the Bible - I'm staying on topic.
What do former homosexuals have to say on the matter?