Let's see, you said that the litmus test of legislation is whether it has an impact on a third party. No, I said it's a privacy issue because it doesn't involve a third party, outside your bedroom. If it doesn't involve me or anyone else outside your bedroom, what goes on inside your bedroom between consenting adults is your personal, private business.
Once we clear up your misunderstanding of what I actually said, the rest of your post pretty much falls apart on its own.
You seem to claim that what takes place between two adults in the privacy of their home cannot be reached by state action. I have shown in previous posts that the right of privacy alone is not enough to preclude state action because we can charge people meeting in the privacy of their home with conspiracy. The right of the government to prosecute for conspiracy transcends the right of privacy. Therefore, the right to privacy is not absolute. The only question is whether the action taken by the state is reasonable or designed to protect a compelling or legitimate state interest.
Since the right of privacy is not absolute and can be constrained by a legitimate interest, your argument pretty much falls apart. Why do sexual acts in and of themselves deserve special protection unless someone has a constitutional right to engage in anal intercourse?