Replies

I am afraid your position is logically inconsistent. Your first statement, “there is no sound natural argument against sodomy” is known in the field of logic as a “gratuitous assertion.” It is logically defeated by a “gratuitous denial:” “Yes, there is a sound natural argument against sodomy.” (You concede this position in your last statement.)

Unless you can offer indisputable facts and an irrefutable logic chain, your gratuitous assertions are mere expressions of opinion. As opinions are similar to certain portions of anatomy in that everyone, including sodomists, has one, yours is no more valuable nor meaningful than anyone else’s.

Your assertion “the reproduction and health arguments are hypocritical” is equally gratuitous as well as inaccurate. The reproduction and health arguments were/are offered sincerely and are based in indisputable facts cited in the presentation of these arguments. The term “hypocritical” means showing the characteristics of hypocrisy.

hy·poc·ri·sy
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

I am not aware of “the overpopulation argument” you are citing as being in favor of sodomy. Nonetheless, I will assume that you are inferring that as sodomists practicing that behavior exclusively do not reproduce, that, therefore, sodomy contributes to a lower population growth. This position is a logically consistent argument. However, your assertion as to its relative strength compared to other arguments is another gratuitous assertion.

Please present the facts and logic chain on which you base your assertions. Otherwise, it would be intellectually appropriate for you to abandon these assertions.