It’s a biological argument. Sexual intercourse has a very specific set definition. Same as sexual reproduction. The bastardized verbiage of sex has lead to nonsensical terminology like sexual orientation, anal sex, oral sex, etc all of which are completely nonsensical when you use sex in its scientific purpose which is for intercourse/ copulation and reproduction. “Gay sex” is more akin to masturbation using other people than anything even remotely close to sexual reproduction.
'Definition' is fairly arbitrary. The best defense of your point of view is the Aristotelean argument that anything that does not satisfy the final cause (goal) of sex, which is reproduction, cannot be classified as sex.
It’s more so about using the Socratic method to make arguments more succinct, which AoV usually enjoys doing through devil advocacy and alternative explanations. Nothing wrong with it as it generally leads to a better structured understanding/ argument overall even if he gets sophistic at times.
Just out of curiosity, are you Catholic?
Ew
Because what you said is a very Catholic point of view, though not exclusively so. It has its origins in Thomas Aquinas, and through him Aristotle.
It’s a biological argument. Sexual intercourse has a very specific set definition. Same as sexual reproduction. The bastardized verbiage of sex has lead to nonsensical terminology like sexual orientation, anal sex, oral sex, etc all of which are completely nonsensical when you use sex in its scientific purpose which is for intercourse/ copulation and reproduction. “Gay sex” is more akin to masturbation using other people than anything even remotely close to sexual reproduction.
'Definition' is fairly arbitrary. The best defense of your point of view is the Aristotelean argument that anything that does not satisfy the final cause (goal) of sex, which is reproduction, cannot be classified as sex.
I don't know what's gayer, reaching this hard for the weakest word-game own possible, or collectively masturbating about how "clever" it is.
Well if you're going to counter the likes of Aristotle, you could offer a definition of sex of your own.
It’s more so about using the Socratic method to make arguments more succinct, which AoV usually enjoys doing through devil advocacy and alternative explanations. Nothing wrong with it as it generally leads to a better structured understanding/ argument overall even if he gets sophistic at times.
I'm not saying he's wrong. Just explaining why this is a Catholic belief.
Also why they opose birth control, because it negates the final cause of sex.