Quote:
Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
Chew on this for a second before you reply:
Why are you able to define a victim in incest but not in homosexuality? You have decided (correctly) that adults should not have sex with children and that the child (even if they swear they enjoyed the sex and asked for it) is a victim. You have drawn a moral line there. It doesn't matter whether the child and adult come forward and announce on national TV that they love each other and want to continue in the relationship, it is still wrong. You draw a moral line at incest but choose to make an exception for homosexuality. I choose to view all sexual deviations as wrong.
The only difference is where you draw the line.
|
No it isn't. The difference is that in the case of an adult-child sexual act, the child does not have informed consent. We as a society have decided that minors are not capable of making a decision of that gravity.
A gay relationship between two consenting adults is an entirely different situation. There is no victim in the relationship.
And you choose to label it as a "sexual deviation." I think it is just different. I don't make a moral judgement on it. You and your religion does. And note that not all Christian religions are quite so harsh on gays.