JASKN Posted July 15, 2010 Report Share Posted July 15, 2010 Um, and? That's like saying "those who argue for atheism simply haven't tried the other side! the people on the other side would argue that God *can* and *does* exist!" And, so what? Lots of people can argue lots of things; doesn't make them right just because they can. It's not like that at all, actually. The religious have no validity to their argument - easily provable - whereas those who argue sex can also "properly" involve values which aren't a person's "highest" do have validity to their arguments. I don't see you even attempting to prove otherwise; you, like everyone else, are just making assertions. I say, "Look at all the people clearly enjoying themselves on varying levels while having sex with each other. Clearly, sex involves not only 'high' values, but varying values." You say, "They aren't enjoying themselves. Sex is only proper when it involves highest values." What is highest, what is your standard for proper? If it includes enjoyment, how are you to go about deciding who is and isn't having this or that level of enjoyment? Then, how will you determine a person's value "highness" for him? Really, your type of argument makes no sense to me. The way I see it, this argument is just ignoring blatant evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.