Elitist and wrong

So.. my argument for homosexual Christian relationships makes it sound like that is the only type of "correct homosexuality".. eh.. see the previous post for more on that. I'm also one that's commited herself to no premarital sex. So.. yes, I'm insane. Oh my logic.. at the moment it escapes me.

So.. Christian couples better than non-Christian couples? Eh.. that's not logical. So I'd be arguing for homosexuality as a whole.. not just my own sexuality that is currently in conflict with my religion.

So.. tying this in with abstinence. No sex before marriage. Why? I think a deep romantic love can exist without sex, and I only want to share sex with the person I am going to spend the rest of my life with-- a person whom through community understanding and our own love and commitment to each other, we've publicly announced this commitment through a marriage ceremony. This, and religious reasons as well.

Er.. so this doesn't mean I don't want to have sex. I'm not an alien, immune to the natural desires of humankind. So.. the feelings are there, but I won't act on them. Could this also be the path to take with my homosexual feelings as well? It sounds ridiculous, but in comparison: abstinence when you want to have sex, sounds equally ridiculous. I can't act purely on my feelings, because I honour something above solely logic and solely passion. There is an eternal love and Goodness-Truth-Beauty which I have devoted my life to, and my actions must be (though are not always) centred on honouring that commitment.

Curious. However, the question is still, is it wrong? Bible/Church politics say: "almost definitely, yes"*.. does homosexuality not honour the Goodness-Truth-Beauty? Then really, what is love? What seperates homosexual and heterosexual love? Human nature is not the right answer (the argument for homosexuality being in-born or developed does not belong here). I don't believe in Original Sin. That's catholicism, and some sects of Christianity, but not my faith. The first step in what I'm talking about is a total commitment to God, and His Grace in forgiving us when we screw up (which, inevitably, we do). Things that would take us away from that, even if it's "human nature" is something that we have to grow out of in order to honour something higher. Granted: human beings are pretty awesome, but they're also pretty shitty.

Human nature should be argued elsewhere, not here. Especially if you are arguing for/against homosexuality. Take it somewhere else. Human nature hasn't been proven, please don't use it to try to explain ethics to me. Unless you really really want to open that can of worms.

So back to elitism.. Those who would devote themselves to the philosophical eternal entities (if that's right): Goodness, Truth, Beauty, devote themselves to God (as some would argue these are general characteristics of God, as well as God being Love).. (if that's right).. does that make them better than those who embrace the self and passion or solely logic? No. Maybe. I don't know. If it does, would that mean that the former must live above the latter? No.. at least not in the sense that they must part the crowd and remain the untouched superiors. We're all still human, all still mortal, all (or mostly) still with our feet together on the ground. Yet what, in embracing an eternal Love and Its nature, does this entail? How do you live that?

Servitude, and knowing that dropping your position to submission does not make you spiritually better than those who have not commited to the Truth. Goodness in this: not grumbling, a selfless service, not "look what I'm doing for you".
Truth? Beauty? I think I've gone way off track again.

Anyway.. my point is.. I'm not trying to be elitist. The argument below is not "Christian homosexuals only", it is homosexuality as a whole-- Godly or wholly wrong? A point in bringing up abstinence is that I believe that sex really should be shared only between [a married couple.. in a sincere whole love and respect for each other, and a deep commitment. Granted, a lot of people don't wait until marriage-- don't think that I assume we're all the 50s image. It works out for people, and it seems to work out a lot, and that's fine with me-- it's not my choice. My choice is to wait].. that sex the action is both physical and spiritual.. and needs to be taken into account, and into consideration in the sense of "feeling/wanting.. but not taking action". -- and in being spiritual, must also be answered in terms of "right/wrong"

"Little of permanent happiness can belong to anyone who lets their passions hold stronger than their virtue." Jane Austen
"We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality." -Albert Einstein

I feel like I jumped around in this one.. but that's how my mind works.