But here's the thing. The statement from you that drew me in was "Limiting sex is not bad."
There it is, declarative and unqualified. You assume the duty of defending it as stated. No revisions, qualifications, circumscriptions. Don't nudge the goalposts when you think we're not looking. I was hoping for something like a debate by the rules of reason. You've established the premise, and i have been questioning it. You can't just change what you're saying. you have to prevail by the rules of debate, or you are duty-bound to expressly and formally retract, yes, to declare that you weren't right.
So let's have at it then. I challenge your bold claim, and ask that you back it up with an acceptable source, one not drawing at its core upon "revealed truth", which i hold to be neither. cn