Corrections of content.
I apologize for mentioning Aristotle. I tend to get the three main philosophers confused. It was Plato who wrote that "Homosexuality is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." I apologize for my confusion. However, true, Alexander was not entirely homosexual. Nor were any Greeks. Nor were any of them Heterosexual. They simply had no concept of there being any difference. He did have male lovers. As did so many upstanding Greeks. This is what you would call homosexual behavior. Young Spartan recruits were paired off with older Veterans. It was assumed that homosexual relationships would develop. Patroclos and Achilles were clearly in love. A special military unit, the sacred band, was set up in Thebes expressly for homosexual couples. It was their elite corps. They were front, left for a reason (after the Thebans rearranged their lines (normally, they would be front, right)). This is clear-cut approval, acceptance, and promotion of homosexual behavior by a culture, is it not? There is no Greek or Latin word for "Homosexual." There is a reason for this: they didn't see any differentiation. It was accepted. Yes, in Athens, the passive partner was considered effeminate and worthy of disdain, but only for his submitting, not for it being a homosexual act. Not so of the active partner. This was acceptable. To say that homosexual behavior was disapproved of in Classical Greece is simply foolish. I would very much like for you to go on with your moot arguments in fact. Also, I would like you to admit that your front page paraphrase is, at the very least, misleading. I don't advocate free sex and disregard for marriage. I advocate marriage between loving companions. These can be of the same sex. Are you going to say that love cannot exist between people of the same sex? I really don't know where you came up with the adultery part of your argument, anyway, since I didn't seem to reference that, and so I have no idea where you're going with that. Finally, you didn't respond to my question as to whether or not, without any knowledge of homosexuality being a sin, you would despise it. Nor did you respond to my argument about homosexual relations in the animal kingdom. You didn't seem to respond to who homosexuality hurts out of a Christian context, either. These were a few of my finer points. Arguing over my poor knowledge of which philosopher said what doesn't get anything accomplished.