I thought I would share some observations I have made, and find useful.
It seems clear to me scripture says sodomy between two men and men and animals is abominable behavior.
I don't recall any mention of what God might think of a man sodomizing his wife, which could amount to no more than birth control between loving, married, heterosexual partners.
However, if children are fruit unto the Lord, then birth control itself is an insult, denying God's expressed desire and betraying a lack of faith that He will provide large, godly families the necessary support.
It would then stand to reason that God would approve birth control for the ungodly, to minimize their numbers.
If we look to the destruction of Sodom, it is not difficult to see sexual assault had become customary for some male residents of the city and was widely known.
When a society allows sexual assault to become a lifestyle option for its members, I think it is safe to assume the corruption goes much deeper than we need to know.
The story tells us there was not one righteous man in the city.
This is correctly, the fear of believers today.
We have become many nations of rapidly receding righteousness, producing little good fruit and worthy of destruction.
For social comfort alone, we should encourage any fundamentalism that truly increases the proportion of the righteous among us.
That is, we want to do no less than balance the sin and we have been falling behind in that battle.
I don't recall any prohibitions against lesbianism in scripture and in the modern West we see that homosexuals often choose family life that effectively argues against any desire to create a new Sodom.
Personally, I would prefer loving homosexual parents to abusive, negligent, heterosexual parents, against whom we have too few prohibitions.
The scriptural command to train up a child in the way he should go, is transgressed often enough perhaps, to make a top ten transgression list.
We do well to keep spiritual matters in some kind of perspective.
Two fundamentalists read a scripture saying a man must not spill his seed on the ground.
The literalist fundamentalist says the words on the ground, allows a man to spill his seed anywhere except, on the ground.
The principlist fundamentalist will say the scripture forbids a man from spilling his seed anywhere but the intended field.
Both of our fundamentalists have a far more fundamental matter to resolve.
If they walk together to turn a corner and witness a man spilling seed, what is the duty of each fundamentalist and the one transgressing the rule? Should the one fundamentalist point out the spiller's error or make it public? Bind and castrate him? Does the other stand between the first man and the spiller? Can the spiller apologize for his error and be on his way? What would Jesus do; say something like, "go and sin no more"? Have you intruded on a man or boy spilling seed? What did you do? Two men love each other and live together.
They are fundamentalist lovers and quite righteous, even though they know scripture warns to avoid the appearance of evil.
I sense this is the heart of the issue for most folks.
Does another fundamentalist assume they are sodomizing seed spillers or righteous men, keeping their private business private? The choice a fundamentalist, or you or I make in this situation; tells us what we are, not what the lovers are, or are not.
Do men not choose sin? Is it my duty to interfere with every man I catch doing so? Is that what Jesus did? Can it be the focus on the unknown sexual behaviors of our brethren is serving to distract us from weightier matters, such as: Would Jesus kill and die for the political objectives of wicked and foolish men? Jesus said no to Judas, the revolutionary.
Are those of us without sin commanded to cast stones or is it a mere option? Do we cast them to discourage sin or satisfy carnal blood lust? On behalf of fundamentalists everywhere, we think you seed spillers and sodomizers should change your ways.
We will love you whether you do or not because we love our neighbors.