Myself making an argument, and you being too stupid to understand the argument being made, are two different things.
The argument has been made that celibacy both in and out of the church is in regards to being unmarried and sexually abstinent. I am not denying that the narrow usage of the word is in reference to being unmarried. In fact, the original usage of the word was in reference to being unmarried. But all words can have a narrow and broader meaning, as well as having a shift in meaning over time. Your problem spot is your inability to understand the dynamic range of a word, as well as selectively quoting a use that fits your argument (much like your limited understanding and use of the word atheism). This all started by your claim that;
Quote:The problem is that "celibacy" doesnt mean abstaining from sex - it means not being married apparently. Therefore if they arent allowed to marry they go find other avenues.
when I replied by asking;
Quote:What the hell are you actually trying to argue? That sex outside of marriage is fine and only the marriage is prohibited?
your only reply was;
Quote:Well thats what wikipedia says and some catholic site i saw the other day too.
If you only wanted to argue that in the strictest sense of the word celibacy is in reference to remaining unmarried, you would get no argument from me. But when you want to extrapolate that point to conclude that the catholic church only holds to the narrow sense of the word and that it means that sex outside of marriage is not actually prohibited, then you are simply going to get proven wrong time and time again.