I think that “fornication”, or the avoidance of it, can occur in any sexual relationship – in a marriage or not, whether straight or gay – because it is not about rules, ceremonies or registrations.
‘Porne’, the root of the word fornication, means ‘prostitute’. So does this just mean that we should stay away from red light districts? I believe there is a wider principle here and we need to ask what it is about prostitution that makes it so incompatible with having the spirit of Christ?
First of all, a prostitute’s favours are not free. Whether sex or ‘love’ in another form, they are only given on condition they are paid for. Within this arrangement, a person must earn their acceptance by what they do or by what they give. The person being paid is treated as a commodity, not a human being in their own right. Neither is ‘loved’ for the person that they are, but become an object, valued only insomuch as they can provide gratification to the other party’s eyes and flesh - or to their pocket. This is diametrically opposed to the spirit of the gospel, where God’s love is unconditional, where he sees and loves us as whole beings. Those who have his spirit should also hold others in the same high esteem, and that includes accepting and cherishing their partner as a whole person within the physical relationship.
In prostitution an unequal relationship is set up of master and servant. This can manifest itself in a number of ways. Jesus said that we are not to be like the heathen, who dominate and lord it over others (Matthew 20:25-28). We should not use liberty for an excuse to gratify the flesh, but by love serve one another (Galatians 5:13) looking to the other’s interests rather than one’s own (Philippians 2:4).
Fornication is essentially, therefore, any exploitative act involving sex, whether done by the body, the eyes, or the mind. It involves a fragmentation, in the mind of the perpetrator: the partner (or even the self) in their entirety - their personality, their uniqueness, their pricelessness - is separated from the act, the sight or the thought of anything they consider sexual. Sometimes this shows up as not regarding one’s life partner as a sexual partner, and this can lead to one or both parties to the marriage turning their romantic and sexual attention elsewhere. Sometimes the totality of the self or partner is obscured by the substitution of a false persona, through behaviour or style of clothes, or in other ways. Sometimes the person is visually or psychologically broken down into body parts (e.g. “Great pair of legs coming this way!”) - again, clothing is sometimes used to suggest this, and a great deal of pornography - and indeed ‘respectable’ commercial advertising - is based on this approach.
‘No premarital sex’ may be a useful rule for those whose understanding can so far only stretch to that: it may give some protection against heartache – and unplanned pregnancies (no loving act would risk the interests of a potential child) and of course this was written long before the invention of modern contraceptives. But here we are going way beyond mere rules: fornication is any sexual self-gratification at the expense of the other, or without welcoming the reality of the other, and so can occur between people who are married to each other, as well as those who are not.
So what is the alternative?
The Song of Solomon depicts the joys and ecstasies of physical intimacy within the context of taking delight in sharing all aspects of life together and each appreciating the wonders of the other as a whole person - their physical attributes, yes, but also their achievements, personality and character.
Jesus speaks about two becoming ‘one flesh’ as a result of ‘cleaving’ - tenaciously clinging on. This suggests an intimacy that is more than merely physical.
In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul says, “to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband”. Many Christian teachers stop there, because their definition of fornication is premarital sex, but Paul doesn’t stop at this point because being married will not in itself prevent fornication. He urges them to give themselves to each other, to submit to each other, to love and respect each other, and to put each other’s interests and needs before their own.
In other words, Paul is talking about the self-giving love that we see in Jesus, spilling over into and governing the physical and sexual aspects of our relationships. Every part of our lives must demonstrate this kind of love.
- sexuality. This seems to be particularly true of the American Christian right, and to a lesser extent of America as a whole. I confess I find it extraordinary that the most extreme, sadisistic violence passes almost without censorship or comment in the American media. Indeed, violence, as long as it is directed towards some outsider group, almost seems to be celebrated in American culture. Much of the cinematic oeuvres of Arnold Schwarzenneger or Sylvester Stallone, for example - *Commando * or the more recent, and utterly repulsive *Rambo * - present the wholesale slaughter of non-white (in this case Asian) villains as something to be cheered, even laughed at.
I am sure that the story goes back much farther than the 80’s. Some credit Francis Schaeffer’s writings as being most important. I was only giving my opinion on what I have seen in the past years. I remember Boy George did a high profile interview here…Mid 80’s, maybe with Barbara Walters. He admitted he was gay, or maybe it was bisexual at the time. Anyway, he then quipped: “America’s having a heart attack!” And, America WAS! Religious hard-liners have always had heavy influence on American politics…Remember that whole Prohibition thing we tried?! 
As homosexuality became more acceptable, the push-back from the Right grew. It’s possible that this actually gave rise to the Christian Right as we know it on this matter.
Anyway, God Bless you Brother. I’d be interested in your opinions on these matters. Keeping it civil is very important to me and I know how easily these discussions can get out of hand so I try to tread as lightly as I can without compromising my beliefs. Anyway, g’day!
You are absolutely right when you say homosexuals don’t have the monopoly on bad behavior. And again you are right to say anyone can google anything and find fault. This doesn’t mean said bad behavior shouldn’t be called out for what it is. You and I have had a few conversations. You KNOW how I feel about gay people. I LOVE THEM. I don’t care if 2 people want to have a committed relationship. I don’t even really care if they don’t! 
But then I’ve never tried it, so what do I know?)