Point #1: The roman empire fell because it's economic model was based on contnuos expansion, and that forced it to reach a size the emperor could not control, given the state of communication and governance technology of the time.
Pretty much, though one could argue it was really the inability of the Roman state to reform itself that caused its eventual downfall. The Empire, for example, was largely unable to raise levies on landed wealth because landed aristocrats were, obviously, the ones most likely to rise up in rebellion against once taxes were hiked. This removed most of the wealth of the Empire out of reach of the Roman State, which was forced to pass on the costs of empire to the lower classes through a combination of heavy taxation and ruinious inflation caused by devaluation of the Roman currency. Once the empire could no longer count on regular installments of foreign tribute and booty, the system could not be sustained in the long run.
Point #2: The notion that the fall was due to lax moral standards is a myth which was presumably started and surely perpetuated by the Roman Catholic Church.
Pretty much, though the rise of Christianity was a reaction to the decline of the Roman state.
They have to have about the ugliest sex there could be.
hmmm...does an orgasm really discriminate?
