What's wrong with this logic?

Rock music was invented for people to dance to usually in a provocative manner. If I'm listening to a song that has a fast beat to it... Well I don't know about you, but it makes me want to drive fast. That's why I prefer not to listen to it. It's also slang for sexual intercourse. It's also considered "worldly". They're are plenty of examples in scripture where we are told to stay away from "worldly" things. Instead, we are called to glorify things that honor God. 

Let's analyze the logic in the provided statement and identify any fallacies, cognitive biases, poor logic, or poor reasoning:

1. **Overgeneralization Fallacy**: The statement claims that "Rock music was invented for people to dance to usually in a provocative manner." This is an overgeneralization, as rock music encompasses a wide variety of subgenres and intended uses. Not all rock music is created with the intent of evoking provocative dancing.

2. **Hasty Generalization Fallacy**: "If I'm listening to a song that has a fast beat to it... Well I don't know about you, but it makes me want to drive fast." This statement generalizes personal experience to others without sufficient evidence. The individual's personal reaction to music with a fast beat is not necessarily shared by everyone.

3. **Slippery Slope Fallacy**: The assertion that rock music leads to increased driving speed suggests an inevitable progression from action A (listening to rock music) to action B (driving fast), which can be a slippery slope argument. There is no direct causation established between listening to rock music and dangerous driving behavior.

4. **Equivocation Fallacy**: The term “rock” is used ambiguously. The claim "'rock' is also slang for sexual intercourse" is irrelevant in the context of music. The original meaning of "rock" in this context is related to the genre of music, not its slang meaning.

5. **Appeal to Authority Fallacy**: The scripture reference to avoiding "worldly" things is used to support the argument. However, this is an appeal to an authority without clear definitions of what constitutes "worldly" and how rock music specifically falls into that category. The criteria are subjective and not fleshed out within the argument.

6. **Confirmation Bias**: There may be a presence of confirmation bias, where the individual selectively interprets information to confirm their preconceptions against rock music. References to "worldly" scriptures seem to be used to support an already determined viewpoint without considering counterarguments.

7. **Moralistic Fallacy**: Claiming that "we are called to glorify things that honor God" and implying that rock music cannot honor God assumes that rock music is inherently incompatible with honoring God. This is a moralistic fallacy, as it assumes moral considerations should dictate factual claims about what types of music can or cannot honor God.

8. **False Dilemma**: The argument presents a false dilemma, suggesting that one must either avoid rock music entirely or fail to honor God. There may be a middle ground where rock music can be enjoyed in a context that does not contradict one's values or spirituality.

By addressing these logical fallacies and biases, we can see that the argument against listening to rock music relies on several unsupported assumptions and faulty reasoning. This weakens the overall claim and indicates the need for a more nuanced, evidence-based approach to the topic.