The Gayers.....

[Doore]

I tend to prefer the "each to their own" adage myself.  The right minded men argument is a bit weak.  To put it crudely, plenty of straight men are bad people.  Plenty of gay men are good people.  To make an incredibly spurious comparison, who would you rather have met, Oscar Wilde or Stalin?  Sounds silly, but you cannot seriously argue straight = good, gay = bad.

[RobertT]

Stalin

[Doore]

Fair enough, twas a poor comparison.  I just think people need to be a bit more open minded.  I assume I'll get called gay for saying this.

[RobertT]

Do you believe in hell?

No, but I watched about 20 minutes of the synchronised diving the other week without switching over...

[RobertT]

Fair enough, twas a poor comparison.  I just think people need to be a bit more open minded.  I assume I'll get called gay for saying this.

Straight boy, so last season

[chalkies_shorts]

I tend to prefer the "each to their own" adage myself.  The right minded men argument is a bit weak.  To put it crudely, plenty of straight men are bad people.  Plenty of gay men are good people.  To make an incredibly spurious comparison, who would you rather have met, Oscar Wilde or Stalin?  Sounds silly, but you cannot seriously argue straight = good, gay = bad.

I don't need to make a decision its been made for me by God and Mohammed. You can always quote extremes to back up your argument. Statistics are great for populations but not for individuals - maybe thats what God and Mohammed were working on. Have you got any idea about gay Buddhists.

[Doore]

You've made a great point - it is about individuals, and individuals are free to be gay, straight, bisexual or whatever they want to be.  If you are an atheist, surely you can't believe a decision has been made for you by God, as you don't believe there is a god.

And no.  I have no information about gay Buddhists.  I bet there are some though.

[flammableBen]

God is gay.

[chalkies_shorts]

You've made a great point - it is about individuals, and individuals are free to be gay, straight, bisexual or whatever they want to be.  If you are an atheist, surely you can't believe a decision has been made for you by God, as you don't believe there is a god.

And no.  I have no information about gay Buddhists.  I bet there are some though.

So basically religion is a pick and mix. I'll have the bits I like and be fucking horrified if anyone transgresses these but I will happilly transgress other aspects I don't like about my religion. I'll shove it up the Gary Glitter but that Salman  Rushdie is going to die for Satancic Verses.

[Doore]

No.  To me, religion is nothing.  As I've said, I'm an atheist.  I also believe people are free to be gay, straight, or whatever they want, as long as it hurts noone.  I do know though that many religious people do things that are outside of what is acceptable to their religion. 

[chalkies_shorts]

I may be wrong here but I'd have thuoght that something shoved up my jacksy would bloody hurt. It was designed more for outward movement than inward movement.

[Simon Pieman]

Maybe God intended you to evolve into a raving homosexual.

[Hammer]

I may be wrong here but I'd have thuoght that something shoved up my jacksy would bloody hurt. It was designed more for outward movement than inward movement.

  And a mouth was designed for eating & talking. Sooo...would you turn down a blow-job ?  :-D

[flash]

You've made a great point - it is about individuals, and individuals are free to be gay, straight, bisexual or whatever they want to be.  If you are an atheist, surely you can't believe a decision has been made for you by God, as you don't believe there is a god.

And no.  I have no information about gay Buddhists.  I bet there are some though.

Terms such as gay, homosexual and queer are used to describe people and not the activities they indulge in. It is interesting that partaking in a particular sexual practice can so completely define a person.

The term gay and even homosexual are relatively recent. Prior to that men who indulged in buggery were just regarded as extremely licentious i.e they would screw anything if they had the opportunity.

So it shouldn't be as you say choosing to be gay just choosing to practice, when you have the opportunity, a particular form of sexual deviance/perversion. As long as it is done in private, between consenting adults, this is no big deal.

I would be a lot more comfortable about them if they would just keep their activities to themselves and please leave God out of this.

[Hammer]

Terms such as gay, homosexual and queer are used to describe people and not the activities they indulge in. It is interesting that partaking in a particular sexual practice can so completely define a person.

The term gay and even homosexual are relatively recent. Prior to that men who indulged in buggery were just regarded as extremely licentious i.e they would screw anything if they had the opportunity.

So it shouldn't be as you say choosing to be gay just choosing to practice, when you have the opportunity, a particular form of sexual deviance/perversion. As long as it is done in private, between consenting adults, this is no big deal.

I would be a lot more comfortable about them if they would just keep their activities to themselves and please leave God out of this.

 Wrong Flash. By taking a particular stance then it is fair to assume that one indulges. If you are a pilot, then you must have flown a plane ! The paramaters are quite clearly set : licentiousness doesn't exist as it used to. As for God, are you a Roman Catholic priest by any chance ?