Shimon's book is of course published by the very right-wing Catholic publisher Connor Court, which as far as I can make is either owned and operated by the deeply misogynist outfit Opus Dei, or has very close connections with it.
But apart from that that why not Google the topic The Secret Life of the Vatican's Gay Cardinals and Monks.
And these chaps with their double minded in your face hypocrisy presume to lecture everyone re their sexual morality and behavior

As an atheist, the argument based on religion is totally meaningless to me - and to many others. I certainly share the concerns expressed in the article about the outcomes for children, who have no choice in the matter. The only thing I'd like to add to the discussion is that we all have feelings and ideas, but we each must take responsibility for our actions. Those who choose to take part in same-sex relationships are doing just that, choosing to do to. Sexual behaviour, whether heterosexual or homosexual is not unavoidable.

All sex is a neurotic simulation of love.

Of all 237-or-so reasons people have sex (http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2007/08/01/237-reasons-to-have-sex), both physical pleasure and procreation are in a small minority.

Procreation is inappropriate in our age of exploding population and temporary, body-dependent pleasure is a far cry from the unconditional and eternal peace, love and joy of being with God. Too much emphasis is placed, here and elsewhere, on the subsidiary question of what happen to be the sexual objects that we are attracted to, rather than on the fact that the signals which our body sends us purported as "pleasure", have evolved to satisfy our genes, not us, their useful idiots.

Plantagenent,

You suggest that "organised and disorganised religion should get out of the habit of judging people on the basis of their sexuality".

What do you have to say to people who do not base their objections to homosexuality on religious criteria? An abhorrence of homosexuality is not the prerogative of just the religious; and many Christians support homosexuals. In fact their are plenty of homsexual priests and ministers, irrespective of what their religion says on the subject. The only religion believing in punishment for homosexuality - death - is, of course Islam, as you know.

Louisa,

Of course we should all take responsible for our actions. But some homosexuals do not do that; by asking for "marriage" they want the rest of society to make them feel better about the problem, perversion, preference - whatever you want to call it - by instutionalising, 'normalising' it, and officially altering the morals and mores of society. As an atheist, you don't have to worry about what religion says, but simple common sense, basic knowledge of anatomy and science, should be enough to tell that same sex couplings were never meant to be. If people do want to break the 'rules' of normality, so be it. But they should keep it to themselves, TAKE RESPONSIBLITY, and not expect the rest of us to make it 'right' for them.

.

Dear Shimon (the author),

.

What a pity the “Abrahamic faiths” do not command their adherents, the “majority of humanity”, to respect the intimacy of the private lives of their fellow human beings.

Homosexuality is a perfectly natural phenomenon, just like heterosexuality. There is no such thing in nature as “the norm of the heterosexual union”. Both heterosexual and homosexual unions are “normal”.

As Petter Boeckman, a zoologist at the Norwegian Natural History Museum of the University of Oslo, pointed out:

« No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, ... a part of the animal kingdom is hermaphroditic, truly bisexual. For them, homosexuality is not an issue. »

Boeckman observes social advantages to the free expression of homosexual behaviour and adds :

« It has been observed that the homosexual couple are often better at raising the young than heterosexual couples. »

http://pactiss.org/2011/11/17/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality/

Religion historically regards homosexual sex acts as sinful, based essentially on an erroneous understanding of "natural law" (the law of nature) as shown by the results of the zoological research mentioned by Petter Boeckman.

Religious dogma is constantly proven wrong in its interpretation of nature by scientific research.

There is a perfume of "déjà vu" regarding the current debate on homosexual marriage, e.g., Galileo's condemnation for heresy when he declared in 1610 that the earth revolves around the sun.

Homosexual behaviour has never been noted to be a possible cause of the diminution or disappearance of any animal or plant species :

http://www.webofcreation.org/Earth%20Problems/species.htm

There is no objective reason to discriminate against either heterosexual or homosexual behaviour as regards the adoption and raising of children.

The role of both the Church and the State should be limited to the public - not the private – sphere, as per Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, “Right to respect for private and family life” :

http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/Convention_ENG.pdf

That said, Shimon, I fully respect your right to believe what you will.

.

Banjo Paterson,

All the old stuff about animals and ancients being homos doesn't make it normal. And, you if think it's OK for same sex couples to adopt children, you really do not care about children at all.