Some ramdom responses:

>I hope you got a good night's sleep.

Thanks Ken. I did.

>If homosexuality were genetic would it not have been "bred" out by >the homosexuals not having any children long before the advent of >Artificial Insemination?

No. The current dominant theory suggests some combinations of genes may be responsible, in which case they are passed on through the ages by heterosexual 'carriers'. Why would God/evolution do this? I'd suggest it is because there are benefits to human societies in having a permanent minority of citizens who don't breed (Interestingly, the opposite is probably true for the nomadic desert-dwelling Jews who wrote Leviticus. To them, non-breeders would have caused excess strain on the tribe's scarce resources).

>“Human rights” does not include the right of a small minority to over ride the majority.

On the contrary: human rights exist to prevent unjust abuses of power, regardless of whether that power is exercised by a 'democratic' majority, a totalitarian minority or theocratic sect. By your reasoning above, the Nazi persecution of Jews, socialists, homos, gypsies etc was not a violation of their human rights because the Nazis enjoyed the support of the majority of Germans at the time.

>“Human rights” does not mean the right to continue to molest children.

Well, duh! Of course not. That would be a gross abuse of power over a minority (children). This continual attempt to conflate paedophilia with homosexuality is a gross defamation. They are two separate phenomena. I recall reading that to most paedophiles the sex of the child is irrelevant. Besides, the vast majority of child sexual abuse happens within families, with by far the most common pattern being a father or stepfather molesting a female child. These molestations rarely make the news.

>They [gays] endure a great deal of physical pain from their activities, and >mental torment from their inner conflicts, and then die horrible >deaths, usually alone, 30-40 years before their time.

Here comes Aslan with the pamphlets again. This is all straight out of Gay-bashing 101. 'Inner conflicts': Religious homophobes should at least have the balls to take responsibility for the torment they cause to young gay people by pepetuating homophobia. 'Usually die alone': We do have families and friends, Aslan. Most of us have our natural families as well as the families we create through romance, bonds of friendship and community. Consequently, few of us 'die alone'. "30-40 years before their time": By practising safe sex, HIV negative gay men in Western countries can enjoy the same life expectancy as anyone else. Besides, this 'statistic' has long been revealed as fradulent. It was based on the obituaries appearing in gay newspapers at the height of the AIDS epidemic -- hardly a sound sample. Furthermore, the flimsy fig leaf of 'loving the sinner but hating the sin' doesn't quite cover the rampant glee with which you describe our supposedly terrible lives. The fact is, Biblical literalists have a vested interest in ensuring gays continue to get the pointy end of the pineapple. They are the cause of the problem, not the solution.

>The Church was responsible for the marriage act ammendment bill >which the ALP was initially not going to support until Jim Wallace >from the ACL gave Nicola Roxon a lesson on democracy.

Get your facts right. The ALP was *never* going to vote against the marriage act amendment bill. It announced its decision to support the bill almost as soon as it was unveiled. And for months prior, Latham had been making it clear in interviews that while Labor was committed to reviewing discriminatory legislation at the federal level, it would *not* support same sex marriage. As a sop to its pro-gay supporters, Labor did commit to send the bill to a Senate inquiry so that Australian citizens could at least register their opinions on the issue. But when faced with a mob of evangelicals at an ACL rally, Roxon crumbled and announced Labor would just pass the bill without waiting for the results of that inquiry. Essentially, the ACL had blackmailed Labor with the threat it would run a campaign during the election claiming Labor had failed to 'protect' marriage from the homos.

>When the rubber meets the road there is only ONE rule for competing >lifestyles and that is "Rule...or be ruled".

Gee, and I thought we could all learn to get along.

>Basically I think the gay community has to do some extra work on >identifying possible problems, and have possible infrastructure >ready to go with such things as gay marriage.

No. The onus is on the opponants of same-sex marriage to identify the problems *they* predict it will bring. So far they've failed utterly to do so. In fact, the level of public debate on the issue in Australia has been remarkably shallow. Never mind, the issue isone of basic equality before the law and will not go away. I predict we'll have gay marriage in Australia within 20 years. Realist conservatives are beginning to understand that same-sex marriage will be beneficial not only for the gay community but also for society at large. Bring it on.

>The feminist movement >didn't and it left behind a hell of a shambles. I think society >cannot afford similar mistakes again

You think feminism left a shambles. I don't agree. Feminism liberated women from a stifling domestic subservience that allowed them few life choices (and next to no control over their fertility). As in the heady days of any liberation movement there were excesses, but on balance, feminism has been a positive and empowering force for both women AND the men who have accepted its importance and successfully adapted to it.

Like most people I'd rather the divorce rate was lower but I'll defend the availability of no-fault divorce to the end. There's no benefit to society for spouses to stay together after love has soured into bitter resentment. We've seen the damage it does to teh couples themselves and to any children unlucky enough to have live in such a storm. People are people. We're imperfect beasts. We make mistakes. No one should have to stay shackled to an old mistake that now brings only misery.

Unfortunately, people today have lost touch with the reasons behind the social liberation movements of the 50s, 60s and 70s. They have no direct experience of the ugly abuses of power inflicted by conservative theologians in those pre-liberation times: the widespread censorship, the figger-wagging moralism, the stifling conformity, the unhappy marriages, the backyard abortionists, the fags getting thrown in jail. But if the Religious Right gets the power it craves you can bet humanity won't suffer through too many years of repression before we'll see another 60s-like wave of liberation. We know too much to tolerate being treated like sheep.

Hi Homo Au Go Go,
I think most people are concerned with “excessive” homosexuality in the community. At present it appears that Cairns in Nth Qld is actually the homosexual capital of Australia, or at least the homosexual holiday capital.

I personally know of a number of families with children that have moved from Cairns and moved to the town I live in. They moved away because of the concentration of gays in the area, and the belief that this was not healthy for their children to live in an environment where there was such a concentration of gays, and children "were" being approached quite often by gays in Cairns.

Personally I am very concerned by propaganda and brainwashing by various groups in society. Feminists are one such group that makes heavy use of brainwashing of the young, with the end result is that many people now overlook the very dark and negative side of feminism. There are now universities in the US that have incorporated an Academic Bill of Rights into their curriculums. This was because the curriculums had become so filled with feminism or liberalised material that students were hardly learning anything that they could use in employment. The universities were simply brainwashing machines of the young by feminists and liberalists.

Similar can happen with homosexuality, whereby gay people will try and impart their homosexuality onto others who are not homosexual. They will try and do this through brainwashing or by trying to make homosexuality look overly attractive in some way. This is occurring in the gay bars and gay meeting places in Cairns.

This is a problem for the gay community to solve. The heterosexual community will simply solve it by shutting down the gay bars, but then the gay community will complain that they are being persecuted and unjustly treated. So to avoid having to complain about persecution, the gay community has to show better self-regulation.

Unfortunately like feminism, I see no great signs of self-regulation within the gay community at present.

Homo Au Go Go,
One other detail, by shutting down all the gay bars and meeting places in towns like Cairns, the heterosexual community will also stop a major part of the drug taking and sexual promiscuity that is taking place in those places also.

Would this be a good thing?

I think so.

Hi Timkins,

>Similar can happen with homosexuality, whereby gay people will try >and impart their homosexuality onto others who are not homosexual. >They will try and do this through brainwashing or by trying to make >homosexuality look overly attractive in some way. This is occurring >in the gay bars and gay meeting places in Cairns.

You just don't get it, do you? We don't need to 'recruit'. There are plenty of us and we are everywhere. When gay guys do make advances on straight ones it's usually because they've not yet made social connections to other gays or they've misread someone's 'signals'. A simple 'no' will suffice.

I do pity those poor frightened souls who might have fled from Cairns fearing the lavender menace. They could have learned so much. Never mind, they'll probably be happier moving to a smaller, more homogenised town and hanging out with the local KKK.

There used to be an old joke that summed things up pretty neatly: "I've go no problem with legalising homosexuality, so long as they don't try to make it compulsory".

Relax, no-one's about to make it compulsory. How could we? Remember, we're only 1 or 2 percent of the population according to the evangelists. Besides, who would want unimaginative str8 boys gatecrashing their orgy? ;)

Hi Go Go,

For many years I also lived near Airlie Beach, (another holiday destination) and saw the changes that took place in that community over time. Basically some gays moved into the area and set up bars, restaurants, resorts etc.

These places were more liberalised (as you might say), and other bars, restaurants etc began to copy. Eventually much has gotten out of control, with drug taking and sexual promiscuity quite rampant. Sex frequently takes place on the beach, in the pools etc. Locals in the area now avoid the place, and they do not belong to the KKK.

Similar I have heard that Hollywood is now filled with gay people, where straights musty abide by the rules of the gays to have any success in Hollywood, but one can hardly regard most Hollywood movies or such things as MTV as being of great cultural value.

In this post-modern world, it only takes a small group in charge of mass media or in charge of entertainment, to create an unhealthy or over-liberalised environment.

...and for all those reasons, however accurate they may or may not be (Tim) u can see why I take a biblical position on the issue. I repeat.. only 1 rule. There will always be the spectrum of moderate/extreme and the extreme will always drive the agenda. So, I continue to endure the struggle but the difference these days is, we are actually realizing that there is a culture war on, and becoming more politically and socially active.
If agogo rejects the love of the sinner but not the sin, then its on his own head. As I said, its the 'willfulness' of sin which condemns a man, from his own mouth.
Homosexual behavior is sin. Full stop. Its just one of MANY sinful acts, which we all commit because we are all sinful. The difference though is that most people who commit adultery or petty theft don't try to change the social value system over it.