In this as in many other issues we can recognise the unhealthy hand of religion. The monotheist religions, to the best of my knowledge, all consider homosexuality as a sin. Therefore homosexuals are denied the ordinary protections of the law and are treated as second class citizens. As the article indicates a woman subjected to a heterosexual advance cannot be exonerated from killing the man unless that is the only way she could get out of the situation.

The homophobic defence has religious roots. Religious bodies have the right to make judgments among their communicants. They should have no right to deny a citizen equal protection of the law because they regard the citizen's behaviour as a sin. As Geoffrey Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury said:

"In a civilized society all crimes are likely to be sins, but most sins are not and ought not to be treated as crimes.

Man's ultimate responsibility is to God alone."

Sinners as defined by religion should have the same protection under the law as the virtuous.

The author of this article is conflating the idea of self-defence, which is a complete defence against a charge of murder with HAD, which is only a partial defence which downgrades the murder charge to manslaughter.

There is a big difference between being found innocent by way of self-defence, and being found guilty of the lesser charge of mansalughter. In the second instance you have still committed a very serious criminal act and will (rightly) serve up to 14 years (in some jurisdictions murder is 28 years, manslaughter is 14 years) in jail time.

The response towards unwanted homosexual advances needs to be in context with the manner in which those advances are made. If a gay person made advances to me and was holding a knife to me, I would definately fight back and it may result in his death (or mine).
In a situation where you are not being threatened, ie a gay person sits next to you and tries to put his arm around you, or verbally propositions you, I think a simple "No thank you" is all that is required. If they were persistant, I would simply walk away

I thought the "provocation" defence had been removed due to Phil Cleary's lobbying since his sister's death.

"In 2004 the Victorian attorney general announced his government's intention to abolish the law of provocation. " http://www.philcleary.com.au/people_2005_phil_cleary_speaking.htm

Possibly a case, if it is only Victoria, for an Australia wide legal system. Does this mean every state has to fight for such a basic legal function? Now there's a candidate for some nation building policy.

The nature of the advance is not mentioned, neither is the youth's ability to retreat.

If the youth could easily have retreated, then it is murder, if not, then there is room for mitigation.

Without knowing the facts it is pretty hard to generalize. What has been spelt out is that the man was 35 and the young man (boy)) was 18. One should be able to go to a public toilet without being propositioned by someone who is deviant. We have had enough young lives ruined by priests, sports coaches, environmentalist and artist who seem to think it okay to proposition and molest young men.

No doubt it would of been better for the young man to flee before allowing his anger to kill the man in what was described as self defence.

david f blames religion and yet if more people were repulsed by such unnatural and unhealthy practices more boys would be saved the degradation of abuse.

I will admit Runner, that being a straight male, I do not make a practice of loitering around women's toilets looking to make a pick up. Is it for that reason you referred to a 35 year old gay man as a deviant or the fact that the man was gay?

Runner the deceased victim had a disability, Autism.

But your forgiven!

Firstly, runner, your hatred to palpable. Do what all those consumed by their hatred for others do, go off and make someone else’s life hell and leave this forum in peace.

Secondly, there is one thing that everyone has missed, not surprisingly, that is that the 35 year old was autistic. For those that do not know Autism is a neuro-sensory condition which causes among other things an inability to read and interoperate emotional signals correctly. This means that someone with autism can quite easily confuse the body language for 'I am here to be picked up' for 'Leave me alone'. It is like dyslexia, where a dyslexic cannot read letters on a page an autistic cannot read body language and act appropriately on it.

Another fact about autism is that many do not and cannot handle violent situations. Although those with autism can act violently towards others this is usually only in response to external stimulus, someone acting in a manner that makes the person with autism defensive.

To lay blame at the feet of an autistic person is only to show extreme ignorance for the condition. If you do not know about it then look it up on the net, there are plenty of resources available.

Finally, I unlike runner will not put my thoughts of the 18 year old on here. Let’s just say they are not complimentary.

And for anyone wondering, I know this about autism because I have lived my entire life with a form of autism myself called Asperger’s Syndrome, look it up too if you don’t know what it is. We can never allow ourselves to fall into the trap of judging people before we know ALL the facts.

runner wrote:

"david f blames religion and yet if more people were repulsed by such unnatural and unhealthy practices more boys would be saved the degradation of abuse."

Dear runner,

Any form of sex can transmit disease and be unhealthy. Homosexuality is not unnatural since it occurs in nature among other species. In other cultures such as that of ancient Greece it was an accepted practice. It is regarded as unnatural because many religions define as unnatural. If it were really unnatural it wouldn't happen.

Kipp

I have relatives with disabilities and have done voluntary work with disabled people. What is your point? The fact is that disability or no disability propositioning boys in toilets is disgusting.

Davidf denies all clear medical evidence of the enormously high disease rates among homosexuals. Stay in denial but it does not change facts. Speak to any honest doctor and ask his/her opinion.

Arthur N I in no way condone the apparent over reaction by the 18 year old. As I stated in my first post he should of fled (if possible) the scene.

I think that the most salient aspect of this case is not so much that the "homosexual advance defence" was deployed, but rather that it apparently succeeded with the jury. As Nina Funnell pointed out, the equivalent defence would not be available for a woman who is charged with murdering a man who made sexual advances to her. I guess it not only underlines the still extant homophobic undercurrent in our society, but also points to the pervasive remnant sexism in the way the law is applied.

As it happens, I spent my late teens in that part of Sydney in the early 1970s, and the toilet block in question was well known as a gay beat even then. Indeed, gangs of young thugs used to go there on "poofter-bashing" forays, although in my day knives were never used - just fists and boots. Reports of the incident that Funnell describes indicate that the young killer was in company, and associated with a street gang that frequented the vicinity.

I think that suggestions that this young thug was in fear for his life are somewhat exaggerated. What was more likely threatened was his heterosexuality. It'll be interesting to see what his sentence is.

Runner. Arthur N has given a discription of autism, and I myself have worked with Autistic students, whom also suffered with hearing impairment.

We do not know the full details of this appalling tragedy, and for you to classify the victim as a deviant, not only degrades yourself by your selective indifference to humanity. It also demeans your so called religous faith!

I completely agree with this article, but I do think it's high time the gay male community dispensed with 'beats' in public places.

They developed when there were few other opportunities for gay men to....well, you know, but in 2008, with many venues set up for this very purpose, to continue to use public places like toilet blocks is kind of disgusting.

It also feeds into the homophobic nonsense runner is so infamous for.

From the evidence both men went there together, consumed more alcohol together. The younger of the two had the knife, maybe his intention was to have M2M sex. We can`t get the other participants side of it, he is dead.Only violent people carry knives, that`s why it is illegal.

How would this read with a slightly different context and a rewording

"The particular legal defence employed in this case is called the Religious Advance Defence (or the RAD). Surfacing in Australian criminal jurisdictions in the early 1990s, the basic premise of the RAD is that if a religious man makes an unwanted theological advance towards an athiest man, he is “provoking” that man. So, should a athiest man respond by killing that religious man, the RAD can be engaged to have the charges reduced from murder to manslaughter."

Nope that still looks like murder.

R0bert

david f, are you serious?

ALL
runner ignores that 18 is the age of Majority (Legally a man not Boy). i.e. he can go to war, he can drink, he can drive a car, he can vote on who runs this country surely we can expect him to be accountable for his actions i.e. Killing a human.

If they had been drinking together and had gone to the toilet together. It strikes me that as odd that the younger DIDN’T figure that the other was gay. In which case the knife presence presents problems.

A possible option is that either one or both were street people then the knife as protection maybe explained.

What isn't known is what (if any) medical/psychiatric conditions (addictions etc) does the defendant have?
Without the afore mentioned conditions one must then examine the alleged naivety of the young man in both the orientation of the deceased and the nature toilet. Any doubt about the naivety must then make the defendants cast doubt on the defence.

If the younger man as claimed naively went into the beat as claimed and was propositioned, touched attacked etc then the presence of the knife and what it may indicate is the issue. Either:
- The younger was expecting trouble
-or has a violent Personality and had an ulterior motive (2008 version of Poofter bashing).
- The elder had the knife and was the aggressor and had been stabbed in a struggle. In which case ‘self defence’ would have been appropriate.

This leads me to my favoured scenario in which the 18yo was attacked an in the struggle the he got control of the knife and repeatedly stabbed the older. THEN 'HAD' may have been his best defence option.
I’m curious why reasonable force (or lack there of) wasn’t an issue or discarded?

But we don’t know.

Sleuthing aside I agree the whole HAD defence is BS. Not only for its gender bias but for the simple factor that it justifies the lack of personal responsibility (killing) on a basis of a religiously initiated irrational fear. What’s next? Justification for killing Muslims?

If the youth killed him because of his perception that the autistic man was not capable of reasoning with..and that an attack, possibly deadly and forced sexual assualt.. then the only justification for killing him would be if the older man actually had hold of the younger and would not let him go.

If the confrontation was simply aggressivly verbal.. then running would have been best.

The "I killed him because he was gay and provoked me" is ludicrous.

Being propositioned by a homosexual is grounds for perhaps at worst "NO you sicko.. get lost" but killing? not a chance.

Just like the female who might say "Get lost you dirty pervert" to a man asking her for sex.. she is hardly going to get out her licenced pistol and blow his brains out...unless he actually attacks her.

Provocation? hmmm not really.. Insulting sure..but not a provocation to violence.

DD. The police officer committed a crime, he was soliciting and grievously assaulted a person.

I do not support censorship, though I am against violence in any form.

Thank you OLO

DD. The police officer committed a crime, he was soliciting and grievously assaulted a person.
Posted by Kipp, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 9:10:43 AM

what police officer might that be Kipp?

This looks like one of those cases where posts have been removed by the moderator without any indication that it's happened. I distinctly recall reading a couple of prior posts by Divorce Doctor in this thread, one of which triumphally described an incident where DD claimed that a police officer had entrapped a gay man in a toilet and then beaten him up.

The exceedingly homophobic DD is trying to be cute here, I think.

As an old homosexual male I am appalled by the writings of Divorce Doctor ( more appropriately Doctor Fanatic) I would have thought that his posts ( must be a he as I doubt any female would harbour such horrible thoughts) breach the posting guidelines but I`m glad that I had the chance to read them as it is a wakeup call to all that this type of fundamentalist thinking is alive and ever a threat to the civil liberties of others.
Referring back to my post of 08/09/08, I can advise that when I was younger, 30 to 55 years, I was offered sex for money on many occasions by 17 to 18 year old young men, not in public toilets but when standing at traffic lights in the city, on train stations and in trains. I do not have any acquired mannerisms and always was conservatively dressed. For these reasons I believe it to be dangerous to jump to conclusions without having the deceased`s side of the story.
In conclusion I would suggest that Divorce Doctor place less emphasis on what he thinks that gays do and consider the possibility that they have a natural predisposition to fall in love with their own gender. That is my experience and the conclusion of Justice Elizabeth Evatt after her inquiry into human sexuality way back in the early 1970s.

no I did not claim it mate

it was from the horse's mouth ie Marsden himself on "Our ABC" on LNL

obviously "sinister workings" are afoot here as the resident bouncer simply emailed me to say he didnt like the term s*i*tlifter [which is a common term used by homos themselves]

then under cover of darkness [and instructions from his minders] he deleted the Marsden story

I suppose we lack the full body of evidence which persuaded the jury to their conclusion, however I would ask:

If a female assault victim stabbed her attacker
Would we be having this debate?

Anyone who attempts to get ‘friendly’ in a public toilet is literally “asking for it”.

The victim of the assault (the heterosexual) has rights too.

Regarding the predator’s “Autism” – that is not something which would necessarily be apparent to the victim (autism does not mean someone has a sign saying “Autistic” stuck to their forehead).

and an autistics limited conversational / empathetic skills might well make him appear more threatening than he actually is but how is the viotim to know that?

I don’t carry a knife but I am certain any male who accosted me in a public toilet would not walk away, he would more likely crawl away, the recipient of a good and well deserved kicking be he autistic or not

A long time ago in Syracuse, NY when I was a teenager with some friends in a cafeteria a man approached me. He invited me to his hotel room to 'show me something interesting'. I asked why he couldn't show it to me here in the cafeteria. This conversation went on for a while with my friends listening. Finally, they started to laugh. They told me I had been approached by a homosexual looking for action as I appeared attractive to him. I was too unworldly to realise what he wanted. That was a long time ago.

Col Rouge wrote;

I don’t carry a knife but I am certain any male who accosted me in a public toilet would not walk away, he would more likely crawl away, the recipient of a good and well deserved kicking be he autistic or not.

Dear Col,

Why would he deserve a kicking? Why not simply tell the person, whether male or female, that you were not interested? I was accosted by a prostitute recently who asked me if I were interested in female companionship. It seemed enough to simply say, "No." I don't think a person deserves a beating because that person makes a sexual advance.

The person who instigates or uses violence against another, is most often a coward and a person who carries negative baggage through life.

In asmuchas certain folk seek to demonise those who do not dig homosexuals and call them homophobes

I have come up with a new term homophile

nobody seems to want to explain the term homophobe [ie why I might be scared] but I will define homophile

phile: One that loves or has a strong affinity or preference for: eg homophile

Dear Divorce Doctor,

A homophobe hates those whose sexual preferences are for their own sex.

A homophobe would hate Plato, Sappho, Leonardo Da Vinci, Erasmus, Michelangelo, Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, Lord Byron, Herman Melville, Walt Whitman, Oscar Wilde, Peter Tchaikovsky, Marcel Proust, Gertrude Stein, John Maynard Keynes, T. E. Lawrence, Charles Laughton, Noel Coward, Laurence Olivier and Alan Turing.

However, a homophobe could still like Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Napoleon, Mussolini and Genghis Khan.

Homosexuality has existed since earliest history. In ancient Greece, erotic attraction and sexual pleasure between males were often an ingrained, accepted part of the cultural norm. Some activities, however, were disapproved of, even as other aspects were accepted and admired. In cultures under the sway of Abrahamic religions, the law and the church established sodomy as a transgression against divine law, a "crime against nature" practiced by choice, and subject to severe penalties, up to capital punishment — often inflicted by means of fire so as to purify the unholy action. The condemnation of penetrative sex between males, however, predates Christian belief, as it was frequent in ancient Greece, whence the theme of action "against nature," traceable to Plato, originated.

In the last two decades of the 19th Century, a different view began to predominate in medical and psychiatric circles, judging such behavior as indicative of a type of person with a defined and relatively stable sexual orientation. Karl-Maria Kertbeny coined the term homosexual in 1869 in a pamphlet arguing against a Prussian anti-sodomy law.
The recent coinage of the word is significant. It indicates that, while the tendency and activity was recognized, there might have been less concern about it.

I am neither a homophobe nor a homophile. I don’t regard sexual preferences confined to consenting adults as anybody else's business.

As the Victorian lady said, "What anyone does to each other is their own affair as long as they don't do it in the street where they might frighten the horses."

I have friends whose sexual preferences are unknown to me. They are my friends because I enjoy their company not because of their sexuality.

David f “I was accosted by a prostitute recently who asked me if I were interested in female companionship. It seemed enough to simply say, "No." I don't think a person deserves a beating because that person makes a sexual advance.”

And I wrote “any male who accosted me in a public toilet….”

Your prostitute example differs on two points,

Your declared “female companionship” and

her solicitation of you was not, I presume, promoted adjacent to the heady atmosphere of a bank of urinals.

And I too have been solicited on the street by “ladies of the night”, without feeling threatened in any way, whilst I would feel intimidated by an approach from a male lurking in a dingy dunny.

DD I agree with you.

Homosexuality is not normal, it is abnormal and whilst I am prepared to “tolerate the abnormal”, it does not mean I would ever consider it being promoted as equal or as valid or as a “normal” variant of human relationship.

And before the homophiles decide to jump, it is simple

If a homosexual relationships were as valid an arrangement as a heterosexual relationship, they would be able to procreate in the same manner as heterosexuals.

We, rightly, tolerate the physically and intellectually challenged, within the greater community, without ever presuming or pretending their circumstances make them “Normal”.

We should, similarly, tolerate the sexually challenged (homosexual), in the same manner.

Col Rouge- "Homosexuality is not normal, it is abnormal and whilst I am prepared to “tolerate the abnormal”, it does not mean I would ever consider it being promoted as equal or as valid or as a “normal” variant of human relationship... If a homosexual relationships were as valid an arrangement as a heterosexual relationship, they would be able to procreate in the same manner as heterosexuals."

You mean like all those billions of nasty perverse non-reproducing worker ants, bees, wasps and termites? There are thousands of species on this planet where non-reproducing individuals are the norm and reproducing individuals make up a tiny minority- does that make queen bees abnormal invalid and inferior? Such adaptations are even found in mammalian species- for example: the mole rat.

Individuals can still be evolutionary successes without reproducing themselves by contributing to the survival of their family members so that their genes are passed on through their blood relatives.

Considering the jealous nature of primate sexuality, having non reproductive males around that did not compete for females with a group's alpha male would have been a considerable advantage for early hominids as the more males living peacebly together in a group, the better their advantage in competing with other hominid groups, and in hunting and fending off predators. I've often wondered if this may be why there are statistically higher rates of male homosexuality in comparison to lesbians.

Thanks to research by Sweden's Karolinska Institute (since reproduced elsewhere) we now know that homosexuality is hardwired into the brain and that homosexual brains respond to the pheromones of their own gender in the same ways as heterosexual brains respond to those of the opposite gender. American research on animals (ironically protested against by gay and animal rights activists because its aim was the elimination of gay rams from domesticated sheep populations) has indicated sexuality is determined before the third trimester of a pregnancy.

(cont. below)

Homosexuality isn't chosen, a fetish, or a product of psychology. It's neurological with observable mechanisms that compare with those of heterosexuality. Homosexuality is as normal for homosexuals as heterosexuality is for heterosexuals.

Its important to note-

We only have Gerard's killer's version of events as there were no witnesses.

He claims Gerard exited a stall with his trousers around his ankles, shuffling towards him in an attempt to hug him. A person so encumbered shouldn't be difficult to escape from and he could have fled as soon as he saw Gerard's state of undress. There is no indication that his position in the toilet blocked an escape.

I've not heard an explanation as to why the killer had a knife. He had to locate it on his person, retrieve it, then unfold it to stab Gerard- this does not seem an unthoughtthrough action to me.

Personally I detest beats. They are a sad anachronism from the age of criminalisation and I do everything I can to discourage their use. That said, in the community where Gerard lived there is no appropriate venue for gay men to meet each other and socialise- let alone a disabled one. Nearly 30 years after decriminalisation there is not a single gay venue north of the Harbour Bridge (I believe someone tried to establish a gay bar in North Sydney about 15 years ago, but patrons and staff were so harassed by local youths it quickly shut down). Gay men should not have to move away from their heterosexual friends and families to expensive city ghettos in order to live their lives openly and freely, nor should they have to spend hours on transport just to meet a partner or hold their hand in public without being screamed at. Provide gay men with a space in your communities to live openly and with dignity and that is how the vast majority will live. This case also highlights the need for resources directed at assisting disabled people in coming to terms with their sexuality so that it manifests itself in appropriate ways in their adult lives.

Andrew Potts writes

'Homosexuality isn't chosen, a fetish, or a product of psychology. It's neurological with observable mechanisms that compare with those of heterosexuality. Homosexuality is as normal for homosexuals as heterosexuality is for heterosexuals.'

What a load of crap. How is it that many women after raising kids then decide they are lesbians. Homosexual behaviour is abnormal to nature. Sodomy has far higher rates of disease than normal sex. At least be honest about your justification for deviancy.

The stigma and negative attitude of some people in society, force many homosexuals to follow the hetrosexual lifestyle.

It is only in their later years, they come to terms with their right to be who they naturally are. Sad! But a question society should be asking themselves.

It is also sad that those who say they believe in "Jesus" and "God", can be so callous and indifferent to their fellow human beings.

By their callous indifference, it shows that there is no love in their beliefs or possibly their lives!

Andrew Potts

“You mean like all those billions of nasty perverse non-reproducing worker ants, bees, wasps and termites”

If you care to compare yourself to insect, so be it. I have always thought homo sapiens were further up the hierarchy of critters but if you insist on identifying homosexuals as no different to hive insects then I will happily defer to your view (does that means I am allowed to clear up gay bars with a can of Baygon?)

“Individuals can still be evolutionary successes”

I fail to see how anyone can successfully contribute to the evolutionary process, when their genetic attributes do not feed back or are passed on into the gene pool.

“non reproductive males around that did not compete for females with a group's alpha male”

Yes, I had already realized and personally appreciated that, with every woman I “meet”

However, as you realize, these “non reproductive males”, by definition, do not contribute successfully to the evolutionary process.

“It's neurological with observable mechanisms that compare with those of heterosexuality”

But it is the “abnormal neurology and mechanisms” which prevail in homosexuals, just as abnormal chromosomes influence the production of those who suffer downs syndrome,

And a wide range of "abnormalities" result in folk of subnormal intellect, dwarfs, giants, sufferers of cerebral palsy and many other abnormalities, as well as homosexuality.

So in the end, being “queer” is just another abnormality.

One of which I personally extend, with all other abnormalities tolerance, excepting the psychopathic and sociopathic (where "tolerance" could be fatal)

Col wrote:

"However, as you realize, these “non reproductive males”, by definition, do not contribute to the evolutionary process."

Dear Col,

Non reproductive males can contribute to the evolutionary process. The evolutionary process is furthered by either passing on your genes or a copy of your genes. We have kookaburras in the back yard. The offspring do not go off to form new bonding pairs but hang around and help feed their siblings as they are born sometimes as long as the parents can produce offspring. The younger siblings share genetic material with their carers. The carers give their younger siblings a better chance at life and make it more possible that they can pass on their genes.

In human beings caring for the children of a brother or sister may achieve the same purpose.

The results of CerebalPalsy occurs during the birthing process of a healthy child,and the child is not abnormal.

Col Rouge you have obivously not been watching the Para Olympics, to see what people with disabilities can achieve, and we must be grateful that your children (if you have any) were not born with a disability.

Understanding this issue is NOT rocket science, folks.

The solution to these types of problems are, almost always, fairly simple . . . .

1. Act like a civilized human being . . . meaning . . . respect
the dignity and physical space of another human being . . .
especially strangers.

2. Keep your hands to yourself, unless you have OBVIOUS
permission or acquiescence from your intended love interest
to do otherwise.

3. While in the company of others, especially strangers, keep
your genitals in your pants . . . unless you have been
respectfully, and GENTLY, invited to take them out.

Observance of these few rules of courtesy, boys and girls, will
go a long way toward preserving ownership of your "family jewels",
and avoiding a very unpleasant foreign metal object in your gut.

This message is brought to you by commonsense.org

Kipp “The results of CerebalPalsy occurs during the birthing process of a healthy child,and the child is not abnormal.”

Tell that to any parent of a child which suffers cerebral palsy, they are the ones who know and the ones who have to deal with the “normality” and I bet you anything you like they will suggest your definition of “normal” is out with the pixies.

David f “In human beings caring for the children of a brother or sister may achieve the same purpose.”

Somehow, maintaining someone else’s “contribution to the gene pool” is akin to a bank clerk looking after someone else’s money… you may tend it all you want, but it is never “yours”.

As I said. previously, queer is "abnormal" but I am happy to tolerate the "abnormal", provided they respect the normal with a manner of reciprocality to the way they demand to be considered.

Sonofeire I think you win the prize for the most reasonable post on the thread.

Col Rouge wrote:

David f “In human beings caring for the children of a brother or sister may achieve the same purpose.”

Somehow, maintaining someone else’s “contribution to the gene pool” is akin to a bank clerk looking after someone else’s money… you may tend it all you want, but it is never “yours”.

Dear Col,

What is "yours" as far as it applies to children varies from society to society. There are 8 types of family arrangements known to anthropology. in one type the biological father has nothing to do with raising children. The mother's brother(s) are the authority figures, the objects of affection and fill all the other functions that the biological father fills in our society except for the actual conception of the child.

My cousin's wife gave birth to a grossly malformed object which died shortly after birth. Since he had been in Vietnam dropping Agent Orange they were afraid to have more babies. They adopted a girl. That girl is their daughter, and it doesn't matter that they are not the girl's biological parents.

I think sometimes we worry too much about what is 'ours'.

Col. I have worked for over tens years with families, and their children with severe and mulitiple disabilities ( + CP).

You insult and denigrate these wonderful parents who love and nurture their child through life, by classifying their chid as "Abnormal".

Your postings say a lot about yourself!

Dear Kipp,

To be abnormal does not necessarily mean anything bad. It may only mean departing from some norm. Einstein, Darwin and Newton all had abnormal intelligence. Their mental ability departed from the norm. Bradman's ability as a cricket layer was abnormal. Sainthood is another indication of abnormality.

Kipp” Col. I have worked for over tens years with families, and their children with severe and mulitiple disabilities ( + CP).

You insult and denigrate these wonderful parents who love and nurture their child through life, by classifying their chid as "Abnormal".”

Well jolly good for you Kipp.

(I will mark that down on today’s list of things I hope I never have to be bored with again)

Now if you care to test your reading skills and open a dictionary,

Look up “abnormal” and show me where my description is any thing but 100% accurate.

Abnormal

“not normal; not typical or usual or regular or conforming to a norm”

"departing from the normal in e.g. intelligence and development;”

That you seem to believe we all have to be politically correct, and use only words of a superlative quality in description is entirely up to you.

Personally, I prefer plain English.

as to “Your postings say a lot about yourself!”

do you mean “he uses words bearing in mind the accuracy of their meaning, ensuring normalcy in communication”

Thanks for that, nicest thing anyone has said to me all day.

David f.. you have got it, and as I said, I believe in tolerance of the abnormal.

However to the comments to child rearing,

whoever rears the young makes no difference on any significant evolutionary scale,

Whilst the "carer" might contribute to the “socialization” of the cared for, that is it.

it is only the natural parent (through their genetic contributor) whose influence will impact the evolutionary development of future generations (much to the despair of those whose lineage carries an "abnormality" like Huntingtons Chorea).

To get back on topic, homosexuality is abnormal, The only thing which has changed in the past few millenia is a pendular fluctuation in social values and tolerance to the abnormality.

Semantics is often used to cloud negative or derogotry comment.

Kipp “Semantics is often used to cloud negative or derogotry comment.”

And an “oversensitivity” to the correct use of words reflects the immature and stunted mind of the intellectually challenged.

Grow up and get over yourself.

This is a very sad case. Sudden violence towards a sexual advance from a an older male would indicate the youth has issues with his sexuality and homosexual panic can easily result in that situation. He will have to live with the tragic consequenses for life. That the jury spared him a jail a sentence is to be applauded, for he will suffer enormously in years to come and rue the day he carried a knife.

On the matter of gay beats, there are many such places and very few legal sex on premises venues for gay and bisexual people. Councils battle developers wanting to open these venues with the result that public places remain the only option for men to meet up.

There is widespread denial by councils and the public about beats and and needs of gay and bisexual men. These guys need safe sex on premises venues where safe sex with condoms and showers is available to help halt the spread of sexually transmitted disease.

Sadly the beats are mostly frequented by married men who want to have sex with other men,or bisexuals.
The number of homosexuals on beats are those, who have a problem with their sexuality by the stigma attached, and have conflicting personal issues, to having a one to one relationship.
The sad part is the bashings on the beats, and the resulting consequences that affect both the victim and those closet to the victim.