//this type of homosexual actions are unatural because this act is called sodemy.//

No, it isn't. And even if it was, calling something something 'sodemy' wouldn't make it unnatural. The words we English speakers give to particular phenomena has no bearing on whether or not those phenomena are natural.

//This area of men and woman is for the important reason to get out all the waste stuff we all must do,or we get sick if we dont.//

No, o sung wu, your mouth is there for a lot of reasons, but eliminating 'waste' really isn't one of them. Regular vomiting is a bad thing. Your mouth is there for eating, talking, breathing, and, in my opinion, cunnilingus/fellatio depending on your preferences.

//This area is not for sex it can not ever be able to produse any children from this area.//

Sorry, I don't understand how this a bad thing. If you can get your rocks off with zero possibility of knocking the girl up, where is the harm in that? I have never known any woman to refuse cunnilingus because there is no chance of it impregnating them. I suspect they'd be less willing to receive it if they could get pregnant that way.

....

//Sir with respect you must say its not natural act. its an unatural act nothing else.//

I don't have to do anything of the sort. I don't find it unnatural and I enjoy cunnilingus, so even though some people may call it sodomy, even though I'll never get a woman pregnant that way, and even though that seems to offend you cranky old tories, I'm unlikely to ever pass up the chance to eat pussy when it presents itself.

Or were you talking about anal intercourse? Well I think most of the stuff I said still applies... I dunno. Most of you blokes seem to be more interested in the subject than myself.

But it does worry me that this argument that says 'it's not sex unless it can produce kids' might gain more favour within the Sexual Morality Squad of the Fun Police, and they'll try to stamp out cunnilingus. So I try to stand up for people having sex in the manner they find most agreeable, whatever form it may take (within the bounds of the law) - even if it can't produce issue.

//Only their ideas are important.//

//Liking and disliking are also feelings based on attraction or repulsion. How can you tell what feelings are manifest in the body of someone you cannot even see?//

I can't. Nobody can. Mind reading, despite what a lot so-called 'psychics' would have you believe, is impossible.

On an entirely text-based forum, it doesn't matter what you believe. What matters is what you write. Nothing stops a person from writing something completely alien to their personal beliefs, and as long as they do it convincingly enough then a reader might believe that the writer truly holds these false sentiments. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

http://tinyurl.com/jb7m2l3

But when a dog types 'black people all suck', you know it's a racist statement even if you don't know whether he's really a racist dog or a nice dog pretending to be racist. And calling it out as a racist statement is just pointing out the obvious, not bullying the dog who posted it. Similarly, when people post obviously homophobic comments you can't tell if they're really homophobic, or just pretending - but you can tell if it's a homophobic comment, and calling out a homophobic comment as homophobic isn't bullying the person who posted it.

Toni Lavis:

What is the point of ‘calling out’ homophobia? Everyone is entitled to have a fear or dislike of homosexuals if they want to just as everyone is entitled to have racist views if they want to.

What they are not entitled to do is to discriminate on the basis of those views. Nor are they entitled to behave aggressively or unjustly. They are also entitled to free speech and have the right to express their views. All of those things are enshrined in law.

They may present arguments in favour of leaving the Marriage Act as it is, for example. They may well be homophobic but what advantage to those in favour of change is gained by calling out their homophobia?

The law should be changed because it is reasonable to do so and good reasons are arrived at by discussion and argument of the ideas so that the truth comes to the surface. The only thing that needs to be discussed to arrive at the truth are the ideas which underpin both sides of an argument.

Labelling a person as homophobic does absolutely nothing to further the process of coming to the truth since it is irrelevant to the process.

If there is no good reason why ‘calling out’ should be introduced to the process of discussion then we can only assume a bad reason. In my opinion it is done in order hurt the homophobic person in the hope that they will go away and will not be heard. This frees those in favour of things like same-sex marriage to push through their agenda without opposition. They are not interested in the truth but only in getting what they want.

Trying to silence people is bullying behaviour it is important to call it out when it rears its ugly head in the discussion. It stifles the process of working towards the truth and it is indicative of people who do not care about the truth. It does not matter if someone is homophobic but it matters if they are a bully.

Hi there SUSEONLINE & TONI LAVIS...

Why are you giving me a hard time ? I've not written anything on this particular topic, on Medibank specifically or anything else for that matter ? I certainly don't mind engaging in a 'blue' provided I'm a willing participant, but this topic, why ?

'Members (like me) pay for it. It's a private organsation. It's a totally unnecessary ad.'

I receive 'tasty recipe ideas' with my Energy bill in a glossy pamphlet. I tried to argue that I didn't see this as a core function of delivering energy, and that the money saved could lower their customer's energy bills, but as usual with these cases the customer service rep was only interested in my specific case, so I was wasting my breath.

Perhaps they actually save customers money (assuming they pass some of the profit of delivering paid content with my energy bill, hahaha yeah right) but such details will forever remain a mystery