Dear Big Nana,

In a world where everything is becoming increasingly
public we need to take more responsibility for what we
say and do. We need to be better judges on what is harmful
and gauging the difference between banning someone's
right to free speech but also avoiding the promotion of
hate speech. Everyone can say what they want but if you want
to promote something that's harmful, then don't get angry
if you're shut down by people who don't want to hear it.
It's dangerous.

Regarding the baker in Colorado? It was a peculiar case
with things not being resolved. The Courts chose not to
address the question of whether religious rights should
take precedence over anti-discrimination rights. They chose
not to deal with those questions. It will be interesting to
see how future cases pan out.

Imagine a coffee-shop owner refusing to serve a black
family because he regards them "inferior."
Even those who oppose political correctness would agree
that a teacher who refers in extreme derogatory
terms - to females (or males) or gays
shouldn't be in a classroom. Even the most expansive view
of free speech recognizes there are limits to it.

As for euthanasia? That's a very emotional topic for many
people. Many years ago I still remember the case of a
friend's mother who was in a nursing home having suffered
a series of severe strokes. She got to the stage where
her mind was substantially destroyed. And as a result she
was in a vegetative state - having lost all functional and
mental independence.

The preservation of her life helped no one. Her family had to deal
with the agony of her vegetation. And in those times her
doctors were not content to let her die in peace and serenity.
They pursued a vigorous therapy that benefited no one except
their own satisfaction in thwarting death, regardless of the
consequences. She lived in that condition for several years.
She would have been horrified if she would have known what
was going on. She had always been a very independent strong
lady.

//So Paul those homosexual friends are able to naturally of themselves to reproduce children, if so they are then fully equal to you.//

I didn't know you were able to reproduce children by yourself, Paul. That's quite a feat. What's your secret? And how has it failed to make headline news thus far?

Yes Toni, unfortunately poor Josephus has got it wrong again, I cannot reproduce on my own. If I could I'd sell my story.

Paul 1405, you do realise that it’s possible to like, or even love someone whilst still disliking or disagreeing with something they do?
Ask any parent with a drug addict child. They can still really love that child but hate what they are doing.
Same goes for homosexuality. Many people have homosexual friends they really like as people, just don’t agree with their sexual activities. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing you know.

//Many people have homosexual friends they really like as people, just don’t agree with their sexual activities.//

And do these people take such an interest in all their friend's sexual activities? Because that sounds a bit creepy.

Or do they only take an interest in their homosexual friend's sexual activities? Because that sounds a bit creepy, and like they're unusually interested in gay sex for somebody who claims not to agree with it. Just sayin'.

Dear Joshephus,

Interesting narrowing of the word to anus.

Excrete. To expel waste. When a women has her period doesn't she excrete unfertilised ova?