“To be fair Josephine - I said that that Poor taxpayers made sense - i.e. is a legitimate position (of itself). It is not, however, my view.

This was to highight the constrast with other views on the page that are clearly expressed with little depth or immersion in what the body of knowledge actually holds about such things as human and animal sexuality.

So - although I disgree with poor taxpayer - actually furthering the equality agenda is an expression of the will of the majority - most importantly, I think it is an act of compassion, resolve and integrity that may just send the right signals to that poor group of young teenagers who desparately may want to change their sexual orientation (from gay to straight) because of the social pressures inherent from the un-educated. And some people lead them to believe that they can, or even should.....no wonder so many contemplate or even attempt suicide.

I was trying to make the point that - if you don't know what you are talking about - then say, "I don't know, it confuses me.." and do something to find out.......like, read a (reviewed)book......instead of writing stupid comments - and looking pathetic!

Hope that clears things up.”

“Richard, Nottingham, your comments are a bit confusing. You regard the pro-religion, anti-gay comments as bigoted or ignorant, yet agree with Poor taxpayer who seems (to me) to be saying the same as they are. Do you think his comment, ¿Another example of political correctness gone mad¿ is directed against the Catholic view or is a criticism of the gay rights laws forcing Catholic agencies to change? I take it as the latter.

The Equaliser, Pastures New, it is not true that all social reformers or rescuers of outcasts were religious, nor were religious people always keen to help the outcasts; children of immoral relationships were regarded by many ¿good Christians¿ as equally tainted. Victorian society is particularly notorious for the double-standards of a moral Christian façade hiding illicit sexual activities. Even in recent years some churches have shown more concern for their reputation than for welfare of children, such as the covering up of child abuse by clerics. The Christian-right politicians in the USA want the law to treat abortion as murder, but vote against financial help for the poor mothers who cannot feed their babies.

Tall David, funny and accurate. Sky pixie covers all religions, and they are all suspect and hypocritical in their stand on war, killing, inter-marriage, rights of women and other issues. I think that people should be allowed their own spiritual belief, but it should not translate into institutions restricting children¿s education or adoption.

I don¿t know if gay couples adopting children is a good or bad thing, but it must be conceded that unwanted babies are not being produced by gay couples.
.”

“Correction - apologies to Tall David - somehow i missed your comment first time round - which is authoritative and intelligent - in my view.”

“The only comment that even vaguely makes sense is Poor taxpayers - otherwise I am afraid the other comments seem to be a case of people make a comment about a subject which they know nothing about - and therefore the comments reflect the ignorance of the authors. If this subject is so important to you may I suggest you actually look at the evidence surrounding the naturalism of sexual diversity as documented in areas such as: anthropology, child development, psychology, psychotherapy, sociology, biology etc.... Perhaps then can your comment have a level of respect - otherwise, they actually identify you as prejudiced, mind-less bigots.

The silver lining here is that fortunately social research of excpetional quality time and time again shows that the comments above reflect the minority view nowadays - its is good to know that most of the population live in the 21st Century.

I would also be interested to know why it is so important for the bigots to express their views in such a way - seems to me like there may be some insecurities uncovered here......”

“Sexual Orientation Regulations? This is more like another case of positive discrimination against straight, normal people and avoiding the more serious underlying issues such as children being brought up to believe that being attracted to someone of the same gender is normal. The result...an awkward situation as they approach adulthood and bring home their friends for tea to meet 'mum and mum', or even 'dad and dad'. My word they're going to grow up so confused! I wonder if things will be reversed when they hide in the straight 'closet', ashamed of admitting that they are attracted to people of the opposite sex?”

“The Hulk makes a fair point. If gays were not gay and had sexual relationships with people of the opposite gender then they could produce children of their own by normal, natural means. No need for them to adopt.”

“If gays had relationships with the opposite sex then people would not have a problem with them.”

“You seem to be a rather confused individual Tall Dave.
The privileges you speak of were not historically apparent until followers of the sky pixie took it as their duty to rescue societies outcasts.
A history lesson would not go amiss Dave
If it is (and I suppose in way you may not understand it is) a privilege to take pity on the children that so sadly in many cases the results of the immorality of the age then why seek to take those privileges away?
Often the movements for so-called sexual freedom have no conscience and their victims would be ignored.
It is the fact that they are "changing" the law of the land that is suspect. I don't see many advocates of such freedoms rushing to the aid of orphans in these enlightened times.
Such a rage Dave!”

“Equaliser, society is taking religious PRIVILEGES away that is all. Why should you expect to be privileged in the first place just because you believe in an unpleasant sky pixie? Sky pixie worshippers should obey the law of the land just like everyone else.
I reserve my right as a member of this society to state this, I would also like to add that I find sky pixie worshippers unpleasant and nasty, and, quite frankly, rather mad.”

“Is this not a direct attack on religious freedom?
We are going down a dangerous road when sections of society that many still believe deep down are immoral can change society like this.
Another case of the bad pushing out the good.
I reserve my rights as a member of free society to state this. I am not a member of the Catholic Church either.”