Tataw, I think I understand your point. We all have to grasp that our ***uality is a spectrum, and some men are effeminate, for example. Likewise some women tend to be masculine in their nature. A minority of people come into the homo***ual (***) category, and these are attracted to people of their own ***. This is how that person is, and it is futile to deny their state and try to change their nature. We have to accept people as they really are.
Unfortunately, the people who devised our religions thousands of years ago were intolerant of these minorities and they expressly excluded them. This was wrong, but we today can have more toleration and good sense than they showed.
Ex-huyton disagree on many things. The subject of homo***uality in one of them. I have many homo***ul friends. I have be approached many times by mean who wanted more than to be friends. And each and everytime the person was insistent to the point of being rude.
What a person does in the privacy does not matter to me. A certainly we should never be prejudiced against anyone for their private preferrences. But when governments, companies, militaries, teams and schools try to act like there is not differeence between men and women I have to draw the line there.
You can not legislate tolerance. What you can do is promote the acceptance of everyone as he is without shoving the counterpoint down the throats of society.
Also, I do not agree that intolerance is the result of religions although they certainly helped to make homo***uality a weird behaviour. Many priests I know are in fact homo***uals. But the idea of using their position as men of God to coerce other to have intimate contact. That is wrong and can not be tolerated.
But some how that homo***ual element feel that they have the right to persuade young people that homo***uality is a valid option. Why must we teach that to 5 year olds?