You get to wear a shirt for one game of the season, the press come and take photos, get a quote from Elton John - and then the rest of the world continues on its merry way.

I applaud your faith and your sincerity and indeed admire it for I know that I could not uphold such blind allegiance to a faith of any description particularly when you consider that the historic base of all religion is control of the population, hence its keen adoption by royalty down through the ages especially when being royal was putting yourself in a very shaky position indeed, theres nothing quite like declaring yourself as the representative of a God to maintain your position in the hierarchy.

I would however question your last paragraph as it seems to be constructed in a convenient way for you to be critical of homosexuality while having some sort of logical structure to your belief.

If its true that you cannot change race or disability (which patently it is) and you accept that homosexuality is not a lifestyle choice (which you do), then how can and why should homosexuals be expected to refrain from sexual contact for the whole of their lives, and its not just christianity who treat homosexual physical contact in this discriminatory way.

The "its not natural" argument doesn't hold any water because its perfectly natural in the "natural" world amongst all animal species, so there is another reason for wanting to bar homosexual contact isn't there ?

Ah, so you base your arguement on the fact that chimps do it, ergo we as part of the animal kingdom should also embrace sodomy? I'm sure you are aware that gang rape, murder and cannibilism are also part of the chimps lifestyle, should we also accept that as "natural" behaviour as well? Life in Horsforth has certainly changed over the last 30 years!

Why not simply accept, that there is a large swath of the population who do not really care what the gay people do in the persuit of their personal happiness, but would simply prefer that they get on with it, without constantly attempting to justify their inclinations, or by belittling others beliefs? Live and let live Mcf. Until it gets made compulsory....

And if we're going to to persue the pink pound as part of a marketing ploy, can I make a plea to The Management to have them allocated their own part of the ground. The last thing I want, is to be sat in the northstand with my view of the pitch obscurred by row upon row of Boy George hat wearing types, ooohing and aaahing everytime Ryan hall zooms by.

Oh come on Billy, get out of the closet.

You do know your avatar was gay don't you?

Yes, Minister

The difference is that I believe that homosexual activity is sinful, not the inclination. You can't act black, or Asian, or brain damaged, but you can knowingly choose to engage in homosexual relations, which is what Christians have a problem with. Not everyone feels this way of course, I accept that, but that is the Christian position.

The greatest swindle of the last century is the elevation of homosexuality to parity with heterosexual marriage. I believe that homosexuality is not an equal sexual 'orientation' and that it ought to be classed as a sexual immorality.

Of course I should reiterate that no gay person deserves to be bullied, threatened or hurt because of how they feel. "Hate the sin, not the sinner" is such a cliche but it is very true. I will therefore stand up for my right to tell such people what I think is best for them - after all, that's what the Bible tells us to do.

Your right is absolute.

Homosexual "marriage" is of course not an option, yet, but this country led most of the world in recognising that homosexual couples should be given some legal entity and that is all that the civil registry ceremony offers, a legal title.

.... And there lies the key. Why such reverence for a book written by scientifically unenlightened men ?
Which version of the bible incidentally ? And do YOU take it all literally or are you selective with it so that it sits better with your own personal comfort or agenda ?

Anyways each to their own....

.....as for the chimps, as long as there is mutual adult ~consent~ go for it

What has science got to do with it?

I do take what could be labelled as a 'literal stance' on the Bible, but it is actually impossible to read the whole thing literally. The Bible is a compendium of many books, of different genres, written by different authors over 1500 years. For example, the NT uses a lot of imagery and metaphorical language, (especially the Book of Revelation, which is just mindbending stuff if taken literally) and when John referred to the 'lamb' it is clear that he was not referring to a literal animal, but Jesus Christ.

A good Bible believing church can help guide you through Bible study, if you're interested in this sort of thing.

Its actually quite a good book to read, as a historical book, I find myself sitting around in hotel rooms from time to time (quite legitimately I add) and sometimes idly flick through the Gideons book that seems to be obligatory in most hotels (what do muslims think of that ?), you can actually find some interesting stories in there.

Incidently my wife works in a hotel and their group is driven by what idiots write on TripAdvisor (personally I'd ignore most of the rubbish that gets put on there), the other day someone gave the hotel a one star rating because there was no bible in the room, FFS, if you're so desperate and upset at no access to a bible then bring your f'kin own with you.

What a load of nonsense. As an active Christian with a gay spouse, I find these attitudes offensive. You are as likely to change your race or any disabality you may have through the Holy Spirit as you are your sexual inclination.

Well done to the club for supporting any campaign to combat such archaic thought.

The likelihood of something happening is not relevant. In any case, the Bible does not command us to change our inclination, but to resist temptation. As a Christian, you should know that homosexual acts are sinful. I'm not saying this out of hate, but love (Ephesians 4:15 & 2 Timothy 4:2).



People are free to believe whatever they want. I really do hope that the club is not going to enforce the 21st Century, politically correct dogma of telling people what to think.

Like I said in a previous post, bullying is not on. But the club (and the government) cannot tell people what to think.

Simply science continues to compell bible believers to wriggle and reinterpret their dogma.

Thanks for the offer but I prefer to read books on evolution, geology and other such factual books. Jejune stories about Noah and his ilk I prefer to leave to others.

You object to equal status for homosexuals I object to state, tax funded catholic schools presenting books to impressionable kids that make statements like " we know " that god made us and the earth.
My primary school teacher, wife, struggles every day with that one and tends to insert the more accurate " some believe ".

And yes ....securing a job was the motivation rather than "supporting the catholic ethos ".... Our taxes should not be used for such, or any other, indoctrination.

Will you attend any games where the shirt is worn ?

Both quotes are from letters from early church leaders to contemporary worshippers. We no longer live in those times.

I have no problem with your "dislike" of homosexuality. I agree that people shouldn't be told what to think and I agree with your stance on bullying. What I take offence at is the suggestion that being gay is a "changable" condition. I assume you're only attracted to people of the opposite sex. You won't change to fancying those of the same sex so why would the reverse be true?

But are you not also attempting to tell people what to think, sin being an essentially social construct?

Furthermore, I notice you have found two biblical references to explain why you are expressing your views, but no scriptural basis for the views themselves.

I am not religious or gay myself, but I certainly find the bible an interesting text, both culturally and historically. The Old Testament (Leveticus in particular) has clear prohibitions on homosexuality, but even the New Testament advises that we should not be bound by Old Testament law (an indication perhaps that the early Christian church was more aware of it's need to adapt to changing social structures than today's?). Furthermore, to accept Leveticus' prohibition we must presumably accept the immorality of eating fat, eating pork, wearing clothes sewn of more than one cloth, cutting the hair on the sides of your head or clipping your beard?

So, assuming (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that you don't recognise all of those acts as sin, we should perhaps discount the proscriptions of the Old Testament.

As far as I know, no gospel or any other part of the New Testament claiming to be the word of Christ makes any specific reference to homosexuality, without delving too much into the gospels, which are not plausibly all Christ's teaching as they are quite mutually contradictory. Rather, Christ's primary conern appears to have been with love, tolerance and forgiveness. I would see homosexuality as entirely consistent with those aims.

I was also interested to read that you regard the legal status of homosexual civil partnerships as a "swindle." In what regard? Do you accept that the law of this country is essentially secular, and as such requires more than a scriptural justification (even if you can find one) for outlawing a practice?

I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't hold these views, indeed I think it's important that people are allowed to express and discuss these matters and taboos do nobody any favours, but I do think if you seek to persuade others of them, this sort of challenge is important. Apologies that you're being asked to respond to a lot of questions here, but I think your view is not as common, nad certainly not as commonly expressed as it might once have been, which makes it interesting but also leaves few to defend it.

I think you're both looking at things too literally. Perhaps read the bible stories as just that. As McF has said, Kings and Queens have and still do use religion to control the masses. Why do you think it's called the King James Bible?

The stories of Jesus' are moral ways of living. The underlying theme is to treat other people how you wish to be treated - equally, with love, respect and forgiveness. Matthew 25: 31-46 sets the bar to what is morally right. The fact that the bar is compared against Jesus is only because he was revered. Personally, I think it's more about being at peace with ones self and others and leading a moral life, rather than entering the gates of heaven.

Apply this theory to people of any sexual orientation and you should be quite happy to let it be.

Whether people are born gay, or choose to be gay is a difficult one. I don't think people are born gay. I think childhood is a very influential time and can affect much more than just the sexual orientation of somebody.

Well that's me up the Kyber pass on Boxing Day. Not only will I not be able to wear my new Champions limited editions shirt, I won't be able to indulge in my usual growler and peas with mint sauce from the Wilsons van! Furthermore I'm going to be looking like a cross between JJB anf Eric Grothe Snr come Grand Final. Pesky religion.

Firstly, can I congratulate you for holding a relatively informed view on dispesationalism. Most non-Christians are very ill-informed when it comes to such matters.

I agree, we are not bound by the law of the Old Testament, because Jesus fulfilled it. However the New Testament does tell us that homosexual relations are wrong. Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians are quite clear that such deeds are sinful. Moreoever, beyond the NT, it is clear from the OT that God intended marriage to be between one man and one woman. We need only look at Genesis 1&2 to see that this is God's plan for us.

I'll repsond to your point about civil partnerships later tonight, I'm snowed under at work at the moment

You are choosing your interpretation. Such a vast and varied book with such a huge amount of vague stories and metaphors and contradiction which is on its umpteenth translation cant be interpreted in anyway you want. You are choosing to view homosexuality as a sin. You are hiding behind your religious justification. The words and condemnation you are using are yours and you bear the responsibility of them. God hasn’t told you to be a homophobe, you have chosen to be so and using God as a justification.

If you wanted, you’re religion and your interpretation of it could just as easily take the opposite view.

From my religious background, (though I'm not what you'd call a practising Christian, I still have my beliefs) I think the position that the CofE had in recent years about gay members of the Clergy was that they were fine to be homosexual, but that engaging in sexual activities outside of wedlock was considered a sin. The place this gets inconsistent is that there is no possibility for a homosexual man to marry his partner. Its almost like saying that its ok to eat Pork, but only with you right hand (thereby depriving amputees, stroke victims etc who may otherwise be totally religious, the fair opportunity to eat something everyone else can through no fault of their own)

I think the root of this is that the modern church (I'm only really familiar with CofE) probably accepts the evidence that people are born straight or gay, but religion in general is a very slow moving thing, and I wouldn't expect it to catch up with something like Gay marriage any time soon.

Was the kit that Sheffield played in last year pink?!

Good initiative imo.

As far as I'm concerned people should be able to get on with their lives irrespective of their sex or sexuality and free of fear or persecution.
Hate crime against the LGBT community is still rife, as is prejudice and discrimination.
In this sense the question of homophobia is very close to the issues of racism and sexism.

Personally I don't give a toss what religion you are, but if your interpretation of whatever text it is you hold sacred tells you to discriminate against others, I've only got three words for you......GET OVER IT!