Craig, maybe it's a distinction in my own head but....
What I referred to as my silly stuff was a direct response to what I consider to be ridiculous assertions made in posts by others. Knee jerk reactions to the subject. I felt your example of leg humping dog / beastiality fit the same mould.
I didn't raise Christianity, the Pope, gay sex, being offended 34 years ago, hating people, the biases of science or any of the other subjects. I simply responded to the posts of others.
If you are disappointed in the words I choose to describe some of the posts in this thread and the thought processes behind them, I would encourage you to re-read them. Perhaps they are not applicable to your posts, but when you weigh in and quickly imagine a scenario that connects homosexuals to beastiality, because that is what you were doing in a subtle way, it seems impartiality is not the direction you are coming from.
I'm not writing in a scientific journal here. The research that has been done is not difficult to find. Google any of the subjects brought up and begin to explore. I'm writing from a life long interest and curiosity about all sorts of subjects and a willingness to explore new ideas. It's the same process that has brought me to many of the very conservative/libertarian views I hold.
I provided one simple link to respond to the " no other animal engages in homosexual behaviour" assertion. Someone else provided addition information. That evidence was roundly rejected and the thread quickly degenerated into a few posts of name calling before getting back on track. I'm not going to convince any one here, no matter what I post. But perhaps some of you may wander off and dig a little on your own. Or hear what Jim and Mike and you have said about what goes on behind closed doors or hate the sin, not the sinner.
As for some deep seated need for PC from me, I'll just say I doubt it. I have explained my conscious reasons pretty fully I think. You can accept them or not.
