Ian McKellen attacks "homophobic" Anglican church

When someone rapes a woman they do not take anything from her. Not to be crude, but it's the exact opposite of taking. It's quite worrying that the commandments which many Christians base their life on seems to allow rape.

With regards to your faith comment I 100% agree: that's where religion truly does have a use: for people who can't think for themselves.

that's just a waste of time

Look at those two guys, they are two peceful, reasonable men trying to promote understanding in the general public so that gay people can get on with their lives the same as the rest of us. They are not forcing their views on anyone, saying: you HAVE to like our lifestyle, they are just fighting for EQUAL rights: that's the kind of 'agenda' that we all have, even you my friend!!!

Do you believe that the votes for women cause, or the rights for the disabled cause were 'agendas' too?

I guess I don't understand what homophobia really means, it has never made any sense to me. you can't blame the church for not wanting to allow what the church considers a sin? it's clear in the bible but whatever, I think the church should be left alone. Homosexuals can find some churches that will marry them and I think they should be able to have civil unions as well. But for the most part Christians are not going to accept the acts of homosexuality as anything other than a sin, just like they themselves are admittedly sinners but they don't endorse the sin.

rwylie - i do think they are forcing themselves into the church.

women, blacks/minorities, disabled should not be used to parallel their struggles with homosexuals.

Gays can get on with their lives, but it seems not without the church changing, or everyone accepting it without being fined or fired or whatever. It's stupid if anyone hates the person but completely fine in my book if you don't accept the act.

in church and in the bible homosexuality is taught as a sin, just as lying and stealing etc... it's all the same in Gods eyes and according to the bible God calls it sin. You don't have to believe it but don't try to change it.

This issue just highlights how ridiculous believing that the Bible is the word of God really is.

Who other than a sadist would choose to make a human gay if they themselves would persecute them on Earth?

that's your opinion and that's fine of course. "Who other than a sadist would choose to make a human gay if they themselves would persecute them on Earth?"

here's what the bible says on that subject:
the bible says that we are all sinners from birth, so it's not just being gay, it's all sin the God hates, he hates the sin not the person, and he wants to save us not by our own good works because we already failed, but by His work which we believe by an act of faith. This also wasn't God's original intent, but he gave humans free will to choose.

not to be preachy, but it helps to understand what the Christians think and what there bible says.

I appreciate your point, and believe me when I say I completely understand the Christians' view, however much I disagree with it. It does however, reinforce the case against following a book that was laid down 1800 years ago, carrying as it does the outdated sentiments of that era. The fact that homosexuality is observed, and appears not to be a choice, in humans and many other mammals, also strengthens the case that the Bible was not, in fact, written or inspired by god.

P.S. Being gay is not a choice, thus should not be included in the same category as other sins, such as murder, rape (althogh rape is not forbidden in the 10 commandments!), or theft.

Oh - and generally speaking, wouldn't rape fall under do not commit adultery?