Where I stand is this. I have no problem what other people do in private. Indeed, I shall go further than this and state that I prefer not to see it as an issue at all. I cannot say much more, but there are people close to me who may or may not be gay and it makes bugger all difference. In fact, if they are, they will probably need some extra love because they are going to find that not everybody thinks the same way.
What I don't accept is militant gay stuff or people who glory in perversion (gay or straight) and then expect us to treat them like heroes and martyrs. I absolutely hate militancy of all kinds, that in your face you have to accept me crap. I have to accept nobody, unless I want to. I also believe that gays get treated with kid gloves (it is almost impossible not to get into double entendres) in some quarters, and in the interests of true equality, they should be able to take the shit just as much as anybody. (Mark Oaten take note) Personally, I abhor loud outpourings of gayness, or fox-huntingness, or animal rightsness, or blackness, or greenness or indeed party politics and sectarianism. Stonewall and their ilk are to me an anathema, as is the fact the London Gay Men's Choir gets government funding. The idea of men in sequinned jock straps parading through Brighton to "celebrate the LGBT community" is frankly sick making.
And so it is that we come to the news that the good ol' C of E is inching into the 19th Century. According to Ruth Gledhill's report in The Times:
Senior bishops in the Lords have told The Times that they will support an amendment to the Equality Bill next month that will lift the ban on civil partnership ceremonies in religious premises. The amendment would remove the legislative prohibition on blessings of homosexual couples and open the door to the registration of civil partnerships in churches, synagogues, mosques and all other religious premises.
I applaud this move with my whole heart, for there is no such thing as the sin of Love.