About the previous post

Posted by: GayGuy

I have recieved quite a bit of feedbacks about the previous posting, as many people think that the contributor has contributed a letter that, in a way, portrays homosexuality in a very negative light.

I agree, and apologise for the offense anyone might have taken from that post, but surely, I am gay, and I am not a Christian, and I have my reasons.

This is NOT a contribution but a commentary worthy of publishing. The commentary has also been slightly edited for captialisation and short-forms.

From: *removed*@gmail.com
To: gay_2_d_bone@yahoo.com

Dear blogger, I have to say that the recent letter you posted really annoyed me majorly. The idea of the whole later was to portray homosexuality in a negative light. There are subtle hints dropped along the way by that City Harvest girl that by being a lesbian or gay you would need to CHANGE. I honestly would love to tell it to her face that it's a matter of choice yes, to be either gay or straight because we're born to be bisexual. It's rather apparant that she is promoting the idea that those who are confused (i.e lesbian or gay) with their sexuality should immediately seek help with their church elders and what's not.

I personally feel that the letter is in some ways a slap in the queer community's face. sigh. I don't know if you actually picked up the hints along the way when you read the letter but my friends and I did while we read through that entry. -_-"

Regards,
lady queer

I thank you lady queer for your continued support and feedbacks.

I am very sure to say now that I knew the hints from the letter, but I believe that what the queer community needs to pick from this letter isn't the small hints or hidden criticism. I believe that we need to realise the fact that she's changed, or at least from what she claims to be.

Christianity and homosexuality are both very sensitive topics, when mixed together.

I believe in choice. If she's changed, and if anyone wants to be changed the same way as her, I would gladly send them off to where he or she finds suiting.

I don't quite know how to continue on from here, but what I wanted to say is that, the contribution may contain elements hinting that homosexuality is wrong, but my approach was to give everyone a freedom of choice.

Wouldn't it be very selfish if we only provide homosexuality from a homosexual perspective?

Look at the article again if you would like, and try to pick out things more "positive", like she's no longer the same, et cetra.

Still, posting that article up, I still felt that I am wrong in some ways, because wouldn't that post itself defeat the purpose of this blog itself? I realised that I would be committing a even greater mistake if I take away the freedom of choice from the readers.

What this blog needs to focus now is again, back to the homosexuality issue, and leave this "trials" behind.

Note that the choice I mention is NOT choice of sexual orientation, which I strongly believe that IT IS NOT A CHOICE, but I was refering to the choice of religion. Surely you can't order someone to choose a religion he or she doesn't like, right?

Please continue to submit your entries either to gay_2_d_bone@yahoo.com or you can directly submit your stories by leaving a comment in the most recent post, posting as an anonymous contributor. Your email address will be kept private. All contributor's real names are NOT required, unless specified by the contributor with written permission to reveal the identity.