Cheers, and respect, Ian.

And thanks for the publicity.

Please come again.

Would it make any difference to your opinions if I was: straight, female, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, Arizonian, atheist, Jewish, Christian, Arabic, Australian, Belgian, French, Californian, German, British, an iPod owner, Israeli, agnostic or American?

It shouldn’t at all of course.

You actually do not know which, if any, of the above may apply to me. I am three of the above. Go figure.

How then does “what you do in the bedroom” as per your previous post, relate to my opinions in the slightest?

A tried old tactic seeking to reduce the import of another person’s opposing opinion which is really just about devaluing the other person based upon existing prejudice - ie assuming you thought I was a gay man.

Not really very admirable. Certainly not very Christian.

But, sadly, very, very typical of the American Conservative modus operandi. (Not French of course, but Latin. Go Google it - you’ll probably work it out.)

Ian.

But the usual “we accept you, but now please just shut up” arguments propogated by many do tend to annoy the people being told to be quiet.

Gay people can decide for themselves how and when they wish to speak. They do not need you to do it for them.

Why are you so threatened by gay people speaking for themselves?

And if you really believe that America is “one” - you need to get out more often. Certainly you need to see how the rest of the world perceives you.

You are right - what I do in the bedroom is certainly my business, but what I want to say about my life - either here, or in print, or on TV on Logo or anywhere - is also my business, not yours.

I am grateful to enjoy the ‘freedom of speech’ that Americans espouse. So I don’t really think you should want to prevent other Americans from doing precisely that, so if they want to view the new gay TV channel Logo, let them.

God did not appoint you to judge others. And you know it.

Ian.

Now you have updated your previous post to correct your math errors.

NOW it reads “With total U.S. population of nearly 300 million people, that would represent 5% market. Even if you cut the population in half, that would only represent 10%. No matter how you slice the numbers, they don’t add up to make a strong business case.”

BEFORE it read “With total U.S. population of nearly 300 million people, that would represent 0.05% market. Even if you cut the population in half, that would only represent 0.1%. No matter how you slice the numbers, they don’t add up to make a strong business case.

EITHER way, how many people deserve to be ignored by the media, in your Christian opinion,

AND now that the total market is up to as much as 10% according to your estimates, don’t you think a marketer would be crazy to ignore that many consumers?

Again, you host a strange site indeed.

Looking forward to your response - and so are all the other people I pointed this odd site out to.

Go ahead now.

Ian.

The point to our article is that it is better to unify a people than to divide them. If homosexuals simply want to be “accepted” as everyone else, why should they self-segregate? We’re arguing on behalf of the proverbial melting pot.

You throw words around like “homophobia” and “discrimination” as if they are supposed to give extra weight to what you’re saying. They don’t. They’re cliche. (That’s french, but you know that in Brussels)

By the way, the only one being “angry” seems to be you. We’re quite content with our position. What you do in the bedroom, Ian, is your business.

Have a Miller Extra Light and chill out.

15 million out of approx 300 million people is 5%, so the market is already 100 times bigger than the “0.05%” you calculated when you dissed this whole project.

Does that mean you will now re-appraise the “worthiness” of this new TV network?

I hope so, but somehow, I doubt it.

There are 100 times more Americans than you thought that are homosexual now remember: “e pluribus unum” - how about them as well?

And since when did small or large population size justify discrimination?

Quite strange views you hold in my opinion.

Ian.

Blessing America is really your best option at the moment as the attitudes and actions of your country in the world at present need all of God’s help. I am 40 years old and cannot remember a time when the USA was more despised.

I wish to try and get you to see that accepting all His creations, including gay and lesbian people, is truly the way Jesus would have lived.

Being so angry because gay people get to watch TV is petty on your part, and somewhat sad. If there is no need to segment markets then I guess you want to see all the Christian channels closed down immediately? Of course not, and neither do I.

Live and let live. Love your neighbour as yourself.

Try fixing America before you bless it - that’s what God would want you to do. Gay TV channels are not the problem. A small matter like all the Rumsfeld-dead people in Iraq would be a much better starting point for you to channel your efforts into. God would surely approve.

Gay, straight or otherwise - we are all God’s creations, and respecting each other is one of the most important things we have to do.

Your anger about this new gay channel is misplaced energy.

Ian.

Just curious: since your email begins with “europeian” (very cheeky, BTW), does that mean you hail from Europe or just dream about it?

Guess we’ll never know…

God bless America!

Ian.

The “issue” we have is that diversity is good in tastes and preferences, but unity is required for a people to be strong.

Why balkanize groups according to race or sexual preference? It does a disservice to those wanting to integrate into the mainstream.

If there are so few gay and lesbian people as you claim, and if you are not homophobic, why should a gay channel bug you so much?

I cannot understand when there are home decorating channels, cooking channels, travel channels, Christian channels aplenty, this one (or two or three or even more) gay channel upsets you so much!

Do you have issues?

Ian