“I think that one started because people saw a guy in his 30s who was still single and was out drinking with his buddies a lot. People kind of go `Oh, he’s 32 and he’s not married. He must be gay.’ “

Here’s the link.

And life is too short and important to worry about who someone chooses to sleep with. The exceptions to this rule is if someone choose to sleep with you and you are not interested. Or if people choose to indulge in dangerous behaviour.

That type of speculation reeks of the “idle hands” syndrome, and is fostered by those with an agenda.

Bleh. I’m rambling.

One of the biggest problems I see, is that society always takes the few with agendas and applies that to all of the people in that group. Most of the gay people that I know, and one is a dear friend of mine, and it’s not dave, are not into the national agenda. Just like most african-americans I know aren’t into the national agenda of the NAACP.

I guess it’s sometime after the women’s liberation movement when the gay liberation movement began. “Looking for Mr. Goodbar” might’ve been the turning point, especially when San Francisco became the un-official capital for gays. Then the gay community started the honor recognition system to point out historical figures who’ve delved in sexual gratification with same sex partners, even though they were also married or had affairs with both sexes. So what that Napolean or Caesar are “gay”, but were they really? And now celebs? Should we know what are people’s preferred sexual gratification patterns? Maybe they’re into S&M or orgies. It’s ridiculous!!! Now let’s see, is Ann Heche gay, since she’s now married to a man? And what about Elton John, Sammy Davis, Jr., etc.? Being bi-sexual used to mean you were a swinger back in the 60’s. Of course, to be a true swinger, you really had to be rich and/or famous.

Why should deviant celebrity status dictate society? Something is definitely wrong if it does. Hopefully people are smarter than the real gay community thinks. Sexual encounters are personal and should be kept private regardless. Outward discussion just proves there is an agenda and a forum to expand their base.

We love because God first loved us.

Much as I enjoy sports, I could care less about the personal lives of stars. Those who spend a lot of time thinking about the personal lives of celebrities in any field need to get a life.

However, in my opinion, concern about at least some aspects of personal character does have some justification in regard to electing high officials. Likewise when considering drafting a young athlete and committing millions of dollars to him. I think such considerations are mainly relevant in considering placing someone in a position of trust that they have not been in before. What aspects of character are relevant here is something about which reasonable people may disagree, I think.

However, other than exceptions such as I noted, someone else’s personal life is none of my business. Attempting to pry into others private lives is wrong, and using public curiosity about someone like Piazza to promote the agenda of some group is reprehensible.