Happy Pride Month! Dame Kelly Holmes Comes Out

Never heard of John MacArthur. Googled him. He’s a homophobe. Not interested in his message.

Why do you have an urge to "educate" anyone? You think you possess some unheard of knowledge about LGBTQ that other people "need to know? Get over yourself, you are nothing special. Just live your life, and get rid of the activism that angers more people than educate.

As for the article - I belong to the majority that just knew all along, and these "news" are not news at all. We knew, did not care, as it is her own, private life, and I still do not care even a tiny bit. I was neutral to her sexuality and preferences, and still am. I would be much more interested in her coming out regarding the use of PED though. THAT would take some courage to admit.

Disobedience to God is the reason the world is fallen. It's a good thing God sent his Son for the purpose to reclaim this broken world.

I didn’t initiate this thread, and I didn’t come to this message board to educate anyone on LGBTQ issues. This is not a forum in which I want to even discuss such issues because I know there are people like TMADDDHASFNE who just spew hateful nonsense. I come to this site to read the news and commentary about the latest outstanding running performances. I just happened to come across this thread and clicked on it because an Olympic champion coming out was of interest to me. When I read the posts, I saw that people were saying that coming out is not a big deal and one person asserting, “There is absolutely no discrimination against homosexuals in the West.” Both assertions are wildly inaccurate, and I felt a need to correct them.

Why did I feel a need to correct misinformation? Because such ignorance is what helps discrimination and marginalization of my identity group to persist. It’s also disrespectful and dismissive of the very real difficulty that I and so many others have faced. If you were with a group of non-runners who started talking about running, and they started saying things like, “Running a 10k is easy, anyone can do it, I don’t understand why so many runners spend so much time training, and why do they brag about their times and post their runs on Strava, they need to get over themselves. Who cares?” would you not be compelled to respond? Now imagine if those people were saying running is immoral, and we lived in a society in which laws are being passed to prevent teachers from talking about running, people light running tracks on fire, others throw pepper spray bombs at road races, runners are regularly bullied in school, assaulted as adults, and parents disown their kids for being runners. Would that bother you? Would you want to say something to those people?

I wish I could just live my life without having to worry about discrimination, or whether it’s safe to hold my partner’s hand in public, or whether the Supreme Court will take away my right to get married. Unfortunately I can’t, and I won’t be silent about it when the topic comes up.

Nothing hateful in any of my posts, only your misinterpreted opinion.

Yawn!

Lol of course my post calling out that Coevett found a way to turn Kelly's coming out into him being a victim got deleted.

I honestly never thought about Kelly Holmes being gay in all my years of being interested in distance running.

That said, the main reason we have Pride Month in the first place is because certain people throw a fit if someone like Kelly brings their same-sex partner to an event or co-habits with them in a way that goes beyond “roommates.” If no one gave a crap or discriminated against homosexuals in the first place, then we aren’t having this debate in the first place. But that’s not the case, and the “education” continues, so to speak.

Hate takes a lot of energy on both sides, the side doing it and the side fighting it.

As for her PED use, who knows. I thought everyone at the top level used them anyway, doesn't seem to be much debate around that.

Marriage is a God ordained sacred union between a man and a woman.

What you promote is called Civil Union, not marriage.

"Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." -- Matthew 24:34 (Amal. II) --

"The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, He went to find out if it had any figs. When He reached it, He found nothing but leaves, because He did not know it was not the season for figs. Then Jesus spoke to the tree, 'May no one ever eat figs from you again!' Jesus cursed the fig tree." -- Mark 11:12-14 (Synod Version) --

How exactly does God do such ordaining?

Who cares, still a cheater.

Why don't you admit you have no wish to debate the ethics of homosexuality?

BTW, I'm not 'homophobic' in any way. I do object to identity politics and I have the right to dispute the claim that LBGT people in the UK in 2022 are 'discriminated' against. I am also a secular rationalist, and am open-minded to the possibility that the fact that virtually every culture on Earth until the last 50 years in the West suppressed homosexuality, may indicate there were deep-rooted social reasons for doing so (and not just 'prejudice' or because 'a Sky God says it's wrong'.

Homosexuality was not 'accepted' in the Ancient World. You can't have your cake and eat it. Either pederasts (in modern parlance 'paedophiles') are homosexuals, or the Ancient Greeks and others were not accepting of homosexuals.

I'm surprised none of you have brought in the penguin argument yet.

The state should only confer civil unions (regardless of the orientation of the couple). If you want your union to signify your beliefs, have the ceremony performed in an institution of your choosing (a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, bath house, etc.). It is not the job of the government to legislate your beliefs.

I don’t need to debate the ethics of my existence with you. As I mentioned previously, you have shown yourself to be ignorant on this topic. You don’t know history, you don’t know the definition of lesbian, and you took the absurd position that there is no discrimination against gay people in the West and heterosexuals are stigmatized. Now you’re suggesting that there may be valid reasons for suppressing homosexuality. Why would I waste my time debating with such a person? It would be as useless as debating a white supremacist about their ideology. If you’re so interested in this topic, you can do the reading I’ve already recommended.

You can't debate with prejudice. It's like wrestling with a pig in the mud. You will get covered in mud. And the pig likes it.

There is more prejudice against Bible believing Christians than to heathens, fornicators, idol worshipers, goat herders, and Marxist educators.

Is that why people swear on the Bible in court? Or why American currency has “In God we trust” printed on it?

"Verily I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things take place." -- Matthew 24:34 (James Rev. Ad.) --

75% of the country is Christian. If you people are persecuting yourselves, that's masochism, not prejudice.