On Celibacy (and homosexuality, again)

Mother Teresa isn't the sort of person you want to compare yourself to, unless you're working as a missionary and/or nun - if that were the case, then she'd be your role model. Jill Laing doesn't see it that way though. Jill also compares herself to Isaac Newton as she attempts why celibacy isn't ridiculous. What I find ridiculous is how Miss Laing still believes that homosexuals choose to be gay.

Mother Teresa and Isaac Newton were virgins for good reason, but they're not the sort of people you want to name drop when explaining that you're celibate as well. Mother Teresa was a nun and celibacy comes with that territory; as for Isaac Newton, well he was a mathematician and that's the sort of thing that doesn't get you laid. So, if you dissect the argument correctly, Jill Laing is either a nun or a mathematician, which, seemingly belonging to the Church of Latter Day Saints, I'm assuming she's neither as nuns are mostly not nut jobs and LDS-folk still believe that Native Americans were originally white, so they probably don't have intelligence under their belt anyway.

There's nothing wrong with celibacy, though. If you're a Katy Perry, it's just a ridiculous joke. My main concern about Laing's inability to accept that homosexuality isn't a choice - we're are living in a century where the earth is round, right? You can choose to not have sex, but you can't choose who you will love. It's that simple. And her suggesting that there is "evidence" that proves that homosexuals can go straight is null and void as most of it resides in the church, and we all know that the church always alters things to follow its belief.

I guess what I'm trying to say here is, if you're going to compare yourself to someone, don't go around name dropping historical people who have made a difference. I've read about Mother Teresa and peruse - because I had to - some of Newton's works, and Jill Laing, you are no Mother Teresa or Isaac Newton.