From no less than the Dalai Lama:
Although he is known for his tolerant, humane views, he is a surprisingly harsh critic of homosexuality. If you are a Buddhist, he says, it is wrong. "Full stop.
No way round it.
"A gay couple came to see me, seeking my support and blessing. I had to explain our teachings. Another lady introduced another woman as her wife - astonishing. It is the same with a husband and wife using certain sexual practices. Using the other two holes is wrong."
At this point, he looks across at his interpreter - who seems mainly redundant - to check that he has been using the right English words to discuss this delicate matter. The interpreter gives a barely perceptible nod.
"A Western friend asked me what harm could there be between consenting adults having oral sex, if they enjoyed it," the Dalai Lama continues, warming to his theme. "But the purpose of sex is reproduction, according to Buddhism. The other holes don't create life. I don't mind - but I can't condone this way of life."
Daniel Nairn, who ought to be regularly read, makes the point eloquently:
How can such a kind spiritual guru, who has carved out a name for himself by standing up for the persecuted Tibetan people, not share in the newest of progressive causes, the cause of full sexual liberation? (He's also against abortion and contraception, by the way)
Western elites don't realize how alone we actually are in the world in our belief that sex is an utterly private activity that can be disassociated from commitment, biological constitution, community, gender, just about anything. We want to fashion our decadence into a moral crusade for human rights, as if the wealthy gay urbanites in San Fransisco share solidarity with the oppressed of Darfur, and we are outraged when the rest of the world doesn't buy the package.
Conservative christians who want to make a mountain out of the molehill that is homosexuality while at the same time ignoring the Swiss Alpian sense of their own sin or the litany of others that christians engage in daily deserve the criticism that comes their way.
However, and regular readers know a however would follow the sentence before this one, I see no reason, theological or otherwise, to affirm, encourage, endorse sin.
Neither apparently does the Dalai Lama.
I consider myself in good company.