Try not to think of gays or guilt as you do so, the language then did not permit those sort of meaning to the words:
'Let me speak proudly: tell the constable
We are but warriors for the working-day;
Our gayness and our gilt are all besmirch'd
With rainy marching in the painful field;
There's not a piece of feather in our host--
Good argument, I hope, we will not fly--
And time hath worn us into slovenry:
But, by the mass, our hearts are in the trim;
And my poor soldiers tell me, yet ere night
They'll be in fresher robes, or they will pluck
The gay new coats o'er the French soldiers' heads
And turn them out of service. If they do this,--
As, if God please, they shall,--my ransom then
Will soon be levied. Herald, save thou thy labour;
Come thou no more for ransom, gentle herald:
They shall have none, I swear, but these my joints;
Which if they have as I will leave 'em them,
Shall yield them little, tell the constable.'
The gay language police don't just want all behaviour to be determined from birth, they also want the one sort of sexual behaviour not to be joked about at all to be the homosexual sexual behaviour. As someone who has an LLB, I am all for lawyer jokes, humour... well... humour is the great unity force, it is something that forms the basis of civilised contact between people of different backgrounds. A laugh can and will stop a war. It is often people who take themselves far too seriously who cannot take a joke. We look on with shock when someone is arrested for mocking their president, but such arrest suddenly becomes okay if they happen to make light of cultural or behavioural differences. The Gay language thought police, who want to omit any jokes involving gay persons, don't have very good language skills to begin with. To them 'gay people' are 'gays people'.
Just to note another issue: the word homo means same, it does not mean gay, which itself is a hijacking of a word for deep happiness. Homo prejudice: same prejudice? Once again the raping of the English language by people who have never bothered to learn it.
In any case, the Le Roux and Others versus Dey judgement, found that much of what the likes of 702 might call prejudice, is not Constitutionally speaking so. I know I have argued in the past that the court was wrong in that case, and that in my view linking someone to homosexuals in order to mock them is defamatory to the victim and not beneficial to gays, that relentlessly teasing little kids by calling them gay neither benefits gays nor society. That was not the decision of the court.
Think for a moment of a good Irish joke. I can certainly think of many, proudly so. Think of a good blonde joke. Think of a good French Joke. Think of a good Catholic Joke. Think of a good lawyer joke. Now, think of the great feeling each gives you. Do you feel malice against any of these by telling those jokes. Do you hate the Dutch by talking of Dutch Courage? Now think of a gay joke. Think of who told you it for a start: probably someone liberal who likes gays actually. Do you feel the same joy as all the other jokes give, or have you been affected by something else? Does joking or smiling about that one subject make you feel uncontrollably awkward. Ask yourself why, and ask yourself whether or not the media approach to homosexuals is actually good for them. Words like anti-gay or homophobic... how do they make you feel. Do you feel like the victim of propaganda, like you are secretly a hidden homophobe, do you feel tremmours of fear, of terror. Do you look left and right and hope, like many in 'gay friendly countries', like you might secretly be homophobic. The statistics suggest the gay friendly countries have many such people, if not a majority. All terrified of their inner homophobic self... why? Because they want to treat gays like the Irish, like Lawyers, Like Blondes, Brunettes, like everyone else: but the gay language police say they can't. Now be a good inner homophobe and call up 702 to tell them of your secret unwitting evil prejudice: that inner part of you that wants to treat gay people like just that: people.