I just finished reading your book and want to wholeheartedly thank you for what you do. I believe, your effort is something increadibly long overdue not just in our society but virtually in any country of the world. I have told about your book to several people already - and I don’t usually do that at all.

At the same time, there are a few things your book has left untouched and, perhaps, rightfully so because this topic may very well deserve a separate book or series of them. What I mean is the topic of an all-inclusive “interfaith” forum: in my humble opinion, though you call it “interfaith”, your project was presented rather an “interreligious” trilogue. And “interreligious” excludes many people who have faith but are not religious. Like myself, for although I am a person of faith, I most certaily don’t believe in an organized form of it, be that Church, Mosque, Temple etc. Because any “religion” is brought to life and maintained by our fellow human beings who, as we all know, are far from being perfect.

I sincerely praise your approach encouraging people to put all their reservations, phobias, doubts etc. on the table so they are clearly seen. And it is precisely why I hope that a full-scoped interfaith forum will tackle the issue of a religion or, for that matter, different religions. Because I don’t believe we can be ultimately true with each other and, more important, true to ourselves without discussing a particular religion and - why not? - criticizing it.

It has always puzzled me how most people (of different religions) when facing a crisis or a tragedy rush to take a religion out of any kind of criticism, saying something like “yes, those people are bad but don’t touch the religion”. In my view, a religion must be touched because in a discussin that aims at finding the truth no subject should be off limits, even if it offends or insults somebody. And, since a given religion does exert - sometimes enormous - influence on historical development of a particular people, its critical analysis is a must.

Another issue to which, I feel, your book has come very close but stopped short of clearly spelling out is “values”. Frankly, I feel discomfort when I hear somebody say “this country is based on - then goes the name of a religion or religions - values”. When the definition time came, I realized that I belive in values that are universally human and - to me - absolute:
a) human life is sacred and cannot be touched no matter what;
b) there are ideas and ideals worth dying for but there are no ideas and ideals worth killing for;
c) unconditional freedom of speech except calls to violence;
d) freedom to practice whatever faith and/or religion you wish, not to practice anything or to be an atheist;
e) human right to pursue happiness and, yes, it does include gays’ right to marry…

I can go on and on with the list but the point is that none of these values can be called Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist etc. For none of the religions created them, the religions rather incorporated them. Long before ANY religion came to life, people knew that some things are right and some things are wrong. And these days, only blind can’t see how many universal human values are in conflict with the religious doctrines or “religious values”.

I can’t wait to hear somebody say loudly and without fear of losing an office: this country firmly stands based on the universal human values. And whatever is your religion or faith, all of you are welcome!

Personally, I don’t see a thing wrong with homosexuality. It seems as natural to me as heterosexuality, there is much homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom, it is not an “unnatural act” as some people have labeled it. It is simply not a lifestyle which leads to procreation, but this can also be said of heterosexual couples who choose not to have children.

I ask because for a while I felt a strong pulling to Islam and the Qu’ran, only I know that homosexuality is NOT looked highly upon - which has caused me to build a lot of personal walls, despite that I know I find myself defending Islam a lot. I know their are Homosexual Muslim groups, but even the more moderate or liberal Muslims seem to still think Homosexuality is a disease. I’ve come across some liberal Catholics who believe it is a personal struggle for homosexuals to overcome (and remain celibate), sent by God.

I know it is a touchy subject, but many people of all faiths use their religion to justify their disproval of homosexuality. I was wondering how other people viewed it.

In all honesty, I have seen many homosexual relationships that incorporate so much honor, respect and love and have been so long-lasting that they are exemplary among all relationships — heterosexual relationships included. I am not homosexual, but having over the years met and become friends quite a large sampling of people in both male and female same-sex partnerships, I cannot help but grieve that their way of life suffers such scrutiny. In some instances I’d say that not only do gay people love as well and as much… but maybe more than the average. Edward, I can tell you with all certainty, that there’s nothing different about homosexual love than there is in heterosexual love except that the two people are of the same sex. I wish you knew some gay people well enough to not have had to ask the question. Remember that as in every demographic that can identified, there are extremists, liberals and moderates. If you met a gay person who was low-key and not “flaming” in the way that we see as extreme, you’d be surprised at how very, very like us they are. I wish you could meet my same-sex neighbors, one of whom is fighting cancer — she’s suffering and her partner is so loving and supportive. I should be so lucky a relationship as supportive and loving as the one they share. If you met them, you’d have no doubts.

1. Yes, many Mormons appear to understand how Joseph Smith, Jr. interpretted the “Golden Tablets.” This is one of the miracles of God, however, from the Mormon perspective.

2. I don’t believe anyone has actually seen these tablets.

3. His wives also had many husbands. I don’t fully understand this, but the idea seems to revolve around the interpretation of a “celestial” family of some sort. I am sorry that I can’t ask any more.

I would like to ask anyone of any faith:

Do you believe homosexuals can love, or do you believe it is purely lust? Why do you believe this?