I presume the chaps who equate homosexuality with buggery and thus too, too awful to contemplate are or have been serving members of HM the Q's armed forces, and thus are or have been trained, equipped and expected to go out and blow (no, not like that) the living daylights out of people, when appropriate.
I find the idea of violently killing people rather more upsetting than the idea of consensual sodomy.
Now, I'm very glad that HM the Q's armed forces exist, and fully support the idea that when it comes to the crunch we can get out there and do it to them before they do it to us. I can cope with upsetting ideas, if that's the way the world is.
But I am surprised that those who consider homosexuality profoundly unnatural (which, given that it's widespread in the animal kingdom, it ain't) are so at ease with the idea of extreme violence. Doesn't that seem a strange set of priorities?
R