Something of a storm over Bishop Robinson’s (the first openly gay Anglican bishop) comments about whether Jesus was gay. Reading the actual remarks I think it sort of depends on the tone of voice he used:

In answer to a question from the congregation about
how the acceptance of homosexuality could be squared with the
scriptural emphasis on redemption for sins, the Bishop replied:
"Interestingly enough, in this day of traditional family values, this
man that we follow was single, as far as we know, travelled with a
bunch of men, had a disciple who was known as ‘the one whom Jesus
loved’ and said my family is not my mother and father, my family is
those who do the will of God. None of us likes those harsh words.
That’s who Jesus is, that’s who he was at heart, in his earthly life.

”Those
who would posit the nuclear family as the be all and end all of God’s
creation probably don’t find that much in the gospels to support it,"
he said.

If this was said in a humorous, almost jokey way, then I would regard it as innocuous, a decent debating point and twisting of the question. After all. no one expects him to say, well, yes, you’re right, homos are sinners now do they?
However, if he actually meant it, that from the above evidence he adduces that Jesus was in fact gay,  then I think he’s off his trolley. Still, no worse than what many of the English Anglican bishops have said over the years. Didn’t one of Durham deny the Virgin Birth?
Another comment he made seems a great deal more reasonable:

"It was a very lonely place to be. At least if you’re black and you’re
called a nigger, you can go home to your mother and father and say, ‘Oh
my god, they called me a nigger today’, and the parents have had the
same experience. But a young kid growing up terribly fearful that he or
she might be gay can’t go home to the parents because of the
consequences."

I don’t know if that’s still true of the current generation of adolescents but can well imagine it was in the bishop’s.