All this fuss over The Da Vinci Code and Holy Blood, Holy Grail. The way people go on, you'd think it was a terrible thing for Jesus to be married, and have sex with Mary Magdalene. There's no evidence that he was married anyway, apart from one line in a gnostic gospel which says he kissed her often on the ..... The word is actually missing, so it could be lips, or cheek or forehead. Whatever, the case for this particular hypothesis is sparse.
Which is more than can be said for the alternative, that Jesus was gay! Putting aside the old chestnut about surrounding himself with twelve men, there remains the presence of the beloved disciple, or 'one whom Jesus loved'. This is traditionally assumed to be John, brother of James, and supposed author of the gospel that bears his name. But he is not actually named. At the crucifixion, Jesus tells him to look after his mother, saying "Behold thy mother." Now Mary still had three sons left after Jesus' death, so why is someone who is not related to her, charged with her care? Unless that someone was her son's partner, in which case he would be a son to her.
Again from the gnostic gospels, there is mention of a naked youth with Jesus in the garden of Gethsemene, who runs off when the soldiers arrive. With them is Judas who reveals to the guard who Jesus is by giving him a kiss! The question this raises is: was Judas a jilted lover of Jesus? Was that why he betrayed him? Before the night was through, Judas had committed suicide in remorse, the actions of a lover, not an enemy.
There's no real evidence for this conjecture either. The gospels were sanitised to remove any suggestion that Jesus had human feelings for people, be they male or female.
Two thousand years later they're trying to stop a gay pride march in Jerusalem. Wouldn't it be ironic if the first gay pride march through the holy city had been the one in passover week in 33AD.