[excuse-me]

Similarly truth isn't an absolute defence. If I stated a particular politician was gay or had an abortion, every time my publication mentioned them - even if that was true - then if it was done purely malicously, ie. it had nothing to do with the article, that could be slander/libel.

There are exceptions for reporting legal judgements, which is why its important to always refer to the convicted liar Jeffery Archer

[true_religion]

I'm really straining to see how you can be slandered by the fact of your sexuality.

[DanBC]

Historically some people wanted to keep their sexuality private because they felt they might lose sales / votes / whatever if people knew their sexuality.

Don't forget that homosexuality has only relatively recently become legal in England.

The Jason Donovan case is particularly interesting.

(http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sad-about-the-boy-1270092....)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Donovan)

(http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/apr/17/law.claredyer)

[excuse-me]

Hopefully these days you couldn't be because nobody should care.

But if you were running say a local paper and you went out of your way to consistently describe a local politician or school teacher/principal as "the homosexual Mr Smith" and your intentions were malicious they could have a reasonable chance of damages from you.