I don't care what his sexuality is or isn't, and I find all religions but my own extreme at times. Some time ago I got a rap over the knuckles because I criticised one religion which shall remain nameless, while defending a star who similarly shall remain nameless--needless to say, not even God Himself can cure someone of a brain tumour by belting him over the head in a church, as happened in this case.
What I find disagreable about Tom Cruise, however--that is, if such stories are true--is that he may be about to sue The National Enquirer for 'hundreds of millions of dollars' for calling him a 'monster'. Were he to be called a monstre (monstre sacré) here in France, this would be the ultimate accolade.
But even to talk of dispensing such a vast amount of money on what may well prove a worthless cause, when there is so much poverty, starvation and illness in this world, is not good.
Surely if he has a few hundred millions to spare, the lovely Tom could put it to much better use? And take a tip from one who knows. Whatever they're saying about you now, they'll still be saying after you've parted with your hard-earned brass. That's why I never sue.
There are other much more satisfactory ways of making tea without just chucking a tea-bag in the cup. More fun, too...