I have no interest in sharing my views on the subject, nor really hearing the views of others on it. This is simply a set of requirements that must be met in order to express any legitimate comment at all.
For anyone at all who would appeal to nature with anything LGBT, it makes no sense whatever. Sexuality in every sentient species of animal is anything but binary or simple. And too, we’re just the sort of being that can change reality, making us true moral agents. In that case, moral agency is entirely predicated on defying the natural … and indeed, Christianity as a moral endeavor is exactly the idea that what is natural is not always best. If you’re particularly Calvin about things, then all the better to make that point; nothing natural about man is best and transformation is a requirement. What sense of “nature” makes sense to appeal to as some sort of moral linkage?
So, the question can only be asked and answered by thinking anything about LGBT is moral or not. What moral principle does any of it violate, how, and why.
I have no doubts that Christians base their ideas of morality on the Bible. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s actually good, I suspect. I also have no doubt Christians would admit they believe it is God’s word, because they believe it is God’s word. I could scarcely doubt they would fail to recognize that other folks feel the same about their holy books. And I hardly doubt they couldn’t imagine there would be different views from different religions. Nor could I image they would think that even among Christians, using the very same book, there wouldn’t be disagreement.
The question then becomes a moral one of their being entitled to their view at all. By that, I mean that there is only one circumstance in which any belief is one we can genuinely choose, and those are when some conclusion is completely dubious. In that case (which in similar principle is “benefit of the doubt”), such choices in what to believe are not about epistemic correctness (ie is true, is false, and here are the facts), but what is best to believe; because in these cases, we know we must believe something because what we believe causes us to act one way or the other.
If then scripture is your appeal for or against all things LGBT related, and if the things I mentioned I can’t doubt about Christians are indeed true about Christians, then isn’t the appeal to scripture dubious? And given whatever you believe about all of this, it is moral to believe based of how it causes you to view and treat others?
Finally, are those beliefs embodied by the life Christ lived; do they keep you from judging righteousness and force you into thinking about the best way of being in the world; do they cause you to love, to be compassionate, gentle, kind as Luke’s gospel paints as the christology of Jesus?
Just some things to think about.
In the end, you are entitled to say something … but if you discount disagreement and credit yourself being right merely by having faith you are right, then you have not justified believing such a choice is moral itself.