No it is not.
This is a result of Scripture taken out of context.
Text without context is pretext.
Here is the Scripture the criminals probably tortured to justify their filthiness.
Eze 16:49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
True enough. But Pride is listed first. Think of "Gay Pride".
Then there is this from the Letter to the Romans in the New Testament that clarifies it for us.
The Bible does not contradict itself.
You just proved my point. Who decides that context? Did you visit the link I posted above? It is replete with biblical sources and interpretations. But, lacking an 'authority', anyone can interpret scripture.
The Catholic Church applies scripture and holds it up with the Early Church Fathers. For example:
"You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill one that has been born" (Didache 2:2 [A.D. 70]).
Or
"[W]e have been taught that to expose newly-born children is the part of wicked men; and this we have been taught lest we should do anyone harm and lest we should sin against God, first, because we see that almost all so exposed (not only the girls, but also the males) are brought up to prostitution. And for this pollution a multitude of females and hermaphrodites, and those who commit unmentionable iniquities, are found in every nation. And you receive the hire of these, and duty and taxes from them, whom you ought to exterminate from your realm. And anyone who uses such persons, besides the godless and infamous and impure intercourse, may possibly be having intercourse with his own child, or relative, or brother. And there are some who prostitute even their own children and wives, and some are openly mutilated for the purpose of sodomy; and they refer these mysteries to the mother of the gods" (Justin Martyr - First Apology 27 [A.D. 151]).
And also from Justin Martyr
"The fate of the Sodomites was judgment to those who had done wrong, instruction to those who hear. The Sodomites having, through much luxury, fallen into uncleanness, practicing adultery shamelessly, and burning with insane love for boys; the All-seeing Word, whose notice those who commit impieties cannot escape, cast his eye on them. Nor did the sleepless guard of humanity observe their licentiousness in silence; but dissuading us from the imitation of them, and training us up to his own temperance, and falling on some sinners, lest lust being unavenged, should break loose from all the restraints of fear, ordered Sodom to be burned, pouring forth a little of the sagacious fire on licentiousness; lest lust, through want of punishment, should throw wide the gates to those that were rushing into voluptuousness. Accordingly, the just punishment of the Sodomites became to men an image of the salvation which is well calculated for men. For those who have not committed like sins with those who are punished, will never receive a like punishment" (ibid., 8).
Essentially, scripture is supported by the writings of the earliest christians. Yet sola scriptura believing christians are exonerated from taking such passages as these (and there are plenty more) into consideration. That is the point I was trying to make. My purpose in doing so is not to incite a flame war but to clarify the critical need for a unified voice, based on historical documentation, including scripture. What active homosexual could excuse away the above passages?
Jude 1:
7Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.