For example, the statement that there have been no civilizations that normalized homosex and survived is objective. Anyone can look through history books and either prove or disprove the statement. What it means is open to interpretation, but the statement itself is objective.
Ditto the statement that there is no religion which accepts homosexuality.
Shalom.
You're simply confused beyond all hope. Not only is your assertion deliberately misleading (as if to assert that these all perished civilizations perished because of homosexuality), it is not objective. It is a subjective (or interpretive) conclusion.
We simply can't have an honest discussion if you're going to substitute creative new meanings for what should be generally understood concepts of communication in the English language.
I could objectively say that cigar smokers have a higher income. True enough. Objectively, that's a fact. But there are many subjective, and fallacious, ways to interpret that objective fact. You can't seem to make that distinction.