See post 29. Those who suppose homosexuals can be conservative have a strange idea of what conservatism requires, and those that assume that acceptance of homosexuality will enable even fiscal conservatism and small gov. do not understand its nature and effects.
I read your post very carefully and there is no contradiction in what you say and what I say. Look carefully:
“1. They cannot be conservatives or promote conservatism... as long as they sanction or promote homosexuality.”
The key words are “sanction” and “promote”. Sanction is enshrinement in law. Promotion is any kind of government-sponsored advocacy, both elements of the gay agenda of the left and anathema to the religious views of many. I oppose both. Gays who do not advocate these CAN be conservative within the closest analysis of what you said and I don’t disagree. But I also oppose your religious views being imposed on those who do not agree. That is not “conservative” either because it requires the same government powers you must oppose to achieve your own liberties.