[trebb]

Peter was right about obeying God vs. men, but the guy wasn't asked to support homosexuality, just barred from focusing on it as a sin - Paul liked to 'infiltrate cultures by becoming like the people of that culture so he could be more effective in carrying the Word. How can making a choice that negates one's ability to carry the Word be "the more noble and God-obedient" way?

I can understand some folks "ideals" but it seems to me that only real use we can be to God is to reach out to people with His Word and the Good News of the Gospels. You can teach/preach about the incredible sacrifice of Jesus w/o focusing on homosexuality. In this case, homosexuality wins by preventing the carrying of God's Word and Salvation because one is so obsessed with homosexuality that it' omission for an environment's preaching is a game stopper.

[markomalley]

You can teach/preach about the incredible sacrifice of Jesus w/o focusing on homosexuality.

You changed the parameters. Originally you said, what about the guy who can't go into jails anymore because he wouldn't sign a paper saying he wouldn't preach that homosexuality is a sin?

In the original case, you are talking about a person who is being required to bury the fact that homosexuality is a sin. In your modified case, you are talking about one who is focused only on that topic.

If you must agree not to preach (at all) on an uncomfortable subject, be it couples shacking up, homosexuality, talking about money or even about the Cross, then you are, in effect, being required to deny the gospel.