I appreciate your post. I would make three qualifications:
1) We are to judge, as in discern; we are not to judge, as in condemn. The truth is that all thinking persons judge - and discriminate - in the sense of discerning and choosing.
The left always seeks to pervert words, such as “judge” or “discriminate” - thus making them into intimidating political weapons - while they themselves aggressively judge and discriminate against those they condemn in pursuit of their aims.
2) Some sins are conditional; some are inherent.
Sexual intercourse is not inherently sinful, although adulterous sexual intercourse, for instance, is. God designed sex, and intended it for good.
Homoeroticism, in contrast, is inherently sinful; it is by definition a perversion of God’s design, and cannot be enacted in a God-pleasing way.
3) There is no such thing as homosexuality: There is no valid, verifiable form of sexual reproduction that can take place between two persons of the same sex; so-called homosexuality is inherently dysfunctional.
I therefore instead use the term, homoeroticism: to eroticize physical interaction between two persons of the same sex.
Leftists love to accuse rightists of being anti-science. There are few positions more anti-science than to argue that homosexuality is real.
I took plenty of science courses, and back then, the secular, anti-religious professors loved to condescendingly gloat that all “evolution” cared about was spreading the DNA in the gene pool, and therefore that “love” was a mere illusion to get us to cooperate with sexual reproduction, and that “morality” was a mere social construct to protect one’s own reproductive rights.
To those atheist professors, sex was all and only about getting two fertile persons of the opposite sex who were not too closely related to copulate and reproduce, and that any attendant considerations of emotion or morality were irrelevant.
Some of these same kind of propagandist, leftist professors are now going on about how marriage is not really about heterosexual, reproductive sex but about emotional, satisfying love between two persons of any of a bewildering variety of so-called genders.
The hypocrisy of leftists is truly stunning.
I didn’t think faggots had satisfying sex. I think they have to do it in a G-dly manner to experience G-d.