...
Given that she teaches that sodomy is against the God’s law, how, exactly, is she is “affirming others who do choose to act out their homosexual proclivities.”
I don't see where she teaches and affirms that it is against God's law. You have to read between the lines... in this case, the silences. Failing, within the context of the discussion of homosexuality, to somewhere condemn that act, the propensity, as a perversion of what God intended is as good as silence in the face of murder. It is tantamount to silent assent.
It would not surprise me one bit, once this new "accepting" mentality embeds itself further in her local church body, if she suddenly "comes out" again as a sexually active lesbian, and demands that her church "marry" her and her lover. And then she'll go to the geh press and give them her sob story of how the church she grew up in and accepted her is now denying her this "right," with the motive to incite hatred toward Christians. This is happening all the time now.
Rubbish. That's just as senseless as saying,
"Jesus never spoke out against homosexuality. (Check out the Gospels: He didn't.) Therefore we'll assume He was for it."
"St. Paul never spoke out against BDSM. Therefore we'll assume he was for it."
"FWDUDE never spoke out against sex-reassignment (transsexual) surgery. Therefore..."
To construe something from silence, especially when you cannot reference the whole collection of their recorded or written words, and can only draw dubious conclusions from the very few direct quotes this RNS interviewer has chosen to cite, does not show sound judgment.
It is a fine line. I do hope that when the term “acceptance” is used by these people they mean it as they “accept” their limitation, not by denying it exists but acknowledging it for what it is, that is, who they are and how their life must be.
They can never be married (to a person of the same sex) and ...
They have a weakness, a susceptibility to lust for members of the same gender.
Some have such a weakness to theft (kleptomaniacs). If they are smart they limit their exposure to easily stolen items.
Some have a weakness to booze. (Alcoholics). If they are smart, then they limit their exposure to alchohol.
Some have a weakness to (heterosexual) lust. If they are smart, they limit their exposure to images that can arouse them.
So hopefully these people are doing the same. They hopefully avoid circumstances where they are tempted to act on their weakness.
This is my hope after reading this. Because like another said we are all sinners and struggle with our own weaknesses. In that regard we’re no better than the homosexual who seeks to avoid temptation.
It’s all in how one choses to read stories like this. One can either interpret it as I have, with hope, or with cynicism.
Let me make it clear: I’m not saying either interpretation is “right”. It’s just how do you want to live life, at the end of the day really.