“I even gave them laws that were not good and observances by which they could never live….”

And he DOESN’T add: “I mean non-moral laws, of course.”

What’s wrong is wrong, in my opinion — whether certain religious writings say so or not.

There are no subtitles saying “The following are moral regulations” or “The following are non-moral regulations”. ALL the regulations in the Holiness Code are presented as explicit commands of Yahweh, and there is NO suggestion whatever that any are optional, temporary or in any way of lower status than others. On the contrary, it is repeatedly emphasized that ALL the laws are to be kept, and severe divine retribution is threatened to anyone who fails to keep ANY of them.

The only reasonable conclusion is that the Mosaic Law is not a reasonable foundation for Christian morality. Yes, things like adultery, child sacrifice and beastiality [sic] are indeed sinful, but their sinfulness does not depend on their condemnation by the Mosaic Law. They would still be wrong even if not a word of the Mosaic Law had ever been written.

What should be issues: Individual and religious freedom, the rapid decline of the global environment, the millions of people dying in wars each year, inexcusable poverty, the failure of heterosexual parents to accept full responsibility for their kids’ education and after-school activities, and steps that can be taken to make abortion unnecessary and obsolete.

The Bible does not make homosexuality a priority; you do.

I respect the portions of the Bible that are indeed inspired by God and therefore are worthy of respect; you, Brad, are dishonest about your obvious rejection of unethical portions of the Bible.

“The man who lies with another man in the same way as with a woman: they have done a hateful thing together; they must die, their blood shall be on their own heads.” (Leviticus 20:13)

As the Dutch Protestant theologian Harry Kuitert observes, “[I]f we were to do everything that is handed down in the Bible as God’ commandments, we would be bad people with abhorrent deeds.”

The New Testament affirms slavery, and much of American Christianity followed suit until the past century.

The Old Testament affirms historically inaccurate accounts of mass genocide against tribes that are falsely accused of wrongdoing, and it affirms the rape and slaughter of the wives and children of the vanquished. Meanwhile, the New Testament affirms pacifism in response to violent assaults. In short, I believe it is Christian of me to acknowledge that the Bible is at times inconsistent, and at times just plain wrong. Jesus said as much in condemning Biblical legalism.

Brad, you cherry-pick a small handful of Bible verses, remove them from context, interpret them to be repudiations of same-sex attraction and love, and dismiss much of the Bible and Christian moral code amid your preoccupation over homosexuality.

In other comments at TWO, you have seemed to affirm a variety of lies, deceptions, and factual distortions regarding gender and sexuality that are central to ex-gay ideology. Ex-gay myths had no place in historical Christianity — not up until antigay evangelicals adopted the mistaken suppositions of atheist Sigmund Freud in the past half-century and declared these myths to be Biblical without any scriptural evidence whatsoever.

I conclude from the above that your religious beliefs are flimsy, half-formed, infused with myths borrowed from non-Biblical and post-Biblical sources. I hope you will take time to get to know former ex-gays and their journey of faith and truth out of the lies and self-contradictions of the ex-gay pseudo-religion.