It is becoming clear the defining moral issue of the younger generation is sexual identity. It is also clear that Evangelicals are finding themselves increasingly marginalized on this issue. Their resistance is equated with intolerance, and their opinions are increasingly reserved for hushed conversations with other Evangelicals.
The reality is there is common ground for conversation, though I doubt either side recognizes it. That common ground is found when one recognizes that even most in the LGBTQ community believe pederasty, pedophilia, and bestiality are wrong. In other words, like Evangelicals, the LGBTQ community believes there should be limits on sexuality.
The difference between the two is a disagreement over where to draw the line. Thus, for the LGBTQ community to insist that only they could be right about where to draw that line makes them as intolerant as they accuse Evangelicals of being.
I suspect most LGBTQers would argue that drawing the line at pedastry, pedophilia, and bestiality is rational because the defining factor is the absence of two consenting adults (and one animal).
But we have long accepted as rational and necessary laws that prohibit certain conduct between adults regardless of whether they both consented. For example, we embrace laws that prohibit drug dealing even though both parties to the transaction consent because we recognize such laws are necessary to protect not only the parties to the transaction but society as a whole. We uphold laws against street racing even though both drivers may consent because we recognize a danger to others.
I’m not suggesting a debate would be productive. LGBTQers will never accept the drawing of any line that would define their conduct as immoral, and Christians should not accept the drawing of any line that is contrary to Biblical authority.
What I am suggesting is that any LGBTQer who calls a Christian intolerant for insisting the LGBTQ lifestyle immoral is a hypocrite. GS