Ask him if he is comfortable eating pork or shellfish. Ask him if he should really wear those cotton/polyester blended socks. Ask him if any of the other laws in Leviticus should be ignored like he ignores those, or it is OK to pick and choose.

The passage in the bible only talks about a man lying with a man and doesn't say anything about women. This should be a clue to what is going on. It's all about Sons, and having male heirs to pass their possessions onto. The fear was that if the sons didn't marry and have Male children their wouldn't be any heirs since women were considered property. In another passage, a father would rather give his daughters up to be raped rather than allowing consentual sex between men. Now that is some twisted morals!

He's probably uncomfortable with the idea of female orgasms because he has not see one of those either,

Hypocrisy. That's all I see from Christian.

Did you ask him who, exactly, was Asking for his "agreement"?

If he truly "has no problem with homosexuals," he woudn't need to say so.

Probably a combination of both.

You frequently see people trying to justify their bigotry. A lot of fatphobia is dressed up as "I'm only concerned for your health" or "I shouldn't have to subsidise your self-inflicted health problems" (funny how they don't say that to people who have motorbike accidents or break a leg while skiing.) Since there's no even tenuously claimable harm that comes to any human being from two other people being initimate, they're forced to retreat to religious objections. And so they cherry pick. A lot. They'll eat shellfish and they'll get tattoos, but they'll also get all uppity about two men or two women enjoying consensual sex.

Sodom and Gomorrah (that favourite Biblical text, from which we get the term 'Sodomite' to refer to men who have sex with men) is God smiting the people over their threatening to rape the angels who visited them. Rape threats and general lack of hospitality being the real problem here. The fact that it was the threat of same sex rape being merely incidental.

Leviticus seems to have a bit of a bee in its bonnet about it at times, though.

Given its fixation with breeding, especially in the early days (though something Catholicism persists in hanging on to) it's surprising that early Judeo-Christianity doesn't do more to discourage biologically fruitless same-sex intimacy.

A case of reality vs ideology.he needs to discover the sexual habits of all species in nature

and who wrote the bible? It was hopelessly ignorant 2000 year sheepherders. Better listen to their opinion?

I made a video about this topic:

Yes but (as usual) I think it makes them uncomfortable because they've been taught from a very young age that it is wrong.
I was taught similarly (homosexuality was illegal when I was a teen/20s) and being bisexual was a source of deep confusion and moral panic despite my being an atheist. I was in my thirties before I began to accept the way of the world.

If you see your friend smoking crack, but he says it makes him happy, who am I to say he's wrong for doing it when I have my own addictions.

That's how I feel about sodomy aka practicing a gay lifestyle.

Sodomy doesn't help procreation, it doesn't make you any healthier and as a matter of fact, rectal tearing mixed with outside tissues leads to health complications.

So, yeah...sodomy isn't a good thing....just like anything that isn't good for you.

Being a certain religion doesnt change facts...uncomfortable or not, its not natural.

Do I agree with sodomy...?
Who cares...its not my asshole were talking about.
???

Well he is in conflict then !!! quite simply..

He says he has no "problem" but he isn't in agreement. You cannot be in agreement yet have no problem at all - a problem being accepted as something we can solve. He is kinda saying he can't solve it too .... here are some expamples of doublespeak too.

"I didn't like that he murdered people but i had no problem with how he treated me"

"I have no problem with mental health problems but i don't want to see them"

These statements are very contradictory. First one you kinda open yourself up to potential murder whilst trying to avoid upsetting a murderer lol .. is he scared of opening up to homosexual folks for fear of just hurting their feelings as people and nothing else, as no experience?

The second one is straight evasion. The scentence abosolves the purveyor of responsibility and simultaneously distances from the issue completely. It's nothing to so with him.

When you put it into context with other things people may find difficult to understand it starts to sound a little odd.

I agree. They don't like it because they don't understand or because it makes them feel awkward or uncomfortable. Have you noticed that many of the men who are passionately homophobic are the ones that are caught in gay sex scandals?

Insecurity

I think people get way too uncomfortable about the bedroom habits of perfect strangers...

I agree.

It seems that most Christians who seem to be so against/afraid of it are closeted. That or harboring other sexually controversial behaviors. Look at the amount of news stories you read about the former pastor/priest etc. who ends up committing a sexually related crime or incest or something else because they have become mentally ill from suppressing their true selves. (not advocating here). There is way too much hate and fear in the world due to religion. Why should it matter who we love, or who loves us?

Scripture tells us, "a man who lays with another man should be stoned." So puff, puff, pass!

I think your Christian friend is afraid you might think he is gay if he says he is OK with homosexuality.