I see “If they are not against us, they are for us” as a battlefield analysis tool. Look up and see which direction our people are going. I’d rather have an honest sodomite than a dishonest heterosexual. Depending on the circumstance… it is a “rob issue” to me. If we are talking about accomplishing a political job, I would prefer an honest homosexual (or garden variety sinner) that might yet repent over a sleazy, lying heterosexual. The competency is important too. We are not a theocracy, and sexual preference should not be a PURITY TEST. We are in danger when we apply purity tests.

In my church, should I plant one, it is a spinal issue. Can’t serve a Church in open sin. Sodomy is sin… and I would only allow someone to attend provided they had counseling and abstained from the behavior if they seek God. We would also expect people to abstain from any behavior that could become an idol before God… gambling, lying, coveting. They are all sins.