So what I'm advocating is for us, first, to acknowledge that good Christians disagree. Some of us are open and accepting toward gay people. Some of us are accepting of gay people, but we don't affirm their homosexual behavior. Some of us are neither open nor accepting. So, what we need to do is say that there is diversity and that good Christians disagree. And then we need to have some charitable and intelligent dialogue rather than the name-calling and polarizing discourse we've had in recent years.
Mclaren, Charlotte, NC newspaper interview, Jan 26, '08
(Here's a hint--you can tell when a liberal is trying to pull the wool over your eyes when he or she starting talking about "polarizing discourse", particular in regards to blaming those opposed to them and their ideas. It really just means that they want people to 'play nice' so they can sneak their agendas in.)
Sure, never mind what the Bible teaches, never mind all the places God says homosexual sex is sinful. We just need to sit, talk, "converse", be nice, and not judge and call such actions sinful.
Isn't this the whole dialectic method (mythos)? Thesis to antithesis to synthesis? Instead of trying to determine right and wrong, take all of that and try to reach some kind of agreement?