I know, and associate with, several homosexual people. I love them dearly, but I do not, nor will I ever, accept their homosexual behavior as "natural", "harmless" or "without sin." It's above my pay grade to condemn them, as I am not without sin, but I do not have to accept that their behavior is normal.

You may have the right to be a practicing homosexual, but that does not trump my right to believe that homosexuality is a sin. Nor do you have the right to demand that I accept your behavior as "normal." To believe otherwise makes you intolerant, and how can you intolerantly demand that I be tolerant?

Christ Himself, when addressing the sinner, had a forgiving attitude, but He still requested that the sinner "go, and sin no more." How, therefore, can a practicing homosexual claim to be a Christian, unless he/she is in a continual state of repentence? And does not repentence require one to recognize, and turn away from, the sin? For a Christian to claim that homosexuality is not a sin, he / she must reject Christ's teachings, as He taught otherwise. How then can he / she be a Christian, without Christ?

While most of this article is factual, it falls apart where it becomes critical. I know several LDS families whose children don't follow church teachings, and with few exceptions these families still embrace these children; they do not, however, embrace their childrens' behavior. "Love the sinner, not the sin" seems to be the rule rather than the exception.

The LDS church does not, to my knowledge, encouraged parents to abandon their homosexual children; rather, it believes that the family is fundamental to God's plan - that it is (or can be) an eternal unit. It does, however, teach forgiveness.

Whether the homosexual community chooses to accept it or not, the fact remains that homosexuality does not contribute to the health of the human family, nor to its continuance (procreation), nor to its happiness.

You, anon, are both ignorant and stupid. You're ignorant because you don't have the facts about this abortion of a "health care" bill (hint - it ain't about reducing health care costs; it's about controlling the health care industry). You're stupid because you can't apply simple logic to the situation. Follow the money, MORON, and you'll see what the "fix" is really about.