Probably would be a good idea if you read my previous post on this subject.
The New Testament treats homosexuality the same way it treats heterosexuality - et.al, ya don't need it. When you become a christian, the idea is to slowly whittle away at the demands of the flesh, so that you are more spiritually minded and less fleshly minded (at least to the point you are able without starving to death or something). It discusses this over and over again. The real issue here is the natural aversion some people have to the idea of homosexuality as a choice. They just have problems separating it in their heads. Honestly people, just read the texts for yourself.

In the Old testament the outlawing of homosexualtiy was a human survival necessity, just like proper dietary and sanitary practices. In the New Testament it's just one of many things the new christian is asked to do away with because it's a flesh desire. Whatever separates us from communion with God is a flesh desire. It's that simple. It's not complicated. It isn't specifically anti-gay, it's anti-anything to do with the demands of the flesh. The buddhist understands this because they learn to ignore pain and so on for similar reasons.

Read, read, read! It'll calm your nerves on the subject and bring the joy back in your heart.

Imagine that an organism is sick. Imagine that the sick cells convince the organism that they were healthy, and in fact, the healthy cells are sick. The gullible organism would just get sicker and sicker.

This is the relationship between society and homosexuals today. Gays argue that same-sex behavior is no different than being left-handed. On the other hand, they say heterosexual behavior is not natural, but socially conditioned and "oppressive." Heterosexual society and family are taking heavy casualties. Our stupid, opportunistic and craven leaders have betrayed us. We don't even know we are at war.

Let's decide whom, in fact, is sick.

Let's look at gay behavior:

a surprisingly high percentage of pathological liars and con men are gay. This results from a natural habit of self-concealment, and leads to a stubborn self-deception about one's own gayness and its implication.

gays tend to reject all forms of morality and value judgments. Gay morality boils down to "I can do whatever I want and you can go to perdition. (If it feels good, I'll do it!)" If a gay feels like seducing a trusted friend's lover, he'll do it, justifying it as an act of "sexual freedom" and the friend be damned.

gays suffer from a "narcissistic" personality disorder and give this clinical description: "pathological self absorption, a need for constant attention and admiration, lack of empathy or concern for others, quickly bored, shallow, interested in fads, seductive, overemphasis on appearance, superficially charming, promiscuous, exploitative, preoccupied with remaining youthful, relationships alternate between over idealization and devaluation."

a very sizable proportion of gay men who have been diagnosed HIV positive continue to have unprotected sex.

Many gays are "single minded sexual predators" fixated on youth and physical beauty alone. When it comes to the old or ugly, gays are "the real queer bashers." Disillusioned themselves, they are cynical about love.

Relationships between gay men don't usually last very long." They quickly tire of their partners and fall victim to temptation. The "cheating ratio of 'married' gay males, given enough time, approaches 100%

gays tend to deny reality in various ways: wishful thinking, paranoia, illogic, emotionalism and embracing crackpot ideas.

Is there any doubt that this behavior is sick? Obviously this is not true of all homosexuals. I feel no malice toward gays. I feel the same way about people who have the flu. I want them to get better and I don't want it to spread.

WHAT?!?!?!?!?

I refrain from any expression beyond that. It would be personally abusive - and not discussing the subject.

Unbelievable

question: Why do many think that male homosexuality would remove a man from potential breeding population? If indeed homosexuality performed the function of preventing overpopulation it doesn't prevent those males from fathering children if the population were to dip. I would imagine that if population dipped that many homosexual men would be willing to father children for the sake of the community. It sounds more like (following OP posted link) that it's more of a reserve measure. Sounds horrible but like natures living sperm bank.