Can someone cite Biblical references to homosexuality being immoral, other
than Leviticus? So far, when I ask, around here, I get the verses from
Leviticus spouted at me, but the whole rest of that book tends to be
ignored by Christians (haven't seen any stonings in a _long_ time :-).

Later,
Max (Bob) Muir

[The list was posted not long ago, as I recall, aside from Lev, commonly
cited passages are:

the story of Sodom.  Note however that this was a homosexual rape, and
there's no disagreement that that is wrong.  I take an intermediate
position on this: note that Sodom is referred to elsewhere in the
Bible for its sinfulness.  It doesn't seem to have been known
specifically for homosexuality.  Rather, I think it was considered a
cesspool of all sins. However from what we know of Jewish attitudes,
homosexuality would have contributed to the horror of the action
described.  (It almost seems to have been contrived to combine about
as many forms of evil in one act as possible: homosexual rape of
guests, who were actually angels.)  But this story is not specifically
about homosexuality.

In the NT, the clear references are all from Paul's letters.  In Rom
1, there is a passage that presupposes that homosexuality is an evil.
Note that the passage isn't about homosexuality -- it's about
idolatry.  Homosexuality is visited on people as a punishment, or at
least result, of idolatry.  There are a number of arguments over this
passage.  It does not use the word "homosexuality", and it is referring
to people who are by nature heterosexual practicing homosexuality.
So it's not what I'd call an explicit teaching against all homosexuality.
But it does seem to support what would be a natural assumption anyway,
that Paul shares the general negative Jewish attitude towards 
homosexuality.

The other passages occur in lists of sins, in I Cor 6:9, and I Tim
1:10.  Unfortunately it's not entirely clear what the words used here
mean.  There have been suggestions that one has a broader meaning,
such as "wanton", and that another may be specifically "male
prostitute".  Again, we don't have here a precise teaching about
homosexuality, but it is at least weak supportive evidence that Paul
shared the OT's negative judgement on homosexuality.

Jude 1:7 is sometimes cited, however it's probably not relevant.  The
context in Jude involves angels.  Since those who were almost raped in
Sodom were angels, it seems likely that "strange flesh" refers to
intercourse with angels.

As you can see, the NT evidence is such that people's conclusion is
determined by their approach to the Bible.  Conservatives note that
the passages from Paul's letters imply that he accepted the OT
prohibition.  This is enough for them to regard it as having NT
endorsement.  Liberals note that there's no specific teaching, and no
clear definition of what is being prohibited or why (is the concern in
Rom 1 the connection of homosexuality to pagan worship?  what exactly
do the words in the lists of sins mean?).  Thus some believe it is
legitimate to regard this as a attitude Paul took with him from his
background and not a specific teaching of the Gospel.

This is an explosive topic, which tends to result in long
dissertations on the exact meaning of various Greek words.  But it's
clear to me that that's mostly irrelevant.  What it really comes down
to is whether people are looking to the Bible for law or whether they
believe that such as approach is inconsistent with the Gospel.  This
appears to depend upon one's reaction to the message of the Bible as a
whole, as well as one's perception of the needs of the church today.
This is a difference of approach at least as serious as the difference
between Protestant and Catholic in the 16th Cent, and one where both
sides believe that the Bible is so obviously on their side that they
keep thinking all they have to do is quote a few more passages and the
other side will finally come to their senses.  That makes things
very frustrating for a moderator, who realizes that such an optimistic
outcome is not very likely...