#2, He must have also missed the class on Philemon, where the "context" is that St. Paul says the runaway slave Onesimus is to be accepted back, not as a slave but as a brother.
#3, he must have snoozed past the discussion about how St. Paul, in the light of Christ, revolutionaized the categories by saying those who are one in Christ are His eyes "Neither slave not freeman, neither Jew nor Gentile, neither man nor woman"
#4, maybe his church, whatever it is, doesn't know a dadblamed thing about Natural Law or Development of Doctrine?
(Sigh.) No, probably not.
So expect more of this from the YOPIOS crowd, yes, in every denomination.
Let's just cut to the chase, shall we? How's this sodomite any different than those Catholic priests who sodomized young alter boys? Isn't that a personal interpretation of Scripture as well, or could it just be that this has nothing to do with interpreting Scripture and everything to do with rebelling against our Lord's Sovereign rule on the matter, in both instances.
There are some areas that Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants and the rest of us will disagree but when Scripture is clear on a topic, with more than one instance of God's views on a subject mentioned such as it is on homosexuality, then it's not a personal interpretation, it's outright rebellion against God.
Don't make this into something that it's not. This is rebellion against God's authority on the matter, plain and simple. It has nothing to do with an interpretation of Scripture, personal or otherwise.