Now, let's start by adressing the usual condemnations of homosexuality, though i will also address a never spoken about detail about jewish culture that might interest you all at the end of the list:

God created man and woman not man and man or woman or woman

1. God most certainly knew Adam and Eve would have sinned, and so created male and female to have them procreate to fulfill his plan.

2. God saw Adam was lonely, so he created Eve, this doesn't mean that only a women can quench the loneliness which is natural to humankind, and no, God doesn't completely fulfill this loneliness, as otherwise, Eve wouldn't have had any need for existing, so loneliness in a human is something which God thought had to be fixed in some way

Homosexuality Goes against Natural law

1. No it doesn't. Many animals are recorded to partake in bisexual relationship, and although very few happen to be in a strictly homosexual relationship, it has been recorded.

Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:26-27

1. Context is key: God is instructing the Israelites to not follow the example of the people of Caanan, who fell into idolatry of sex and pagan Gods, and use homosexual sex as a way to worship those pagan Gods, the same way in the OT God condemns tattoes, not because of the act itself but because of the purpose.
   
2. The people of Caanan were initially straight. the reason they became so sex-obsessed is because of their pagan traditions, as it is stated in the whole chapter, that they steered away from sex with women, and women steered away from sex with men.
   
3. Many homosexual acts of the people of Canaan are against the children. The initial term used for what we call today homosexuals is the term used for those who had sex with boys, but was used as also to refer to those who did it with girls too, i had seen a comment a while ago which talked about it better.
   
4. The cause of their sin is not homosexuality. Their newfound homosexual lust is caused by a bigger sin, idolatry and paganism. So paganism is the cause, homosexual acts from straight individuals is the consequence of it, this is also discussed in romans 1.

There is a bad consequence to any sin

1. Any sin has a reason to be a sin, and the motivations are explained in the bible, but instances of homosexuality are only mentioned six times throughout the bible, and none of those explain what is bad about homosexuality, as already stated before, it is only talked about as a consequence of a larger sin.
   
2. There is no apparent bad thing about homosexual love (love as love, not eros, though eros is condoned in marriage, but we discuss it further later) which brings us to our next point

God has defined what is love, and God defines what's good or bad, even if we don't understand it

1. This point is ridiculous. If God came downstairs and told us that he changed his mind and we can only repent for our sins by killing each other would you do it? If the answer is yes, then you confuse your faith for ignorance, fear, bigotry and you are no better than a robot who can only do he's told from the one who's in charge. I do hope that if that were the case, not many would resort to it, but the reason why it would be stupid for us to do it is the following: we are sold into Christianity because of the forgiving love of God, and because of his promise of resurecction in heaven. If any of those two things are missing, then it's not the same God we are talking about. That's why a good-minded individual wouldn't become a mass murderer just because God told him to. Because that's not the God he decided to give his life to. But let's assume you actually do decide to kill people because he told you. What if it turns out the devil was the one who asked you? God tells us to be able to distinguish right from wrong, and for that he gave us consequences to any sin and told us to oppose temptation and sin in any possible form. So, humans are just as capable as God to distinguish right from wrong, which brings us to the next point
   
2. We ate the fruit of knowledge of Good and Evil, which made us capable to know on a istinctual level what is right and what is wrong just as much as God, however we are weak compared to God, and for that, we see evil as more profitable in certain occasions, which is why we fell, and free will is the result of that. So no, God has to explain why something is sin for us to understand, otherwise our istinctual knowledge of Good and Evil comes into play, and here we come to our next point
   
3. Huckleberry Finn is a very well known classic, and pictures the life of a young rascal from Missisipi during the years of slavery, and he is taught that it is moral and right to report a fugitive slave to the authorities, not only because of the law, but because God endorses it. Huck is obviously incapable to know that God does not condone it, and he has 0 reasons to not believe it, that is because everyone taught him that it is moral and rightful. So when he meets a fugitive slave, he initially thinks of doing the right thing, and report him to the authorities, and he truly believes it to be the moral and rightful thing too. Yet he doesn't report him, that is because he emphatizes with him as a human being and sees no reason for why he should be enslaved.
   
4. No questioning of God's authority or sin's nature only brings about more sin and ruin, the crusades show perfectly for it, but even Naziism, for God's sake, many horrible actions have been done over the centuries. Is it right not to question what is taught to us about sin? Next point.

Natural repulsion for sin

1. As previously stated, if the origin and consequence of a sin is not specified, then it is not to be considered a sin unless our instincts tell us that there is something inherently wrong with it. But i do not base my opinion on how i feel about it, because my view on homosexuality is just as biased as the one of an homophobe. Instead, i give that responsability to a toddler. Figure it in your mind for a second: Is it more possible for a baby to cry confused as to why two men or two women are kissing, or to cry because a woman is getting raped or a man is killed in front of him? Greeks and Romans, although lustful, did not see homosexuality as inherently bad. The discrimination on homosexuality came about later, as Christianity spread, so it is natural to assume that nobody felt a natural repulsion for homosexual love, and nobody ever felt an unknown sense of guilt by praticing it without first knowing that the bible condemned it. On the other hand murder of another human being would make that person feel an underscribable sense of guilt, as it's shown in Crime and Punishment, where the main chracter, although non-believer, winds up crazy after killing an old woman for her money. So there is an inherent repulsion for sin in our lives, just as much as we are drawn onto sin.

Jewish culture and their obsession with cleaniness

1. As final point, i wish to bring about the obsession with cleaniness of Jewish culture, a point rarely spoken about when talking about homosexuality. So, knowing that it isn't against natural design to be homosexuals, and that God recognizes the need for humans to have companions, and there is no natural repulsion for two men or two women being together as a couple, the last point is cleaniness: as we know, without protection, homosexual sex is very dangerous, and could bring about diseases, something which isn't unknown to Jewish culture, who had witnessed other cultures practicing homosexuality, and had seen it's consequences. Another part of Jewish culture which is rarely spoken about is why pork is forbidden. The reason for that would be that first thing, it's a dirty animal, who eats his own shit, and second thing, it's an animal who's meat rots very quickly, very easily, and in a time where everybody had to survive, food poisoning had to be absolutely avoided, and the same can be said about sexual relations with men, which could bring about sexual diseases, but for that, another point is needed.
   
2. Sex outside of marriage is seen as an incredibly bad sin for many reasons, but i won't speak much about whether it's bad or not or the implications of it now, what i want to concentrate is the cultural-historical context. At the time, people needed to absolutely survive, so the wealth of a family was the survival of their sons and daughters, and given the short life expectancy of the time, people around 15-20 would be married as soon as possible, and as early as the first period shows up for girls (or around that time), fact is that arranged marriages were the norm, and so was an early marriage. People for that reason did not have much reasons or chances to have sex outside of marriage, as they married soon enough to not be overly tempted by sexual immorality, and as we know, dating culture was not present at the time. So what were the main causes of sexual immorality outside of marriage? Infedelity, homosexual sex, homosexual (or even straight) pedophiliac sex, and possibly bestiality. All of those can bring about consequences, you can enrage a husband and start a feud, you can spread diseases to your wife by having sex with a man, you can take away the virginity and honor of a teen girl and the honor and masculinity away from a teen boy by having sex with them, and could also spread diseases by having sex with animals. There were good reasons for that. Onto the next point.
   
3. Necessity for survival dictates a straight-oriented society. In case of homosexuality, it was more akin to bisexuality, like in animals, where strictly homosexual pairings are much rarer, and it is far more common for animals to have both straight and homosexual relationships, that is because they never lost the drive for survival, unlike us, who have evolved ourselves to a point in which we're willing to kill ourselves. So at the time, survival of the family and the village took priority over everything. Even in case a man was strictly homosexual, there wouldn't be much room for him to explore these fantasies, as he would've been married pretty early, and if he did actually understand that he was attracted to males and not females, he would have been ridiculized most probably, due to the bias of the time.

These are all my points. The last i would like to talk about is the fact that there is nothing wrong with love, but that point has been "disproved" by people telling me that God has defined love and it's between a woman and a man, but i ask all of you to turn on your brain and see what the patterns of behavior are in both straight couples and homosexual couples, only then you'll see with your eyes that it is genuine love, and a few words about it cannot change the way it is. End of story, if you want to argue, use logic please.