I was referring specifically to Paul's argument in Romans relating to the requirement that sexual relations follow some sort of natural law doctrine. My argument is that this argument cannot be applied to homosexuality today without ignoring what we know of animal behaviors.

Note that I am NOT saying that one cannot build an alternate case against homosexuality based on the Bible. I can imagine at least one case build solely from the teachings of Christ and abandoning Levitican law entirely. However, the current arguments seem to be arbitrary to me. Basically there is an idea to apply whatever portions of Levitican law seem to appeal to the sensibilities of the church leadership at the time, and this suggests to me that changing the doctrine to accept homosexuality would not be very hard.

Personally, if I was a Christian, I would be an Arian (bet you don't hear that every day :-) ). I think that to the extent that the Bible is valid it is as a mythological rather than a historical document-- that the exemplary models and not the historical details are what is important, and that this shows a dimension of the spiritual path which is generally overlooked. I suspect though I am not sure, that Mormonism may have some teachings along these lines.