To answer you TM, I have various feelings on the issue.  They varied even more when focused on a timeline of my past 6 years.  6 years ago I had no couth in using terms like 'fag' and 'gay.'  I still really don't but that's because I don't believe in PC in the sense that a term can be hijacked by a majority, and therefore be off limits because at one point it was used as slander (lest we not forget, in many european nations and other subcultures here such as the punk culture, refers to cigarettes when they hear the word 'fag.')

Anyways, 6 years ago, I was mortified by homosexuality.  I felt it immoral, wrong, and just plain dirty.  I had assumed all homosexuals were these permiscuous club hounds who trolled the streets and gay bars for sex.  Now, those kinds DO exist, and those are the ones I DO believe are committing sin knowingly; they are chasing after a sexual satisfaction, needing to be satiated at any cost, as opposed to someone with an alternative lifestyle who is actively seeking out a monogamous, intimate connection.  Then a friend of mine 'came out.'  The 'coming out' was a big shock since women LOVED this guy and he always had the cutest, most sought after women flinging themselves at him, and nothing in his demeanor, speech, or any personality traits pointed to anything stereotypically homosexual.

I freaked.  I'll admit it.  I felt he was wrong, and then it hit me, 'why was he wrong?'  I first went to the bible.  Then I re-read certain parts of the bible such as sodom and gammorah, and other parts that seem to take homosexuality to task, and I found alot of new things when reading it.  Now, I am NOT saying the bible does NOT condemn homosexual sex, because it does in at least one part, come out and claim that it is 'evil,' but I found it funny that many self-professed bible scholars I had encountered (not people here, people I know in real life) love to refer to sodom and gammorah when speaking of the evils of homosexual sex from a religious standpoint.  After reading it, I had caused quite a few red faces, and even perhaps a few people to re-evaluate their views on the issue, simply by mentioning that:

#1: in the story, nowhere does it claim the sin that is punished is the sole act of homosexual sex.  The sin was that the people were a violent lot, and that men and women laid down with one another, indescriminately, basically the sin punished was the sin of violence and having one heck of a 'pile on' orgy.  I read that story, which again is meant more as a parabole (Im sure I misspelt that, forgive me) and I took from that story that the moral was NOT that the town was punished because of homosexual sex, but rather, due to their lack of appreciation for human life and the intimacy that is meant for two people when they come together physically.

 Also, before I leave the bible portion of this, remember, as you mentioned before TM, in older versions of the bible, shellfish consumption is seen as an equal sin as well.  My take on that is a more logical one.  Shellfish are not the safest (or safe at all) of seafood to consume raw.  I believe during this time, those who consumed raw shellfish, often fell ill to natural poisons found when consuming raw and poorly prepared seafood, and due to the lack of science at that time, and abundant reliance on faith, we as people could only logically assume that God was punishing those who consumed the coveted shellfish.  I feel that homosexual sex *may* be cautioned against for similar reasoning.  We all know that right or wrong, the act of homosexual sex between two men creates an opportunity where transmission of sexually contracted diseases is greatly increased in odds than transmission through heterosexual sex.  This is also not a 'God' issue, there is more than enough scientific and logical information explaining why this is so.  However, back in the days before contraception and 'safe sex,' it is not too far fetched to believe those who engaged in homosexual sex were in turn more apt to contracting disease.  Again, with the lack of modern science (or any science) back then, it would also be not too far fetched to believe that people saw this, much alike those who fell ill to eating shellfish, as God's way of punishing those who committed 'heinous and unholy acts.'

there's my take on the bible's take, and that is the point where I realized perhaps we as christians lost the overall message and became too obessed with creating rigid rules as opposed to simply relying on our faith, reserving judgement, and treat one another, no matter how different, in the same ways we would wish to be treated.  Maybe it is fear of damnation or merely xenophobia that causes us to want to exclude others who are unlike us, but for me, admittedly, I realized alot of it was rooted in the latter.

Anyways, I began asking my friend more about himself, how he knew, is dating the same process?  Is there the same ackward moments before a kiss?  Is someone the 'girl' and someone the 'guy'?  Basically I was the 3 year old, desperate for knowledge about a subject that most would rather just judge by its cover as a bad book, obviously not on God's booklist to them and therefore useless to glance at anything but the cover (ie the stereotype and the label of 'gay.')  He was more than happy to oblige with answers.  He actually was happy someone finally cared enough to ask such questions, and I think he finally felt safe and content that he had someone who he could talk to and knew wouldn't judge him. 

Over the year I hung out with him from time to time, met alot of people from 'that side' of society, homosexuals, drag queens, twinks, bears, and all this confusing terminology and again, I almost fell back into the 'hate' trap.  Most of his friends behaved like the spoiled girls on my sweet 16, that awful show that MTV so lovingly presents so our children have the warped perception that a brand new 80,000 dollar car is a typical 16th birthday present from your parents and that if P.Diddy doesnt play your birthday, you have bad parents.  They seriously would just troll the clubs, talk about random, no strings attached sex, and would even hit on me, until finally I would explain that I'm not gay, I just am not homophobic so being around a primarily gay crowd didn't bother me.  I also noticed MANY of them are prejudice against those who claim they are 100% straight.  Many feel that we are all too 'prudish' and that sex should not be held on the pedestal that it is. 

Now, *that* IS evil.  To forgo the consideration of other's feelings, and physical/emotional health is inexcuseable.  Like I said, I began to hate homosexuals.  Where there was fear and a dislike, it was now hate.  I felt like they WERE this big conspiracy, trying to 'gayify' our culture and turn everyone into selfish, sex crazed people who will 'screw anything with a hole,' forgive my graphic wording.  However, I saw John when he was with his boyfriend, and then met a whole different side to that subculture.  John's boyfriend's friends were also gay, and yes, they made jokes about it, gabbed about the 'hot boys' in the media and celebrities, but the difference was, these people had couth, they were normal, they had consideration for others, morals, conept of family values.  Basically, they were just like me, except, well, they liked men and WERE men.  It was at this point I saw proof of the saying that there are two sides to every coin, and noticed the problem that occurs with stereotypes.

Shortly after that I became aquainted with a new friend.  She was someone I had known for years, but had known her as 'him.'  I had always noticed she was more 'girly' and soft than the rest of the guys, and did indeed have a much girlier style (longer, styled hair, girls jeans, tight clothes, lean figure and a borderline obsession with keeping themselves as fit and 'compact' as possible) but I had never thought that she was, well, 'she.'  Again, I was in a position of uncertainty.  This time not so much from a religious standpoint, but rather a logical standpoint.  I figured there was no other explaination than the fact that they were either crazy, or perhaps just confused.  I mean, the thing they always tell you is 'what would you do if you woke up tomorrow and you were the opposite sex?'

I never *really* asked myself that question.  I always figured 'well, it wouldn't happen, I am who I am, I think you're just confused, people don't get born that way.'  Also, like many here, I knew there was info on it, but I didn't want to hear it.  I feared the floodgates.  I felt that even IF there were a few legitimate cases out there, they were necessary sacrafices to keep transexuality as an undesireable because of how high the prevelance is of fetishists in that area and crossdressers who would see this as an opportunity to just go parading out in the streets in flambouyant drag, acting loudly and in a distracting manner, and basically causing havok in our public realm.  I realize now, that is wrong.

Here is why, on both a gay and transexual point.  Now I am saying this next bit is by no means racist, just a hypothetical situation to prove my point of tolerance.

If African americans were the highest demographic convicted and proven to have committed violent crimes, and the crimes were much lower during slavery, woul that be justification enough to again take away the rights of ALL of a minority simply because of the acts of some within that minority? 

Many would say 'of course not' and they would be correct.  You can't lock up ALL redheads if we found out that red heads had a high potentiality for crime. 

This ties together with this.  Are there *many* homosexuals out there and many subcultures who promote the lifestyle of no responsibility, free sex, and the destruction of moral values in exchange for complete physical freedom?  Yes.  Does that mean ALL are like that?  No, absolutely not.  If transexuals were accepted as their identified gender, would that allow many over-the-top types to flood out of the woodwork and claim they are women too for less than legitimate, proven reasons?  Yup.  However, is it fair, that to avoid that, that we force those who are legitimately gender dysphoric to 'fit' into their birth gender roles merely because someone thinks its 'weird?'  No, absolutely not, it is completely unfair, *especially* with science today, which has pretty much proven that most transexual brains are closer in biology to their identified gender rather than their birth gender.

To sum it up, you ask me, how do I *feel* about homosexuality/transexuality?

I feel as you said, scared, but mine is a more hopeful-yet-aware approach.  I'm aware that condoning such things *will* cause some of the less than genuine and less than moral aspects of both subcultures to surface and thrive, but they exist in our own camp too.  There are plenty of heterosexuals who engage in group sex, many who are irresponsible with sex and participate in sexual acts only for their own pleasure, with no regard to their partner(s) health, emotional investment into the act, or even the decency to do anything but bolt out to door as soon as the sex is over.

I feel scared, but I think acceptance is going to be a net gain of good.  Sure, there will be good and bad alike, but as I said before, if we focus on the ACT that is wrong (infidelity, promescuity, lack of concern for health and emotions of others) then we are not singling out the subcultures themselves, but rather, the act that perverts said subculture.  Afterall, if a person has an infection in their hand or another body part, you don't just cut it off, you do your best to save the limb. 

And yes, I am concerned with this issue because of my friends John and Ashlee.  They both are great people, good morals, have great family values, and both are better people than most I've met, gay, straight or whatever.