Or for you Pascal programmers "Apologetics <> Offtopic"...
That's the case isn't it? I can only see the rationale for closing this question is that the OP didn't specify what kinds of answers he or she wanted.
That's a problem, so when I answer with a Catholic answer and 4Castle answers with a JW comment we both do something technically incorrect for the site.
Apologetics is "reason applied to faith". Reason, which should be accessible to anyone regardless of their faith.
But, but, but, isn't this a "TRUTH QUESTION?", that's true - if you think that "what is reasonable?" is the same question as "what is truth?". But since those aren't the same thing :
I answer that
Answers that sound reasonable to questions on practical, "how do I be a Christian in the modern world" type questions are topical rather an off-topic.
They ought to be scoped appropriately (if necessary, although the reason for opposition to homosexual behavior and lifestyle doesn't deviate greatly between Christian sects that do oppose it), they should not be too broad (as this question probably is, which is the close reason incidentally)
On the Other Hand
Isn't this Pastoral Advice? Shouldn't you be asking your pastor how to deal with something, what is appropriate, etc?
I answer Not necessarily, when you're asking about how to deal with a "Big Hypothetical Subject" that's different than when asking a question about a "Little Niggling Thing" and I think the broadness of the question offsets the pastoral adviceness of the question.
Still, it has at least 1 and a half strikes against it, which I think justifies it being on hold - but not permanently.