Rabbi Benny Lau, a cousin of the more famous Lau family, has written an article in the Jerusalem Post which has two glaringly obvious errors.
a) He claims that if a person has a Gay sexual proclivity that this person has no free choice. This is arrant nonsense. The Rambam opens up with people who have “tendencies” inborn and what they should do about them. Never does he claim they have no choice. He suggests didn’t activities.
b) Proclivity does not mean imperative. They are different words with different meanings
c) The Shulchan Aruch clearly PROHIBITS Yichud between two men where there is a high chance of hanky panky. I do not understand how Rabbi Lau didn’t folliow Shulchan Aruch when he proposed “Couple Partnerships” – the Clayton’s Marriage. Does he not see this is Lifnei Iver or Mesayeah L’idvar Aveyroh as well.
d) I do agree that these people should not be subject to any ridicule. At the same time they invite such by forming cloisters which are only for the LGBT movement. I have no problem with Gay people. They are Jews like everyone else.
Rabbi Lau tries to be all things to all people. He ends up not playing the role of Rabbi, populist or commentator. He strikes me as a man torn.
He has failed in my opinion.