On the contrary, your interpretation is an outright condemnation of a specific act, rather than condemning two simultaneous acts.
First, I did not say that Paul was condemning the Romans for idolatry, I said he was warning them against it.
Second, I did not admit that Paul condemns homosexual behaviour, but rather behaviour against one's nature. For a straight man, this is indeed homosexuality. For a gay man, this is heterosexuality. The text does not exclude heterosexuality, and merely states that they went after 'strange flesh'. Incedental homosexual or heterosexual behaviour isn't condemned, but behaviour contrary to one's nature and caused by Pagan idolatry, is.
Homosexuality is the sexual and/or romantic attraction to members of the same sex. Nothing in the human psyche has changed the prevalence of homosexuality in human culture. So no, I do not believe homosexuality has changed.
The attempted rape (which is debateable in itself) occured after God declared Sodom and Gomorrah to be sacked. The sin of Sodom is never stated to be one of homosexuality; indeed, other verses emphasise that the sin was primarily inhospitality and ignoring the needs of the poor. Given that one's life often depended on the hospitality of strangers, this was a grevious transgression on the part of the Sodomites.
I disagree. It is only temple prostitution that is explicitly condemned. The fact that it was young boys being sought by older men is incedental, since this was widespread throughout Graceo-Rome.
On the contrary, I clearly stayed in context, especially with Romans 1.
Of course. I can neither disprove your position nor prove mine, and you can neither disprove my position nor prove yours. This is a semantics debate; our positions ultimately boil down to our interpretations.
That said, I disagree that they would have been rebuked for their homosexuality, since I still disgaree that the Bible condemns homosexuality at all. If my position is right, then your position on the rebuking of David and Jonathan is wrong.
On the contrary, my being unChristian would make me more unbiased than you, since I ultimately do not care what the Bible says on any topic. If it condemns homosexuality? That is unfortunate, but I'll get over it. If it does not? Then I will be pleased, insofar as one can be pleased with winning armchair philosophy.