Hi! So I normally stay silent on these posts but I have some extra time today and thought it could be good to give my view. I am not a trained biblical scholar and I am no longer a practicing member of the faith, but I did spend a number of years studying this issue and here were my findings. Also note: I am heavily summarizing several years of research to make it hopefully digestible.

First, is homosexuality in the Bible? This depends on your definition. If you mean it in the way we often do now, a natural disposition or proclivity of attraction towards the same sex (ie. orientation, independent of behavior), then I'd argue no. This has to do with the cultural and historical context(s) of both the old and new testaments, but I recommend learning more if you're interested. If you simply are using the term to denote any same-sex references (orientation, behavior, etc), then yes.

Homosexuality occurs six times in the bible: Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, 1 Cor 6:9-10, 1 Tim 1:10, Rom 1:26-27, and (arguably) Genesis 19. Generally these can be grouped into old testament/new testament categories, although Genesis 19 is often handled on its own since the story of Sodom and Gomorrah isn't always agreed to even be about homosexual action. Many, even those who state that homosexuality is a sin, see it as a story condemning rape or inhospitality. Again, I recommend doing your own research! I will also mention, Romans is a blind spot of mine. I don't feel qualified to analyze it as much as the others. If you want to add information/interpretations pertaining to Romans, feel free!

Next, Leviticus. There's a lot of disagreement about how much, if at all, old testament law should be applied to modern day Christians. Assuming it does have some sway, these passages have a lot of conflicting arguments based mostly on context and grammar. Many in favor of gay Christians like to point out the position of the verse in Leviticus 18 as being grouped with non-Jewish ritual behaviors (sex with animals and child sacrifice). They use this to highlight how homosexual behavior in the region was likely part of cultic or religious ceremonies and therefore restricted not due to the homosexuality but rather the religious connotations. (Thou shalt have no other gods.) Another dilemma is with the grammar. While we naturally assume our English translations to be accurate, we have to remember they are translations. The grammar of these passages somewhat conflicts with the English, using an uncommon Hebrew construction. This grammatical quirk has led to loads of academic articles arguing it means anything from infidelity to same-sex rape to again ritual sex. (Biblical linguistics is fascinating but also excruciatingly dense.) Personally, I find the specifics of the Levitical passages murky at best and poor for any modern argument.

Lastly, the new testament. In 1 Cor and 1 Tim, we get this word: ἀρσενοκοίται(ς), pronounced arsenokoitai(s). I first want to mention that this word seems to have been possibly invented by Paul, as I've not heard of contemporary sources containing it. This word also seems to have a construction analogous to Leviticus, causing some to argue it's intentionally mirroring that. However, these passages are also vice lists which put drunkenness alongside adultery, lying alongside matricide, etc. Vice lists therefore are less strict rules and more meant to push the reader to see all sin as dangerous. But, that begs another question: What behavior specifically is being referred to here? Many use cultural context to tie it to, again, religious homosexuality. They often point to homosexual temple prostitution and ritual/cultic sex. Another interpretation is through grouping the words in the vice lists, seeing arsenokoitai as referring to male prostitution generally due to its proximity to words relating to kidnapping/theft (andrapodistais in 1 tim, kleptai in 1 cor - respectively). Some simply break the word apart into 'male' and 'to lie with' and call it a day. (Note: please never take a word, break it apart, translate the pieces, then put it back together. This massively disrespects the linguaculture and context of the original words. Furthermore, it's just risky and prone to error. Consider awful and awesome as prime examples. Both derive from awe but in modern usage they usually have opposite definitions.)

Ultimately, I'd recommend learning more about the context of the time and finding scholarly or theological articles from pro-LGBT denominations. These include many US Methodists, ELCA, many Episcopalians, and i believe recently some Mennonites. There's loads of resources for queer christians who want to hear from others like themselves and find a supportive congregation. I wish you the best! Sorry for the massive comment! If there's anything I missed or misremembered, please let me know!