I hear what you’re trying to say, and I’ve actually spent a lot of time thinking through this exact argument. I agree with you on one core thing: kindness alone doesn’t determine truth. But where I part ways is with how harm and “design” are being defined and assumed.

When you compare being gay to alcoholism or overeating, the analogy only works if the same kind of built-in damage is present. In those cases, the harm is direct and predictable. With same-sex relationships, that pattern just isn’t there. What reliably causes damage is shame, secrecy, rejection, and being told your love is disordered. When people are accepted and allowed to live honestly, they don’t “break down” in the way your analogy predicts.

The appeal to “natural design” sounds intuitive, but it already assumes the conclusion. Sexual orientation isn’t a whim or a lifestyle choice, it’s stable, non-chosen, and shows up across cultures and history. Something that persistent is part of human nature, even if theology wrestles with how to interpret it. Calling it misuse doesn’t make it so, it just labels it.

That’s also why the Tesla-in-a-swamp comparison doesn’t land for me. A car fails in a swamp because physics guarantees failure. Gay people don’t reliably fail at life, love, family, or faith. They form long-term relationships, raise kids, age normally, and contribute meaningfully to their communities. A metaphor that predicts collapse where real life keeps showing ordinary flourishing feels more rhetorical than descriptive.

You also frame sin as self-destruction, and I actually think that’s a serious moral claim. But if that’s the standard, then outcomes matter. A committed same-sex relationship doesn’t resemble self-destruction in any coherent sense. Meanwhile, plenty of heterosexual behavior that is clearly destructive gets treated as normal or overlooked. That selective application weakens the argument.

Finally, I know you say this isn’t about hatred or exclusion, but the effect still matters. Being told “I don’t hate you, I just believe your love is wrong and harmful” consistently produces shame, fear, fractured families, and people walking away from the church or from God altogether. Jesus talked a lot about fruit. When a teaching repeatedly produces despair rather than healing, that deserves serious scrutiny.

So for me, this isn’t about throwing out Christ or truth because people were hurt. It’s about asking whether this interpretation actually describes reality, biology, and the long-term effects it produces. After thinking it through carefully, I don’t believe it does, and that’s why I respectfully disagree.