Is it possible for members of religions to claim that it is religious intolerance when they are called homophobic for subscribing to religious dogma that defines homosexuality as a sin?

Sort of inspired by this blog entry, which discusses the argument many religious people state that their assertions that homosexuality is wrong cannot be called homophobia because it is not motivated by fear or animus.

This is a major problem that has been generally insurmountable in discussions between certain faith-based groups and gay activists. Those on the religious end of the scale want, reasonably, their beliefs to be tolerated. However, regardless of the motivation for the message, the message is that being gay is somehow harmful.

It’s almost impossible for gay rights advocates to break through this barrier, as recognition of their relationships as worthy of the same rights and privileges as those relationships sanctioned by the religious dogma requires those committing to the dogma to, at least, stay out of the movement.

From an objective standpoint, remove the labels and there is one group that has government provided rights that the other does not. These rights are, at the same time, considered central and fundamental to everyone’s lives. Therefore, it seems necessary to admit that the group that has been denied the rights is in the better moral position in demanding that their argument be recognized.

Of course, once the labels are applied, we end up with the issue we have now.

Is it possible to claim that gay-rights claims of homophobia against anti-gay dogma is religious intolerance in a way that is genuine and workable? Is there a way to avoid accusations of homophobia against such anti-gay dogma and still effectively fight for civil rights in the gay community?

It seems to be a paradox. I’ve posted in “General” to avoid flame-ups and side discussions, if at all possible.