Question

Rabbi, I was impressed by what you wrote regarding interpretation in the Torah, and that it is important to preserve the root value when reality changes. 
But I find the distinction between morality and Jewish law difficult. It is true that there are laws that do not touch on morality, such as the issue of a priest and a rape victim. But there are laws whose root is morality. And the Torah takes pride in the fact that the nations will come and say about our Torah, what wise and insightful things it contains.
The Torah educates a person to be good (moral), and the Torah also educates regarding constitutional matters (such as sacrifices, or matters of priests, or matters of marriage—these are things that establish the boundaries of life within which we live and which we do not cross) (for example, there is no such reality as a priest with a rape victim). Who said that the reason homosexuality is something invalid is also that it is something immoral? Therefore, in my view, removing moral matters and matters of character from the Torah is a grave sin against its purpose. 
And according to your approach, it sounds like morality has great importance if you argue that the words of the Sages should be set aside because of our culture’s understanding of morality. But no one knows better than you that we are too limited to arrive at a perfect understanding of the human soul, a perfect understanding of morality, and a perfect understanding of reward and punishment (for one who believes). That is, why should we set aside the words of our rabbis when they relied on the principles of the Torah, while we rely on human reason in its understanding of morality or the good—something that could change in a few generations? My main claim is: by what warrant do you prefer, in a situation of doubt (the words of the Sages, according to your approach), the side of morality over the religious side? Is the matter hidden behind the words of the Torah a moral matter, such that you end up being more moral than the Torah?