Question

In the debate you argued that there are two different obligations that stem from the divine source: one moral and the other halakhic. You also argued that if there is a dilemma between the two, then where there is a clear ruling in the Torah, even if it does not feel morally right, you would choose the Torah’s ruling. (As an example, you gave the divorce of a priest’s wife who was raped.)
The question is whether you continue with that same line of thinking regarding other clear prohibitions as well, for example male homosexual intercourse, or whether here you go in a different direction, where you reconcile what is written in the Torah by means of the Oral Torah?