awe, once again, I see your point. But I hasten to point out that young people (as well as adults) are exposed to graphic, excessive violence daily on tv, in movies and video games.
Talk about desensitizing & taking root! 99% of the violence depicted shows no consequences, and it is no surprise that we now have gangs of children who drive by McDonalds & kill someone for the thrill, or for initiation into a gang.
I honestly don't think most of us really recognize violence when we see it any more. The effort to expand our view of violence is in reaction to Jesus' nonviolence. (see Wink's book, Jesus and Nonviolence, p.27f)
I think sin is contextual. I think that's what the Bible shows. Many people are taught, "Thou shalt not commit adultery." meant one monagamous opposite-gender spouse for a lifetime. In context it meant, don't have sex with any women with whom you haven't negotiated a deal with her father.
As for gay sin, I think what emerges from the few texts that address it, or seem to be addressing it, is simply that it is not OK to exploit a same-gender partner for sexual gratification. It is especially interesting that it seems to be saying if you have power over someone such that they would be expected to obey you, you may not use that power to gratify your sexual desire. Ah, the conversation returns to violence. Using, exploiting, raping are all violent in nature.
So, again, I defend the expanded definition of violence.
Sheesh, I was expecting someone to stump me with "Is it wrong to stomp on a cockroach?"