The reason why it seems so wrong to argue against it, is to do so, you're going against Enlightenment Period, which is what has influenced modern conceptions of morality.
There are schools of thought from previous eras that can be used to argue against it.
That's why most people are disgusted when someone argues against homosexuality, because social contract theory had become so normalised in modernity, that they have trouble accepting the plausabiliy of anything that conflicts with it.
But then on the other side, you have anti gays who can't see beyond the way theyve been brought up, or will create premises to supplement theological conclusions they already held.
Not to mention that both sides tend to apply the appeal to emotion fallacy.
There are schools of thought from previous eras that can be used to argue against it.
That's why most people are disgusted when someone argues against homosexuality, because social contract theory had become so normalised in modernity, that they have trouble accepting the plausabiliy of anything that conflicts with it.
But then on the other side, you have anti gays who can't see beyond the way theyve been brought up, or will create premises to supplement theological conclusions they already held.
Not to mention that both sides tend to apply the appeal to emotion fallacy.