ABSTRACT
Inclusionists in general and LGBT UMs in particular have a number of options when it comes to making sense of the experiences they have within the denomination. They could, in theory, decide that they had invited their own suffering by disobeying the Lord in sexual sinfulness; such a position would likely lead to the conclusion that they should solve their problems by becoming heterosexual. Such an analysis was both readily available and even promulgated by the conservative caucuses. It was, however, strongly resisted by both LGBT UMs and their heterosexual allies.
