if telling someone to sit at the back of a bus is racism, then telling someone they shouldn't have an intimate relationship is obviously homophobic. What's more of a deprivation, where you sit on a bus or whether you can have an intimate relationship?
Except that is not what they are doing. The equivalent would be them believing that black people who sit at the from of the bus won't go to heaven. It would be crazy - but not really denying anyone the right to sit where they chose.
That's why, for example, many JW parents would be willing to meet and associate with their exJW son's girlfriend and would have them in their lives but wouldn't want to meet their exJW son's boyfriend.
Technically, a JW parent shouldn't be willing to meet and associate with their exJW son's legal wife and family. So trying to make it a gay issue is smoke and mirrors - it's the "ex" part that causes the shunning.
Here is my question: IF IF IF IF I believed homosexuality, with or without sex, was against bible teaching would it be discriminatory to teach that to my kids? And if not should I have to use preapproved language vetted by the LGBTQ community?
Does everyone have to believe that homosexuality is ok and teach that to their kids?
Some would want it to be as you describe and they seem to be the ones struggling with the fundamental issue that the religious people who believe these things have the right to teach these things to their kids - as long as they are not publicly using hate speech or discriminating against people and people have had the chance to prove the video contains the latter and so far failed.
Remember the bible only comments on a sex act, not the relationship. The sin in both cases would be exactly the same: fornication (whether homosexual or heterosexual). This is an example of the type of discrimination that occurs as a result of the prejudice encouraged by JW teachings like this video.
I think that is wishful thinking - it doesn't say for instance that a same gender couple can marry as long as they don't have sex. You are also arguing that some local application of the rules is unfair as though that proves that the rules themselves are discriminatory. They are equally judgmental about different sex acts between married hetero-sexual couples although for obvious reasons, these are less likely to come to light.
Freedom of religion is fine. Be in the kkk and make racist cartoons or make cartoons about gay people but why should it be shielded from criticism for what it is?
They shouldn't escape criticism for it. But the criticism will be more powerful and convincing if it is kept accurate.
Making claims about the video containing hate speech and discrimination just weakens the message because when people watch the video and don't see those things, they may then dismiss this and other criticisms. An opportunity lost.
At the end of the day, they have their beliefs and it's clearly based on the bible. We might not agree with these beliefs, but they have the right to hold, teach and preach them. If anything, they should be used as an example and the direction that other, far more vocal, religious groups that do want to discriminate against people should be encouraged to move.