My point is that this is not an inconsistency at all. It is just something that is surprising to many since on subjects like homosexuality people tend to associate public disapproval of a specific behavior with political aggression to those with the identity and so personal conflict with the individuals who happen to practice it. But that just doesn't logically follow. To get from "disapprove of behaviour X" to "have a problem with person B who does X" you need to add in a whole other premise... which is not something everybody does.

Bear in mind that the kind of Christians (ie. nice ones) who can denounce homosexuality when asked directly but hold nothing against their homosexual friends are also the kind who take particular delight in the verse "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". And the meaning that conveys is uplifting to them. Becomes it comes loaded with the connotation "And it doesn't matter. Jesus loves us all and we can all be forgiven and we should forgive. How can I hold anything against anyone when God doesn't hold anything against me despite all my naughty thoughts about Sam naked? Just because we believe in omnipotent imaginary friends doesn't mean we are obliged to be intolerant dicks. Hallelujah". Well, they really do think the first bit. The not being intolerant is just a pleasant side effect from my perspective. :)