Such a discussion is always at risk of becoming broad and pejorative, and therefore less likely to influence anybody's thinking.  The debate is only relevant if both sides actually engage in a meaningful way.  To encourage engagement, it may be constructive to focus intensely on specific aspects of particular texts and discuss their inerrancy individually and in depth.

Some will find this reductionist approach inappropriate.  Many propose that the Bible, for example, is inerrant as a whole, but that individual verses are too easily taken out of context to serve as a basis for solitary belief.  It is also very common, however, for singular passages to be parsed for meaning and put forward as support for a particular belief or practice.  Inerrancy is an absolute assertion, so looking deeply at subsets of the text must be a reasonable approach to understanding.

Theological scholars also warn that simplistic readings of these texts lead to false interpretations.  This discussion will ignore that warning - because the vast majority of the readers of these books are not theological scholars.  Millions of people shape their views and behavior based on a straightforward reading of the words.  If we read the text "like a child", perhaps we will better understand how the words actually influence thought and action.

"Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it."  -- Mark 10:15

Each article in this series will introduce a specific text, and ask a series of questions regarding the meaning of the text when viewed from the perspective of inerrancy.  The intent is to encourage discussion.  In addition to the questions, some diverse perspectives from external sources will be assembled and presented. These ideas are not an expression of the author's point of view.  

All Bible citations are from the Revised Standard Version.

Today's text

"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them." - Leviticus 20:13

Questions

Does this verse mean that those who commit the specific homosexual act described in this verse should be put to death?  Why or why not?

Does this verse prohibit only male homosexual intercourse or other practices as well?  If it applies more broadly, why?

Galatians 3:23-26 says:
"Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed.  So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian; for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith."
Does this mean that the laws described in Leviticus are no longer relevant?  If they're no longer relevant, should they be part of doctrine today?

Perspectives

A summary of various views on this verse can be found at:
www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh3.htm.

Wikipedia has a collection of Biblical verses and interpretation related to homosexuality:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality

Some Christians interpret this verse literally:
www.godhatesfags.com.

Liberal interpretations put this verse in the context of Leviticus overall and assert that these proscriptions are directed against "idolatry" and not sexuality - specifically regarding the prohibition that the Israelites must not engage in the practices of the fertility cult of Molech and Ashteroth.  For example:
www.allfaith.com/Grace/lev20.html

 "Readers of the Bible's diverse sexual regulations -- whether liberal or conservative -- are and need be selective. The Old Testament allows married men to have sex with prostitutes, slaves and other unmarried women not under the protection of their fathers. It never condemns female homosexuality, nor does it condemn male-male sex aside from intercourse. The Bible's world of sexual mores is not ours. Anyone claiming to be advocating pure Biblical ethics has not taken a close enough look at them. Prayerfully, Christians must build on and beyond the Bible."
-- Dr. David M. Carr, Professor of Old Testament, Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York; cited at:
www.pbs.org/pov/pov2003/familyfundamentals/special_chapter_3.html

Apparently the verse is humorous to some:
www.jacksonville.com/apnews/stories/050807/D8P05QN80.shtml