Aren't Christians being selective with Old Testament law when they appeal to it with respect to homosexuality, while ignoring Old Testament commands about clothing, food, etc.?

Question: Aren't Christians being selective with Old Testament law when they appeal to it with respect to homosexuality, while ignoring Old Testament commands about clothing, food, etc.?

In some sense, yes, because we are singling out the moral law, which is exactly what the New Testament trains us to do. The book of Acts distinctly separates the ceremonial and liturgical laws from the moral law. The Lord told Peter not to distinguish between clean and unclean animals any longer (Acts 10:9-16). At the same time, the Jerusalem Council clearly confirmed the continuation of the moral law (Acts 15). Paul tells us the gospel is for the Gentiles as well as for the Jews, which obliterates that distinction in the holiness code. 

Nevertheless, Paul regularly returns to the moral law of the Old Testament to show and defend the character of righteous living in general and rule commandments against same-sex acts in particular. 

If we still depended on rule Levitical code for our understanding of sex, the church would have an incomplete picture of human sexuality. Thankfully, Scripture provides us with a comprehensive picture of this issue in the New Testament. As a result, the church's basic understanding of the sinfulness of homosexual acts is not finally rooted in Leviticus; it is rooted in the New Testament, and specifically in texts like Romans 1. The consistent identification of all same-sex acts as explicitly sinful reveals the unquestionable continuity between the Old and New Testaments.