About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."Acts 10:9-15; see also discussion at Metafilter.
"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."
The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."
As I mentioned in my comments on Prof. Dorf's blog, I wondered if the New Testament's amendments of the law of the Old Testament meant that other Old Testament proscriptions such as proscriptions on homosexuality were similarly superceded by the new covenant created through Jesus. Some research into this reveals that, according to the Gospels, Jesus does not appear to say anything about the specific topic of homosexuality, but there are statements in other chapters of the New Testament that suggest that the proscription stands. Needless to say, it's a matter of significant controversy between Christians.
One thing that becomes clear: there is no easy reading here. We are dealing with interpretations of multiple English versions of the New Testament, which in turn rely on the understanding of the use of ancient Greek terms such as "malakoi ". It seems that the very nature of the exercise would caution against dogmatism. It does seem to me, though I am not expert, that, on the whole, Jesus' approach was one of forgiveness and tolerance: the basic message seemed to be that the technicalities of what one ate, or what went into the body were not important so long as one was pure of heart and word.