THIS IS SO WRONG!

“Christians must be very careful not to claim that science can never prove a biological basis for sexual orientation.”

Oh. So sorry I never got that memo. But if “basis” means “cause” I will quite vociferously deny it.

If Moehler is intending to torment the pansexual left by being provocative, then I think he is being brilliant. But if he seriously means to recommend alterations in fetal chemistry to rig the right feelings, then I am seriously concerned.

Let me ask you men this: If I offered you a drug that drastically altered your sex drive so you no longer had to remember to look the other way while going by the Victoria’s Secret store in the mall, or an injection you could give your sons so you wouldn’t have to wave them away from the SoftpornIllustrated magazine in the racks in every damn store in the world, would you use it? I assure you that you’ll still have your sex drive for your wives–at least as often as she’s already in the mood (Camille Paglia points out somewhere that the studies indicate lesbian couples have sex slightly less often than married couples while homosexual males have sex a great deal more often). But you’ll mostly be uninterested and not even notice stimuli in general.

How many of you would line up? I reckon only slightly more than would be willing to castrate yourselves.

No, you would hate the idea of becoming a shadow of yourself. You would realize lust is a sin but you would know the answer lies elsewhere, namely:

For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

That, not a patch on your mother’s womb, is what Christians should be recommending.

What I’m trying to say is that you would be hard to convince that my miracle therapy would not seriously dampen and alter who you are. And I think it is fundamentally unrealistic to think there are people who are like other people in every possible way except they just happen to be attractedin a samesex direction. No, we’re talkinng about altering personality. And I don’t think that’s right. Yes, we have to tell people to repent of samesex and live according to God’s word. But do we really want to tell people that there is something wrong with whole personalities–that God never wanted male hairdressers (or insert favorite stereotype based on half-truths here) to exist? It is fine to reduce animals to impulses but things are more complex with human beings. Curing rams may not have problematic consequences but altering people’s personalities is a different issue.

I think we’re going to be hated either way, but I still would rather tell people to embrace celibacy or marriage and appreciate how God has made them rather than saying that there is a whole part of the spectrum that should be wiped out by prenatal testing and gene-therapy.*

And frankly, there are real people working through real issues right now who do not need to hear a major Christian leader telling them they are stuck the way they are unless they get chemical treatments. What they need to hear is that there is a way for them to truly reflect God’s glory that involves rejecting sin while being thankful for who they are rather than ashamed.

Dr. Moehler is a great Christian leader. But I think this published opinion is a mistake.

*Addendum: Dr. Moehler has written more here on the resulting controversy. He says some really good things. He also seems to think that any “gene-therapy” reference is a misrepresentation of what he wrote. Readers are invited to read for themselves and decide for themselves if this is an offense against true reporting.

6 thoughts on “THIS IS SO WRONG!

  1. scott cunningham

    Good thoughts. This is a difficult question. The scientific proof for homosexual preferences existing is very limited, though there is some. That said, as to whether we have a right to altering a person’s chemistry to change their preferences seems dangerous. It sounds like what you’re saying is that if personality is complex and biological (at least in part), then it’s unlikely we can change one part of it – particularly something as significant as people’s preferences over types of people to have sexual relationships with – without changing others. Moehler’s point is not without some argument, too, though. It’s hard for me not to believe that a celibate or married homosexual (ie, married to a woman) isn’t lonelier than the exact same person who prefers having sex with the opposite sex. In that limited sense, it seems to improve their overall happiness and wholeness if it was possible to take the burden away. For instance, what if it was possible simply to make the sinful burdens lighter for someone – a person with a vicious hunger for killing innocent people, for instance. We essentially do attempt to treat those people medically – through psychological counseling as well as medication. So it’s not obvious how this is different, except that it is coercive (if treatment is in utero), and the consequences more unknown.

    Reply
  2. pduggie

    I agree here, but am also wondering how much we should be willing to identify our “worldy passions” with out fundamental personalities.

    “Worldly passions” in some sense are not “us” our “better selves”. The “law of our members” is not “how it is *supposed* to be.

    Mohler is maybe making a more provocative claim than just changing personalities, he’s holding open the idea that worldly passions might have a locus in biology. Which doesn’t seem impossible: can’t we attribute some of “fallen nature” to genetic nature?

    Reply
  3. David

    Who can argue with the passage from Titus? At the same time, though, I wonder if the issues are so black and white.

    For instance, should Christians consider depression medication (at least sometimes) legitimate, in addition to biblical counseling?

    What about Ritalin?

    Reply
  4. Pingback: alastair.adversaria » Links

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *