Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Mohler’s “Cure” For Gay Babies: A Follow Up

Jim Burroway

March 16th, 2007

I guess the Rev. Albert Mohler got quite an earful after he green-lighted the “curing” of gay babies before they’re born, should such a treatment be developed. Surprisingly, that earful came from other Evangelicals. For one thing, they don’t like him conceding the mere possibility of a biological factor in the development of sexuality.

But the sin I found most interesting was this one, where he’s chastised for not using their politically-correct language. Rev. Mohler doesn’t buy it:

Some Christians seem absolutely convinced that there is no such thing as sexual orientation. There is a point to be made here. No “orientation” can alter the sinful status of sinful acts. Some have written me to say that there is no such reality as a homosexual, only those who perform homosexual acts. This flies in the face of the Bible, however, which speaks of those who commit such sins by their sin — murderers, liars, adulterers, gossips, etc. It does not help to deny this. But, even though no “orientation” can alter the moral status of actions, the fact remains that some persons are sexually attracted to persons of the same sex while the majority are sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex. There are other terms to use here, ranging from “sexual attraction pattern” to “sexual arousal profile,” but sexual orientation seems a bit less explicit and is generally understood within the culture.

Much of the problems that I have with Exodus is its utter refusal to speak clearly. I gave you some insight already into their carefully craft language which denies the very concept of sexual orientation. It took about seven pages of material to tell you how Exodus and Focus in the Family described “homosexuals” at Love Won Out. I’m currently working on another long post just to talk about how they use the word “change.” That single word alone will take another seven or eight pages. It shouldn’t be that way. My family heirloom Oxford Universal Dictionary (a gift from my great-great aunt as I left for college), as thorough and comprehensive as it is, dispatched with the job using a mere six inches of text.

Rev. Mohler ends his post with a few comments directed to gays and lesbians, in which he’s most clearly not “on our side.” But I can understand perfectly his apparent impatience with those who insist on using an artificial language that evades clarity and is, in his words, unbiblical.

See Also:

The “Cure” For Gay Babies: Take A Chill Pill



Lynn David
March 16th, 2007 | LINK

You mentioned in the other post on Mohler his derisive nature towards the Roman Catholic Church. Most notably the Catholic Church seems to hang onto a psychological genesis to homosexuality. In the Catholic Catechism it specifically says, “Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained” (see: 2357-2359). So I don’t know what the Roman Catholic Church would do if a biological source were found for one’s personality, more precisely sexual orientation.

The whole idea that a small segment of the human population should be astigmatized by a curse from a god with an inborn situational sin which strikes at the heart of what it means to be human, to intimately share your life, is the most stupid thing a man like Mohler can ever come up with (but that’s religion for you). Someday people will have to face it and realize that straight people (‘cept maybe St Paul) wrote the “holy” books and thus the full spectrum of humanity waa not therein recorded.

I’ll have to admit also that bronze-age man had a poor way of reconciling homosexuality with their developing religious thought (or simply as man’s knowledge of his world and himself grew). The qadesh, temple prostitutes (incorrectly a.k.a. the sodomites of 1 Kings), of the Middle Eastern (Canaanite) temples promoted promescuity and was certainly not a way man should have handled homosexuality. The backlash against it produced the institutionalized homophobia of the Abrahamic religions.

However, go back several thousand years in the Middle East and homosexuality was probably managed in tribes similar to that of what was encountered here in Native American tribes. However, listen to Native American tribal voices today and you realize how easily the Christian religion has elicited a homophobic bigotry in that community which their traditions did not engender. I find that to be quite sad. It shows up how easily it is for humans to adopt a hatred of that which they do not understand. And religion permits it under the guise of love.

Eh…. you got me going, Jim.

March 17th, 2007 | LINK

According to historians, the ancient worldview, in which the biblical writings are rooted, know no such concept as sexual orientation. Let’s be realistic. The idea of “sexual orientation” is a relatively recent development. In fact, it is only in the past few decades that sexual orientation, as a fundamental characteristic of human existence, has been generally embraced by the western vernacular. It is not surprising to observe that those persons and groups who are deeply rooted in biblical thought are reluctant to accept the modern understanding of homosexuality.

But I like to see Mohler admit that “. . .sexual orientation . . . is generally understood within the culture.”

July 12th, 2007 | LINK

I have a nephew, 19 years old. He become a gay. So i think it’s best if any Dr. can find a solution or create a medcine to cure this bad situation. I hope this can happen…

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.