I don’t look to the editors at the New York Times to agree with Christian teaching on sexuality, but neither do I expect them to advocate a policy that effectively excludes Christians from government service. Yet that is precisely what they have done today in an editorial about President Bush’s nominee for Surgeon General, Dr. James Holsinger. They argue that Dr. Holsinger’s adherence to his church’s teaching on homosexuality should exclude him from being the Surgeon General. They write:
“What’s troubling is the view he once expressed â€” and may still hold â€” on homosexuality . . . because church doctrine deems the practice of homosexuality to be ‘incompatible with Christian teaching’ . . . [The Senate Health Committee] must determine whether Dr. Holsinger holds these benighted views today. The Senate should not confirm a surgeon general who considers practicing homosexuals abnormal and diseased.”
There may be other reasons people may oppose Holsinger’s nomination (e.g., his previous views on stem-cell research), but his faithfulness to his church’s teaching on homosexuality should not be one of them. I think most Americans would agree with that. Still, what does this say about our culture that “the newspaper of record” could even suggest such a thing?