Dr. Al Mohler

According to an article that was posted on beliefnet.com by Adelle Banks, who incidentally I got to meet a couple of time while she wrote this article, Dr. Al Mohler has said that if science determines that there is a gene that pushes one into homosexuality and if science could create a resonable method to changing that gene while in the womb in order to determine that a child would be heterosexual, than that method should be employed in order to “unapologetically support the use of any appropriate means to avoid sexual temptation and the inevitable effects of sin”.

While I generally find myself in agreement with Dr. Mohler, and while I am opposed to homosexual behavior and believe, as do many evangelicals, that it is outside of the intended relationship behavior that God designed for us to engage in, I also see this kind of thinking as ethically, and morally, irresponsible. To alter a child, in womb, who is not experiencing illness, nor is in life-threatening danger, is to delve into the realm of “playing God” it seems to me, and flirts far to intimately with altering the intended biological design that God created us to have.

If we reject the notion that we should alter any child who is created with abnormalities or physical defects than we should vigorously reject this type of thinking as well, I believe. I hope Dr. Mohler would rethink his position on this. We simply cannot oppose the efforts to “play God” when it suits our moral, biblical and ethical position and then do an about face when we feel it is appropriate to our moral sensibilities.

If you would like to read the article in its entirety you can do so here.

Micah is a husband to Tracy & a daddy to Grace, Kessed & Haddon. He’s Senior Pastor at Brainerd Baptist Church in Chattanooga, TN. Most of all, he’s a debtor to grace.

3 thoughts on “Whoa!

  1. Micah,

    I’m glad you posted on this, and I think that I pretty much agree with your position on this. It is a frightening thing to think about altering the genetics of an unborn baby, and seems obviously to be quite a slippery slope.

    I have never much cared about the debate about whether homosexuality is due to biological predisposition versus choice. To me, it just doesn’t matter that much. As you have correctly phrased it, it is not homosexual orientation that is sinful, but homosexual behavior. And that is no more sinful than any other sin in that it removes God from his rightful place in our lives and places our desires on that throne. What caused it to happen may be interesting as an academic study, but ultimately it changes nothing.

    To paraphrase what Ben Cole said about this, I think Dr. Mohler served this pie before it had finished baking.

  2. Micah,
    Perhaps a link to Dr. Mohler’s original article would be wise, it can be found here – http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=891 .

    Beliefnet seems to have latched onto only one of Dr. Mohler’s statements while overlooking the point of his blog. Just for the sake of discussion, Dr. Mohler writes:

    “Homosexual activists were among the first to call for (and fund) research into a biological cause of homosexuality. After all, they argued, the discovery of a biological cause would lead to the normalization of homosexuality simply because it would then be seen to be natural, and thus moral.
    But now the picture is quite different. Many homosexual activists recognize that the discovery of a biological marker or cause for homosexual orientation could lead to efforts to eliminate the trait, or change the orientation through genetic or hormonal treatments.”

    His conclusion:

    “The development of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis [PDG] is one of the greatest threats to human dignity in our times. These tests are already leading to the abortion of fetuses identified as carrying unwanted genetic markers. The tests can now check for more than 1,300 different chromosomal abnormalities or patterns. With DNA analysis, the genetic factors could be identified right down to hair and eye color and other traits. The logic is all too simple. If you don’t like what you see on the PDG report . . . just abort and start over. Soon, genetic treatments may allow for changing the profile. Welcome to the world of designer babies.
    If that happens, how many parents — even among those who consider themselves most liberal — would choose a gay child? How many parents, armed with this diagnosis, would use the patch and change the orientation?”

    If I am not mistaken, the greatest thrust of his post is the fact that the claim that homosexuality is biological is now backfiring on homosexual activists, because if it is biological, it is detectable – and as such could lead to abortion or treatment.


  3. I suppose I disagree with you on this. If my wife was pregnant (which she is) and the unborn child had a genetic defect that I could fix, (Downs Syndrome, etc.) then I would surely fix it…just as I would have began trying to “fix/help with” it when the child was born through traditional methods.

Leave a Reply