Faith Facts

• New York Times columnist David French refuses to question Texas state Rep. James Talarico’s Christianity despite controversial theological statements
• Talarico previously claimed biblical prohibitions against homosexuality are ‘mistranslations’ and called abortion ‘a difficult moral decision’
• Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey challenged French’s stance, arguing that denying core biblical truths warrants questioning one’s Christian profession

New York Times columnist David French is defending his refusal to question the faith of a Texas lawmaker whose theological views have sparked widespread controversy among Christian conservatives.

During a recent discussion, French stated he will not claim that Texas state Rep. James Talarico is not a Christian, despite Talarico’s public statements that contradict traditional biblical teaching.

The debate centers on Talarico’s previous assertions that biblical prohibitions against homosexuality are merely “mistranslations” and his characterization of abortion as “a difficult moral decision” rather than a moral wrong. These positions have alarmed many Christians who view them as direct contradictions of Scripture’s clear teachings on sexual morality and the sanctity of life.

Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey challenged French’s unwillingness to scrutinize Talarico’s profession of faith. Stuckey argued that when someone publicly denies fundamental biblical truths, it is appropriate to question whether their beliefs align with historic Christianity.

“Not writing these people out of Christianity,” French responded, signaling his reluctance to draw theological boundaries even when faced with positions that diverge significantly from orthodox Christian teaching.

The exchange highlights a growing divide within American Christianity over how to respond to professing believers who advocate for positions contrary to Scripture. While some argue for a broad, inclusive approach that avoids questioning anyone’s profession of faith, others contend that truth and doctrinal clarity must take precedence.

Traditional Christian teaching, grounded in both Old and New Testament texts, has consistently affirmed God’s design for human sexuality within marriage between one man and one woman. Similarly, the Bible’s emphasis on God’s creative role in forming life in the womb has historically led Christians to oppose abortion except in the most extreme circumstances.

Critics of French’s position argue that refusing to address theological error—particularly from public figures who influence others—represents a failure of Christian leadership. They point to numerous New Testament passages where apostles clearly identified false teaching and warned believers to hold fast to sound doctrine.

The controversy also reflects broader tensions within conservative Christianity about engagement with secular institutions and progressive theology. French, who has become increasingly critical of certain elements within the conservative movement, represents one approach that emphasizes dialogue and inclusivity. His critics advocate for clearer doctrinal boundaries and willingness to identify teaching that contradicts biblical authority.

As political and cultural divisions continue to reshape American religious life, the question of who defines authentic Christianity—and on what basis—remains a crucial and contentious issue for believers across the theological spectrum.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Faith Facts

• Evangelist killed by suspected Muslim extremists posing as moto-taxi drivers in central Uganda on April 9
• The attack occurred shortly after the victim preached at a gospel event
• Christians face increasing persecution in Uganda and across East Africa

A Christian evangelist has been murdered in central Uganda after preaching at a gospel event, according to sources on the ground. The attack occurred on April 9 when suspected Muslim extremists, disguised as moto-taxi drivers, targeted the evangelist shortly after he finished sharing the Gospel.

The killing highlights the growing dangers faced by Christians in Uganda and throughout East Africa. Believers who openly share their faith are increasingly vulnerable to violent attacks by Islamic extremists who oppose the spread of Christianity in the region.

This tragic incident serves as a sobering reminder of the cost of discipleship in many parts of the world. While American Christians often take their religious freedom for granted, brothers and sisters in Christ around the globe risk their lives simply for proclaiming the Gospel.

The murder also underscores the need for continued prayer and support for persecuted Christians worldwide. Uganda, despite having a significant Christian population, has seen a rise in violent incidents targeting evangelists and church leaders in recent years.

The perpetrators’ decision to pose as moto-taxi drivers demonstrates the calculated nature of the attack. This deception allowed them to approach their target without raising suspicion, then strike when the evangelist was most vulnerable.

American Christians must remain vigilant in praying for our persecuted brothers and sisters. We must also support organizations that provide aid, security, and advocacy for believers facing violence for their faith. The global church is one body, and when one member suffers, we all suffer together.

This attack serves as a call to action for the international community to address the growing persecution of Christians in Uganda and neighboring countries. Religious freedom must be defended vigorously, both at home and abroad.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Faith Facts

• Two Catholic schools in Colorado were denied participation in a state-funded preschool program due to their biblical teachings on marriage and gender
• The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether excluding faith-based schools from public funding programs violates the First Amendment’s protection of religious exercise
• This case could set a critical precedent for religious freedom and the ability of Christian institutions to maintain biblical standards while accessing taxpayer-funded programs

The highest court in the land is poised to hear a case that could have sweeping implications for religious liberty and Christian education across America. At the center of the dispute are two Catholic schools in Colorado that were barred from participating in a state preschool funding program because of their adherence to traditional Christian teachings.

The schools were excluded from Colorado’s Universal Preschool Program after state officials determined that their biblical positions on marriage and human sexuality did not align with the state’s non-discrimination requirements. The exclusion raises fundamental questions about whether government can force religious institutions to abandon their deeply held convictions as a condition for equal treatment under the law.

This case arrives at the Supreme Court amid an ongoing national debate over the intersection of religious freedom and LGBT policies. For Christian conservatives, the stakes could not be higher — the outcome will help determine whether people of faith can fully participate in civic life without compromising their beliefs.

Legal experts note that the Supreme Court has increasingly sided with religious liberty claims in recent years, particularly in cases involving government funding programs. Previous decisions have established that states generally cannot exclude religious organizations from public benefit programs solely because of their religious character or mission.

The question before the justices is whether Colorado’s exclusion of these Catholic schools constitutes unconstitutional religious discrimination. Supporters of the schools argue that denying them access to a generally available public program because of their theological convictions violates both the Free Exercise Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.

Colorado officials, however, maintain that the schools’ policies conflict with state anti-discrimination laws and that participating institutions must comply with certain requirements to receive taxpayer funding. This argument sets up a direct clash between religious freedom protections and state-mandated ideological conformity.

The case underscores a broader cultural tension facing Christian institutions nationwide. As progressive policies on gender and sexuality become increasingly codified in law, religious schools, charities, and other faith-based organizations find themselves caught between maintaining biblical fidelity and accessing public resources available to secular counterparts.

For families seeking to educate their children in environments that reinforce Christian values, the Court’s decision could determine whether faith-based preschools remain viable options. Many parents choose religious education specifically because these schools teach and model traditional moral principles alongside academic instruction.

The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling will likely extend far beyond Colorado’s borders, potentially affecting similar programs and disputes in states across the nation. A decision favoring the Catholic schools would reinforce the principle that religious Americans cannot be treated as second-class citizens, while a ruling against them could signal that biblical teachings are incompatible with full participation in public life.

As the case moves forward, Christian conservatives and religious freedom advocates are watching closely. The outcome will serve as a barometer for how seriously the nation’s highest court takes the constitutional guarantee that government shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.