NY Times Columnist Defends Lawmaker’s Controversial Theology Against Conservative Criticism

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.