Saturday’s New York Times front-paged its “Some Christians Seek Truce in the Gender Wars” piece, taking an inappropriate spin on the subject. It would be more realistic if it stated “Some Christians Surrender to the Gender Wars”. The Times portrayed those Christians withdrawing from the gender dispute as somehow retaining their “conservative” stance while paving the way for acceptance.
The crux of Ruth Graham’s story drives a message for conservative Christians to deviate from traditional Christian norms, notably taking the example of couple Andrew and Debbie James who broke away from their church after their child identified as transgender.
The Times inaccurately labeled opposition to expanding gender norms as “vociferous” while painting the Left as conducting “earnest searches for understanding,” sitting quietly “far from the shouting”. They conveniently highlighted the desperate situations of transgender teens from conservative Christian families who suffered rejection and mental health damage. Yet, they barely gave any attention to the quiet attempts within individual sanctums of worship, therapy offices, and homes to understand.
The narrative from the Left seems to strongly favor support for transgender causes against traditional beliefs. It wasn’t until paragraph 26 that a conservative point of view was cited by Mary Rice Hasson, a senior fellow at the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center. Hasson powerfully emphasizes the detrimental influence our modern gender culture has on our understanding of the human person, where the line between reality and personal belief is dangerously blurred.
Graham did hint at biblical clarity regarding the creation of males and females but immediately proceeded to emphasize the acceptance of gender diversity in the Bible, forgetting the basic tenets of creation.
The Times narrative is clearly steering formerly conservative Christians like Andrew and Debbie James into a clouded realm of compassion, effectively throwing them off their steadfast faith. Their children having abandoned Christianity clearly outlines the potential consequences of this issue.
With all due respect, the issue here isn’t whether Christians should show understanding or not, but to what extent should that understanding rewrite the basic norms of Christianity. The Times angle on this issue just seems like an attempt to upend long-held beliefs and interpret scripture in a way to push their agenda of acceptance of the expanding gender norms.
