Russell Moore Condemns Uganda For Christian Law

Russell Moore has followed in the footsteps of Richard Land in not only having been head of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission but also in condemning Uganda. Russell Moore, the editor in chief of Christianity Today was nowhere to be found when Roe v Wade was overturned, but he is able to condemn Christians all the way in Uganda for enacting a tough law against sodomy.

In an article titled, Don’t Pretend the Ugandan Homosexuality Law Is Christian, Russell Moore screeches against Uganda, ultimately arguing that buttsex is an unalienable right.

There are three major flaws (that I will address.)

Christian History Begins Post-WWII

The first is that Russell Moore pretends that Christian history began post-WWII. He ignores the long, proud history of sodomy laws in Christian nations, specifically those with English Common Law as a legal system.

At issue is a harsh new law signed by Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni that would not only outlaw homosexuality but also mandate conversion-therapy-type “rehabilitation” for gay people who are arrested and require a kind of surveillance culture in which citizens are criminally liable for not turning in people they know to be gay. But most chilling of all, the law would impose the death penalty on categories deemed to be “aggravated homosexuality.”

It’s worth noting that Russell Moore is arguing that pedophiles shouldn’t be executed if they are gay. He is also denouncing so-called conversion therapy which has studies have shown aren’t harmful.

Of course, repressive regimes violate human rights all the time and all around the world—and there are vast limits on how much other nations can do about it. But in this case, many are wondering whether the primary problem is that Uganda is taking the Bible out of context.

Some of those sniping at Cruz—especially for his categorization of the Ugandan law as “horrific” and “wrong”—argue that the senator’s issue is really with God. After all, they say, doesn’t the Bible dictate that “if a man has sexual relations with a male as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable [and] are to be put to death” (Lev. 20:13)?

Ted Cruz did take issue with the Bible. That is why he deliberately used the word “abomination.” Russell Moore tries to parse Leviticus 20 to argue that it was written to a specific people for a specific time while ignoring the fact that the Christians in Uganda have crafted a law for their specific people in this specific time. The law reflect the law of the Bible but isn’t the exact same. Perhaps it takes the general equity as the Bible prescribes homosexuality as a crime both in Leviticus 20 and Romans 1. Christians throughout history have always recognized this, until recently.

Conflating Church And State

Christian Nationalists have been blatantly misrepresented as trying to have the keys and the sword in the same hand. But this is what Russell Moore is actually doing. Citing 1 Corinthians 5, Russell Moore argues that Paul did not instruct the church to wield the sword 

In writing to the church in Corinth, the apostle Paul rebuked an example of sexual immorality explicitly mentioned in the text of Leviticus 20—having sex with the wife of a family member. Paul also quoted, “Purge the evil person from among you” (1 Cor. 5:13, ESV) —a text that was used in the Old Testament civil law to denote the death penalty (Deut. 13:5; 17:7; 22:21).

Yet Paul did not use this language to call for any criminal penalty by the state—and certainly not execution. Instead, he saw the “you” of the new covenant as applying to the church, not to the state. And the church is not given the power of the sword (Matt. 26:52; Rom. 13:1–7; 2 Cor. 10:4).

Russell Moore cites a passage on ecclesiastical governance and treats the absence of sodomy law advocacy as evidence that the Bible doesn’t allow for the civil magistrate to criminalize buggery. His argument deliberately mixes categories of church and state. Although citing Romans 13, he ignores the duty of the civil magistrate to punish evil.

Given that homosexuality is both evil and tangibly manifested, it is completely fair game for the criminal penalties. This is why the Bible prescribes a criminal penalty for sodomy but not envy. Not all sins are crimes. Russell Moore makes this argument, but he is incapable of reasoning as to why this is.

Buttsex Is A Right

Russell Moore concludes his high level midwittery by invoking the Declaration of Independence.

Unleashing the violence of state-ordained execution, imprisonment, and surveillance on gay and lesbian Ugandans is a condemnable act of authoritarianism and a violation of the self-evident and unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To do such a thing is a matter of power, not of conviction. It demonstrates not a commitment to the Bible’s authority but a rejection of it.

When the Declaration of Independence was written all 13 of the colonies had anti-sodomy laws, due to their adherence to English Common Law. This was no contradiction, as the ratification of the founding document did not lead to the rolling back of sodomy laws, like it did for slavery which was imposed on the colonies by the English Crown.

Moore claims to know more about unalienable rights than the Founding Fathers, which is a bold strategy, Cotton.

Conclusion

Russell Moore is predictable, if nothing else, and his arguments are underwhelming.