Talarico, With His Left Hand on the Bible
Calling Texas’s Democrat senatorial candidate James Talarico, even derisively, a “bible-banger” is a disservice to bible-bangers.
March 10, 2026
By Richard Kirk
Reprinted from American Thinker
Calling Texas’s Democrat senatorial candidate James Talarico, even derisively, a “bible-banger” is a disservice to bible-bangers. At least the latter take the book seriously, whereas Talarico uses it as a prop to further his far-left Democrat agenda. His Wikipedia page even lists “opposition to Christian Nationalism” first among his political positions — before the legalization of cannabis, expansion of the Supreme Court, and a two-state Palestinian solution that vilifies Israel for “atrocities” and “war crimes” in Gaza.
These priorities were foreshadowed by his education, which started as a University of Texas government major followed by a Masters of Education at Harvard. Later, while serving in the Texas House of Representatives, he earned a Masters of Divinity degree from Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, an institution associated with the Presbyterian Church USA. This “mainline” Protestant group has seen its membership drop from over four million in 1965 to likely under one million this year. It has achieved this “hospice” status, as the author of a recent First Things article notes, “by doing exactly what Talarico now proposes: subordinating the claims of Scripture to the moral intuitions of secular progressivism and calling the result ‘the gospel.’” Following Gavin Newsom’s lead vis-à-vis California, Talarico proposes to do for Texas and America what deconstructive theology has done for the PCUSA.
Talarico’s forays into theology are prime examples of Nietzsche’s atheistic critique, “The text has disappeared under the interpretation.” It takes breathtaking arrogance or ignorance to cite the annunciation to Mary found in Luke 1:26-38 as a scriptural basis for abortion. According to Reverend Talarico the fact that the angel Gabriel asks Mary’s “consent” prior to her conception somehow constitutes tacit approval of abortion since “creation has to be done with consent.” Talarico prefaces this fatuous interpretation with the observation that Mary was “an oppressed teenage peasant girl living in poverty under an oppressive empire,” an unsupported assertion that shows where his ideological druthers lie — much closer to Marx than Matthew or Mark.
In truth (a word to which deconstructionists are allergic) even if Talarico’s notion of “consent” were accurate, the annunciation scene would only proscribe rape, not Democrat worship at the altar of abortion. But in fact, prior to Mary’s “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word,” the angel had already announced that “you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.” Yet miraculously, with his left hand on the most recent printout of Democrat talking points, Talarico manages to turn a “handmaid of the Lord” into an abortion advocate worthy of membership in Planned Parenthood. Also ignored by the Lone Star divine is the history of early Christians saving exposed and unwanted babies in the Roman Empire and the all but universal Christian condemnation of abortion through the ages. But apparently for Talarico, Henry Ford, and deconstructionists generally, history is, more or less, bunk.
As for Talarico’s God being “non-binary” based on the fact that the Genesis one masculine word for God in Hebrew (Elohim) is followed by a generally feminine word for “His” breath, wind, or spirit (ruach), this not-so-odd pairing stems ironically from binary-based linguistic principles in languages like Hebrew, Greek, and Spanish where nouns are usually designated either male or female. More importantly, while languages may have non-sexual male-female gender designations, the Hebrew and Christian scriptures make it perfectly clear that God transcends human sexual categories. And those human categories Genesis limits to two: “male and female He created them.” Unlike the philandering Greek gods, the biblical God has no consort, creates by the word, and must not be imaged. In short, God transcends any of the six human sexes Talarico absurdly asserts “science” has discovered. One can only imagine what article of leftist faith the recent seminary graduate might deduce from the fact that Elohim has a plural masculine ending (im) regularly used with singular pronouns and verbs.
Talarico clearly criticizes Christians (smeared as Christian Nationalists) more than any other group. The state rep even vilified this largely conservative cohort for using the bible (plus, I would add, common sense and reliable science) to oppose sex changes for minors. Those who did so in the state capital, he thundered, not only harmed children, they also dishonored scripture for the sake of a “hateful amendment.” Stated without leftist distortion, Talarico believes Christians harm children if they oppose their mutilation. Instead, he embraces the faux science of propagandists who inundated our culture with the bizarre notion that even pre-teens are capable of evaluating the lifelong medical and psychological consequences of transition decisions. In short, Talarico inverts biblical teaching and slanders Christians who seek to protect “little ones” from the ravages of a mass delusion.
On the other hand, Talarico expresses nothing but appreciation for other “beautiful faith traditions” that are “circling the same truth” as Christianity. Even conceding that the major religions Talarico explicitly mentions are attempts to express in symbolism and ethical demands the nature of the cosmic “mystery,” it takes a sophomoric novice (or political shyster) to focus only on this grand generalization and to ignore the particulars of each religious tradition, including their historical impacts — both of which are far from “the same.” But Slick Jimmy would surely find a way to rationalize the Hindu caste system or the enduring violence and subordination of women that has characterized Islam from its inception — likely by pointing to a verse in the New Testament that admonishes wives to obey their husbands. No need to complete the sermon, “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it” (Ephesians 5:25).
In short, Talarico comes off as an Elmer Gantry on political steroids, using scripture for the sake of a leftist creed that also includes DEI, abortions for transgenders, a “welcome mat” on the border, white skin racism, and green hysteria. Indeed, he felt so confident about his Marxist-inspired version of reality that he used a middle school teaching position to indoctrinate young students on the dangers of climate change. In his own words he “freaked them out” with the same existential fears long stoked by AOC. So not only does Talarico support surgeons who mutilate young bodies, he’s also eager to manipulate their minds and emotions. Would that Talarico were as respectful of their humanity (and of biblical texts) as he is of the wildly differing attempts to grasp the cosmic mystery he glibly embraces for political effect.
RELATED:
The Gospel According To Talarico: Progressive Christianity Reshaping Politics
James Talarico is More Demonic Than You Think
Texas Dems Choose Candidate Who Called White People a “Virus” | Frontpage Mag
Richard Kirk graduated from Emory University’s school of theology in 1975, taught religion classes professionally from a literary-historical perspective, and is now a freelance writer living in Southern California. His book Moral Illiteracy: “Who’s to Say?” is also available on Kindle , as is his book Poetry with a Moral Edge.
Leave A Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.