"Should a potential holder of public office be automatically disqualified because he supports a traditional Christian view on sexual ethics, as the United Methodist Church does?" -- Executive Director of UMAction Mark Tooley

Contact: Loralei Coyle, 202-905-6852 cell, lcoyle@TheIRD.org; Radio Interviews: Jeff Walton, 202-413-5639 cell, jwalton@TheIRD.org; both with the Institute on Religion and Democracy

FT. WORTH, Texas, May 2 /Christian Newswire/ -- After the United Methodist Church reaffirmed its support for traditional marriage this week, UMAction defended U.S. Surgeon General Nominee Jim Holsinger's views on marriage and sexuality. Dr. Holsinger's nomination by President Bush as U.S. Surgeon General has been on hold since last summer because he has publicly defended his denomination's stance on homosexuality.

Specifically, Dr. Holsinger's critics have cited his comments during and resignation from a United Methodist Task Force on Homosexuality in the early 1990's. He resigned from that committee when it was clearly going to oppose the church's teaching, a stance that was reaffirmed by the church's 1992 General Conference.

Critics of Dr. Holsinger have also pointed to his leadership over the last 8 years in the United Methodist Church's Judicial Council, which has enforced the church's prohibition against actively homosexual clergy and same-sex unions.

This week, delegates from around the world met in Fort Worth for United Methodism's governing General Conference. By strong margins, they reaffirmed the church's position that homosexual practice is "incompatible" with Christian teaching.

The United Methodist Church has 7.9 million members in the U.S. and is America's third largest religious group.

Mark Tooley, Executive Director of IRD's UMAction Committee, commented:

"Should a potential holder of public office be automatically disqualified because he supports a traditional Christian view on sexual ethics, as the United Methodist Church does?

"If members of the U.S. Senate oppose Dr. Holsinger based on his qualifications, then they should say so. But it is grossly unfair to stall and attempt to kill his nomination primarily because he supports the historic views of his own denomination."

www.TheIRD.org