top of page

Episode 501: "Don’t Say Gay” & Latino Evangelicals with Gabriel Salguero

Florida is the latest front in the culture war with a controversial bill to prevent teachers from speaking to children about the existence of same-sex couples or transgender people. But is the bill so vague that it could also prevent schools from acknowledging opposite-sex married couples too? The crew breaks down the intent, and the possible side effects, of Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. And, what does Disney’s response to the controversy tell us about where the wider culture is heading?

Then, pastor and president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition (NALEC), Rev. Dr. Gabriel Salguero, joins Skye for a conversation about the growing influence of Latinos within evangelicalism. He says the diverse perspectives of Latino Christians offers the white church a “view from below,” and promises to bring renewal to the American church, but we shouldn’t romanticize the movement either. Plus, an example of Christian Nationalism in the wild, and goats go to church.

News Segment

0:00 - Intro

5:21 - Animal News

7:52 - An example of Christian nationalism

19:49 - Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill

30:13 - Disney’s response


41:03 - Abide

Interview with Gabriel Salguero

National Latino Evangelical Coalition:

42:14 - Interview start

45:36 - Latino evangelical experience in America

50:32 - Shared challenges

53:47 - Future of the church and evangelicalism

1:03:51 - Navigating recent tumultuous times

1:17:27 - Hope for the future

Other resources mentioned:

“The Dissenters Trying to Save Evangelicalism From Itself” (David Brooks article) -


Thank you for including a Latino voice in your podcast.


Alan Trahan
Alan Trahan
Mar 25, 2022

Thank you for this very balanced look on the Florida bill - I'm LGBT but I was largely sympathetic to it because I've noticed the increasing problem LGBT activism has with grooming and the push to introduce explicit sexual material to younger children. Not enough of us have been willing to speak up against the minority that backs that kind of thing so it was pretty much inevitable that legislation would get involved eventually, but I appreciated your discussion of the language and how the bill is probably not built to actually accomplish what it intends.

Replying to

Hmm, I haven't heard of this happening, but it's a valid concern.

Can you give examples of that problem?

What makes this more complicated, too, is that bad actors are now falsely claiming that anyone who objects to the bill is a "groomer", in order to shut them down and reinforce homophobia.


Mar 25, 2022

This response may ramble so sorry about that.

I was agreeing so hard with Skye on this. It really does seem as though parents think that just talking about LGBTQ+ issues with children will 'turn' them rather than enable those children who are wrestling directly with it to have a space to talk about it or for those who are not to recognise that there is diversity in world.

It's not confined to the US either. There was a major fuss around materials produced by an organisation here for schools to use that openly discussed LGBTQ issues/people in a positive light. It was hard to find anywhere that just laid the facts of the situation out without bias. The material…


Wonderful episode!

On the Don't Say Gay Bill discussion, there seemed to be some questions about what qualifies as "age-appropriate" or "developmentally appropriate for students."

I wanted to point out that this is the sort of thing that an agency would promulgate regulations on-- departments headed by people the governor hires and fires at will. This means the question of what is and isn't age-appropriate would be left to--indirectly-- the governor. This is similar to, for example, how the funding for the border all turns on and off depending on who is in office.

So yes, it is ambiguous what the bill means when it says "age-appropriate," but this is the sort of ambiguity that shows up in a ton…


I enjoyed this week's discussion of the #DontSayGay bill.

I heard the term "traditional teaching on sexuality" used repeatedly, though, which is a bit of a tricky phrase. Hopefully I can shed some light...

We tend to use "traditional" as a euphemism for "gay sex or romance is wrong", but

until the 20th century, Christians tended to believe sex was only for procreation. So, according to that logic, gay sex is sin, but not because it's gay; because it's non-procreative.

So, for example, Martin Luther would accuse modern-day heterosexual Christian couples (most of whom use contraception) of "sodomy" just as he would a gay Christian couple.

Most of us (myself included) don't believe this way anymore, though.

Nowadays, we interpret…

bottom of page