James Talarico’s “God is nonbinary” remark from a 2021 Texas House debate has exploded into a campaign headache, with conservatives and Attorney General Ken Paxton using it to paint him as out of step with Texas faith and values; Talarico has since tried to soften and explain the comment while critics call the retreat predictable and politically timed.
Now that the Democratic nominee is facing Ken Paxton in the general election, his past words are getting new life. The controversy is less about a single line and more about what it says about judgment, theology, and where candidates stand on cultural flashpoints. Republicans are seizing the moment to frame Talarico as extreme and unserious about voters’ concerns.
Pat Gray and his panel dug back into the clip on “Pat Gray Unleashed,” pointing out how a provocative line turns into a political weapon when an opponent runs ads. The conversation was sharp, and the hosts argued that backtracking doesn’t erase the original claim or its impact on voters who care about faith and tradition.
During that 2021 debate over transgender issues, Talarico openly declared “God is nonbinary.” The line landed like a grenade in Texas politics because it touched both religious belief and identity politics at once. For many voters, it wasn’t a clever provocation; it was a direct challenge to traditional Christian theology.
He went further on the House floor, saying “God is both masculine and feminine and everything in between. God is nonbinary,” and leaning on Scripture to make the case. “In Genesis 1:26, God speaks of God’s self in the plural, saying, ‘Let us make human beings in our image to be like us.’ That’s the infinite multitude of God. The masculine, the feminine, and everything in between,” Talarico continued. “Trans children are God’s children made in God’s own image. There’s nothing wrong with them. Nothing at all. They are perfect. They are beautiful, and they are sacred.”
Republicans, led by Paxton, have hammered that clip as proof of Talarico’s radicalism, and the moment has been replayed repeatedly in the 2026 race. Opponents argue the quote makes clear that Talarico’s views diverge from mainstream biblical teaching and from many Texans’ common-sense beliefs about gender and faith. That framing has been effective at raising doubts among persuadable voters.
Facing the backlash, Talarico recently tried to walk the line between his earlier boldness and political reality. “I was being intentionally provocative with that statement. But what it means is that God can’t be defined by human categories. The apostle Paul in his letter to the Galatians says that in Christ there is neither male nor female,” he said, blaming Paxton for “intentionally clipping [his] cringy comments to distract from his career of corruption.”
He offered a similar defense in another interview: “I understand that that comment is a little provocative. I said it on the House floor when the extremists in the Republican legislature were picking on school kids who were different. But I don’t think it’s controversial theologically. Most Christians would acknowledge that God is beyond gender,” he said. Those explanations haven’t satisfied critics who see politics, not theology, driving the shift.
The hosts on Pat Gray Unleashed were particularly blunt about competing priorities. They noted how someone who positions themselves as both a trans advocate and a champion of women’s rights has to answer hard questions about fairness in sports and single-sex spaces. “If they want to play sports, let’s come up with a way to let them engage in sports. Like with their own biological gender, they could compete, or we create a separate category for trans people,” Pat argues. “But you don’t stick them against the females. It doesn’t make any sense.”
Whether you see the clip as an earnest theological point or a political provocation, it is now part of the narrative voters will unpack between now and election day. The exchange has been turned into a campaign test about authenticity, faith, and who speaks for the values many Texans hold dear. For anyone following the race, the moment is a clear reminder that past remarks can become present problems in a tight contest.
