The Moral Basis for Religious Exemption from Testosterone Testing
For it was you who formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. (Psalm 139:13-14)
Physical training has always been a part military training to "be all you can be." Now the Pentagon wants to inject soldiers with drugs to make them more than they can be by nature alone. The Pentagon is playing god.
The Pentagon has proposed testing the testosterone levels of all service members over the age of 30 and offering testosterone "therapy" to those who fall below a certain level. The test is not addressing a real medical issue. Absent symptoms that would cause a doctor to suspect a significant hormonal problem, drawing blood to test testosterone levels is invasive and medically unnecessary. According to the Harvard Medical School, taking testosterone carries medical risks for cardiac issues, prostrate cancer, fertility impairment, and blood clots. So, the Pentagon's proposed universal testing of testosterone levels is medically problematic. But, a medical objection is not the same as a religious objection.
So what is the religious objection? The Pentagon's plan to test and push performance enhancing drugs on everyone is an artificial human enhancement program on the same philosophical spectrum as 20th century eugenics, modern genetic engineering, and biomedical interventions aimed at creating supermen. The Pentagon doesn't want to fix a medical problem; it wants to build better, stronger, faster soldiers.
The dream of transcending the limitations of human existence has appeared in everything from ancient myths to comic book heroes. In the 1970s, a TV showed gave us a six million dollar man who was not merely restored to health following an accident. He was enhanced. The show's premise was that “We can rebuild him. We have the technology. We can make him better than he was. Better, stronger, faster."
Christians do not believe our God-given bodies need to be improved. They need to be healed when they are sick or injured and supported when they are disabled, but the human form God created does not need to be enhanced. We are grateful for our bodies; we are not resentful of them or envious of what we wish they were.
The ethical framework extends far beyond the medical issue of testosterone injections. Human enhancement programs see ordinary human life as a problem. Being merely human, created in the image of God, isn't believed to be good enough. Ultimately, this approach diminishes our sense of humanity, turning men into machines. Christians, however, do not judge the value of a person's life based on their physical or mental capacities.
Significantly, body dysmorphic disorder takes a different form in men than it does in young women. For men, it often takes the form of obsession about muscle size and meeting some idealized picture of masculinity. Some studies suggest that this recognized mental health condition is increasing among young men. The Pentagon's proposal certainly plays into the "gym bro" philosophy that feeds this obsession. It is wrong to contribute to this unhealthy outlook that harms society.
Everyone is unique. Our biological differences, and the resulting variations in physical abilities and mental outlooks, does not diminish us individually or collectively. God is not looking for cookie cutter humans or idealized bodies.. There is no one physical ideal by which every human should be measured.
The long-term effects of artificial human enhancement will make the problems of poverty and social fragmentation worse. The poor and weak are already seen a hindrance and their lives discardable. That problem will become infinitely worse if a subset of our neighbors start seeing themselves superior beings. Enhanced humans are not likely to come with enhanced moral character. Everything we know about human existence tells us that the strong look down on the weak and exploit them. The recent portrayal of "the supes" in the streaming series "The Boys" is closer to the truth than the idealized Superman comics of the 1950s.
"But it's just a testosterone shot," you say. "You're making too big a deal out of it. It's nothing in the scheme of things." In reality, it is part of a much larger worldview that seeks to transform human nature - but just for those fortunate to have the resources required to reap the benefits. The United Methodist Church has said, "we are not called to reengineer our bodies or those of our children, or destroy those different from us, but rather to follow Christ." (Book of Resolutions) Our created humanity is sufficient.
But what about just taking the test? The Pentagon has said that the shots won't be mandatory. Let's set aside, for the moment, that there will be substantial pressure applied at the unit level. Didn't max your fitness test? Well, did you take the shot? It's naive to think that there won't be expectations to conform. The amount of pressure will vary from unit to unit, but it will exist.
No, the main religious reason to object to to the test itself is that it a component of an ungodly worldview that denigrates human life as God created it. As a Christian, I reject the notion that my healthy body needs to be enhanced. Practices that reinforce that worldview have a harmful effect, not just on my own walk with God but on the well-being of the world. The apostle Paul wrote, "Abstain from every form of evil."
The theological foundation for requesting a religious exemption is found in the doctrines of Creation and Incarnation. God's creation is good. So good, in fact, that God came to live in an ordinary human body. Yes, our bodies are subject to disease, injury, and death. Therapies to restore health and function are perfectly appropriate. Jesus, after all, was a healer. Jesus healed the sick and restored those with disabilities. He had no human enhancement program, and his own body was in no way beyond the norm. He suffered and died as an ordinary human being. Only in the resurrection did Jesus put on immortality.
When Jesus returns, the power of his resurrection will transforms all creation, overcoming death, diseases, and decay. We will never, however, be anything other than human. Believers will be resurrected into immorality, to be sure, but we will always be human. We will never be gods or angels or some kind of supermen. To aspire to be more than a natural human is an affront to the God who made us.
God's creation is already marvelous. Life, right now, is filled with wonder. We do not need to be remade better, faster, or stronger. Mere humanity is enough. We should receive God's gift of natural human life with all its physical challenges with gratitude. Our race's problem is not a lack of biological capacity. Our primary weakness is moral, not biological. You can't fix that with an injection.
You are fearfully and wonderfully made. If you are sick or injured, seek treatment. If you are disabled, find the adaptive technology that works for you. But If you are healthy - just weak or slow, - then train your body to its full natural potential. You do not need to enhance your body with artificial substances to be the person God made you to be.
Is the "Human Enhancement" philosophy a real thing? It shows up frequently in academic papers in the medical world. Here is a sample.
A 2019 paper on human enhancement by Mara Almeida and Rui Diogo in Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health draws an ethical distinction between therapy and enhancement.
"For centuries human enhancement has populated our imagination outlined by stories ranging from the myths of supernormal strengths and eternal life to the superpowers illustrated by the 20th century comic books superheroes. The desire of overcoming normal human capacities and the transformation to an almost ‘perfect’ form has been part of the history of civilization, extending from arts and religion to philosophy.
"In the broadest sense, the process of human enhancement can be considered as an improvement of the ‘limitations’ of a ‘natural version’ of the human species."
"Human enhancement aims to increase human capacities above normal levels. Many forms of human enhancement are already in use. Many students and academics take cognition enhancing drugs to get a competitive edge. Some top athletes boost their performance with legal and illegal substances."
"This is only the beginning. As science and technology advance further, it will become increasingly possible to enhance basic human capacities to increase or modulate cognition, mood, personality, and physical performance, and to control the biological processes underlying normal aging. Some have suggested that such advances would take us beyond the bounds of human nature. These trends, and these dramatic prospects, raise profound ethical questions.
"Two decades ago, the practices of human enhancement have been described as ‘biomedical interventions that are used to improve human form or functioning beyond what is necessary to restore or sustain health’. The range of these practices has now increased with technological development, and they are ‘any kind of genetic, biomedical, or pharmaceutical intervention aimed at improving human dispositions, capacities, or well-being, even if there is no pathology to be treated’."
Almeida, M., & Diogo, R. (2019). Human enhancement: Genetic engineering and evolution. Evolution, medicine, and public health, 2019(1), 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1093/emph/eoz026
In an article for the Pew Research Center, David Masci wrote:
"To those who support human enhancement, many of whom call themselves transhumanists, technological breakthroughs like these are springboards not only to healing people but to changing and improving humanity. Up to this point, they say, humans have largely worked to control and shape their exterior environments because they were powerless to do more. But transhumanists predict that a convergence of new technologies will soon allow people to control and fundamentally change their bodies and minds. Instead of leaving a person’s physical well-being to the vagaries of nature, supporters of these technologies contend, science will allow us to take control of our species’ development, making ourselves and future generations stronger, smarter, healthier and happier."
David Masci, Human Enhancement, Pew Research Center
Finally, in Frontiers in Medicine, Gerardi and Xinaris acknowledged the social dimensions of the human enhancement philosophy.
"A critical ethical concern surrounding human enhancement technologies is their potential to exacerbate social inequality."
Gerardi C and Xinaris C (2025) Beyond human limits: the ethical, social, and regulatory implications of human enhancement. Front. Med. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2025.1595213/full