On Sex and Marriage, God’s “Precedent” Must, and Will, Prevail

Alas, as you almost certainly well know by now, it’s Pervert—aka “Pride”— Month again. Whenever you hear “Pride Month,” remember, this is the kind of thing the LGBTMYNAMISLEGION apologists take “pride” in (warning: graphic content):

Drag Queen dances for children in Dallas, Texas. pic.twitter.com/uqoFWZMFAT

— Isabella Riley (@isabellarileyus) June 4, 2022

Tragically, as one observer noted, this was not even the worst footage from the “Drag The Kids To Pride” event in Dallas, Texas. Along with these vile actions, in their own words, these “Drag Demon Queens” have declared, “This is going to be the grooming of the next generation. We are trying to groom the next generation to not see the way that they just did.”

No one should be surprised that these fools are now openly telling us that they are “grooming” the next generation into the evil LGBTMYNAMEISLEGION agenda. We’ve been on this path for years. What was long (and rightly) seen as immoral—and even laughed at by numerous Hollywood leftists—and more recently something that needed to be treated and cured, is now promoted and celebrated.

And as anyone not named CornPop well knows, the Democrat Party seems to be fully on-board with every new perversion the LGBTMYNAMEISLEGION apologists can dream up. In addition to anything they can accomplish legislatively in support of this evil agenda, one of the leading Democrats in America, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, will make a promotional reappearance on RuPaul Andre Charles’ TV show, RuPaul’s Drag Race.

In describing drag, RuPaul has correctly noted that it is a “very, very political” act because it “challenges the status quo.” He further adds, “Drag says ‘I'm a shapeshifter, I do whatever the hell I want at any given time.’” Of course, “I do whatever the hell I want at any given time” is an admission that one fully embraces the godless Pagan philosophy of “Do as Thou Wilt.” This godlessness is the foundational principle of the modern left.

There is nothing more “status quo,” or put another way, there is nothing in the history of the universe with more precedent than what is a male or female, and what is marriage. In other words, if you want to wage a war on the truth, marriage and sex (the noun and the verb) would be—and in America have certainly proved to be—prime targets.

Emboldened by the wicked ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in Obergefell, which legally redefined marriage throughout America, the left is attempting to do the same with the definition of male and female. As Matt Walsh’s recent and excellent documentary What is a Woman reveals, they are well on their way to accomplishing this. Again, the SCOTUS is aiding and abetting this evil effort.

In its 2020 ruling on Bostock v. Clayton County, the SCOTUS “unilaterally redefined” the word “sex” to mean “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.” Since that ruling, the SCOTUS has added Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson who, in her Senate confirmation hearing, refused to define what is a woman.

The disasters that such abandonment of foundational truths portend can hardly be imagined. Yes, we already have rampant disease, drug use, and despair in the homosexual community, adopted children robbed of a mother or father, men in women’s restrooms, men taking trophies (and money) from women, girls in the Boy Scouts, a Drag Demon Queen in charge of our nuclear waste, and so on. Just 20 years ago, if you warned that the evil LGBTMYNAMEISLEGION agenda was going to lead to such, many—if not most—Americans would’ve dismissed you as a hysterical, hyperbolic loon. Yet, here we are, and headed to who knows what!

The only way out of these disasters is for more and more individual Americans to decide that they want to be on the right side of the truth in these grave matters. This also means that those of us who already understand the truth here must speak and act frequently and boldly for the truth. We must not be ashamed to do so!

We need more like the few Tampa Bay Rays’ baseball players who refused to wear the LGBTMYNAMEISLEGION logos on their uniforms as their team celebrated Pervert Month. Franklin Graham rightly recognized the Rays’ players on his Facebook page when he declared,

I appreciate these Tampa Bay Rays players who said no to endorsing and celebrating sin during Saturday night’s game…Followers of Jesus Christ must love everyone, but also stand with the truth of God’s Word and share that truth with a lost and dying world.

What a shame more MLB players (and other team employees and owners) didn’t join these men in the simple gesture of not promoting sin. If you haven’t already been in the position of these Tampa Bay Rays’ players, you likely soon will be, and like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, you will have to choose.

Unlike the brave Jews who disobeyed King Nebuchadnezzar’s immoral decree, you almost certainly will not face death for standing up for what is right, but you almost certainly will face some sort of ridicule or persecution as you stand for the truth. This is especially true as you stand against the lies of the enemy on matters in the sexual realm.

Don’t be surprised at what you might face in this sin-sick world. The higher your profile, and the braver your stance, the more danger you will face. As Brett Kavanaugh recently learned—because of how the left perceives he will rule on abortion—SCOTUS justices who are on the right side of the truth now face the reality that their lives, and the lives of those near and dear to them, may be in danger from those who hate the truth. (Like homosexuality and “transgenderism,” abortion is a sexual issue.)

Marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God’s covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church, and older than any government. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. About the only truth older than what is marriage is what is a male and what is a female. No amount of protest, no volume of deceit, no laws of men will ever change these important, eternal truths. The sooner each of us embraces this, the better off the world will be.

(See this column at American Thinker and The Blue State Conservative.)

Copyright 2022, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

A Conservative Supreme Court Must Deliver

After the confirmation of now Justice Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court, Susan Collins was widely lauded by republicans and conservatives alike for her speech before the U.S. Senate. As she announced her support for Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court, I, like many others, was also very grateful to hear her condemn the hideous tactics employed by democrats to keep him off the highest court in America.

While I agree with and like much of what Senator Collins said in her Friday afternoon speech, I did not enjoy or appreciate her emphasis on “precedent” as she tried to persuade her audience that a Justice Kavanaugh would be no real threat to Roe.

I’m under no illusions when it comes to Senator Collins’ sad position on the supposed “right” to kill children in the womb. It is possible that, in spite of her speech, she’s under no illusions about the very real threat Justice Kavanaugh poses to Roe. Perhaps Senator Collins just heard what she wanted to hear in her talks with Judge Kavanaugh.

Perhaps she was just providing herself political cover if the current court indeed reverses the tragedy that is Roe v. Wade. Or, perhaps Justice Kavanaugh was just careful enough with his language that he was able to provide Senator Collins answers that would comfort her without revealing anything about how he might actually vote on any issue. (Per the “Ginsburg Rule,”—or, more accurately, the “Biden Rule”—and the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, U.S. Senators well know that nominees to the Supreme Court are under no obligation to reveal how they would vote in matters that might come before them.)

Whatever Senator Collins’ real thoughts on Justice Kavanaugh, many of us who voted for Mr. Trump were very pleased with the confirmation of another conservative federal judge, especially one that should play a significant role in decidedly putting a stop to the left’s misguided use of the courts as some sort of “unelected super-legislature,” and thus return the Supreme Court to its proper role in our government. In other words, in spite of what Senator Collins implied, Justice Kavanaugh cannot be a clone of Anthony Kennedy.

What’s more, a conservative court—one that is dedicated to “conserving” an originalist (read: “proper”) view of the Constitution—should indeed reverse much of what the left has achieved via rogue federal courts. This certainly includes, but is by no means limited to, nationwide abortion on demand and a perverse legal redefinition of marriage.

Note that, while defending the legal right to kill children in the womb, those like Senator Collins often refer to Roe as “long-established precedent,” but while defending the legal right to same-sex “marriage,” they declare 2015’s Obergefell—a recent and precarious 5-4 ruling—as an “important landmark precedent.” Thus, either way, “precedent” rules the day.

Speaking of “precedent,” there is nothing with as much precedent as marriage being the union of one man and one woman for life. As I’ve often noted, marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God’s covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. As the first three chapters of Genesis reveal, before we were even aware of the preciousness of life—because there was no death—humans were made aware of what is marriage.

In spite of what Susan Collins would have us believe, when it came to legally redefining the oldest legal “precedent” in the history of humanity, liberals on the Supreme Court found it perfectly sufficient to overturn a long-established precedent because “five current justices believed” they were right, and history, the Bible, and long-established overwhelmingly popular human law was wrong.

One gets the feeling that those on the left view as “precedent” any opinion that sits well with a liberal worldview. This is because much of what modern liberalism holds dear was not achieved via the ballot box or through the legislatures, but through judicial tyranny. Winning elections and actually achieving law the way our founders intended has proven far too difficult for liberals and the party they own. Thus, the courts have long been a favorite tool of the modern left. It’s time for leftists to learn: what the courts giveth, the courts can taketh away.

No doubt this is why the behavior of those opposed to Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation was so abhorrently evil. Not “crazy,” as so many have been quick to say, but evil. If you thought it was bad during the Kavanaugh confirmation, just wait until a 5-4 decision overturns Roe or Obergefell.

Nevertheless, the courts should be above such intimidation and fear. Jurists dedicated to a constitutional view of our laws cannot allow erroneous views of precedent, the courts, law, and the Constitution to prevail because of how those on the unhinged left might react.

It is sometimes said that “politics is downstream from culture.” Others insist that such a view is “profoundly mistaken,” because “politics is a part of culture.” Whatever the case, our courts should be as free as possible (because judges are human beings, the courts will never be completely blind to politics or culture) from influence by political or cultural forces. Otherwise we end up with such absurd notions as a “living Constitution” and the law is whatever a five-vote majority on the highest court in the land says it is.

As the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia—who repeatedly stood against such nonsense—said, “the Constitution is not an organism, it is a legal document…(it) is an enduring document but not a ‘living’ one, and its meaning must be protected and not repeatedly altered to suit the whims of society.”

Conservatives like myself have long waited for this to be the prevailing view of the highest court in our land. With the confirmation and swearing in of Justice Kavanaugh, it is time for the conservatives on the Supreme Court to deliver.

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

The Marriage “Precedent”

There’s “precedent” and then there’s precedent. It seems for Maine’s Senator Susan Collins—who’s never been considered a conservative and is the very definition of a RINO—precedent is everything, except when it isn’t. According to Townhall recently,

Maine's moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins told CNN's Jake Tapper today that she would not be supporting a Supreme Court nominee who has “demonstrated hostility to Roe v. Wade” because, in her mind, that would be a justice who does not respect established precedent.

Collins added,

I want a judge who will apply the law to the facts of the case with fidelity to the Constitution. Roe v. Wade is a constitutional right that is well established, and no less an authority than Chief Justice Roberts said that repeatedly at his confirmation hearing.

Because, you know, when you are killing the most helpless and innocent among us, you’re supposed to think “fidelity to the Constitution.” A long-time U.S. Senator—especially one who is so often called upon concerning the same moral issues, should not be so careless with her words. Roe v. Wade is not a right in and of itself but rather is a court case that found a “right” that, prior to 1973, had escaped every previous jurist in the history of the U.S. judicial system.

In getting their perverse agenda into law, if only today’s liberals would limit themselves to things that are actually “constitutional.” Even the pro-slavery Americans of the 18th century were willing to get their way via the Constitution. And legal slavery was forever ended in the United States constitutionally, via an amendment, not by the mere ruling of a judge or a majority of judges.

But winning elections and actually achieving law the way our founders intended has proven far too difficult for liberals and the party they own. Thus, the courts have long been a favorite tool of the modern left. Don’t get me wrong, though. As November, 2016 well demonstrates, liberals love to win elections—and hate to lose them! Because so many of them have made a god of government, liberals very much enjoy obtaining all the political power possible, whether legislative, executive, or judicial, and they are loathe to see it in the hands of those opposed to their perverse agenda.

As most today well know, much of what modern liberals hold dear was achieved because of the efforts of rogue judges who happened to find in the U.S. Constitution what had so long escaped so many others (because, of course, it was never really there). Liberals look at the Constitution like an NBA referee: based on who’s playing the game, the rules are changed. Of course, liberals wouldn’t describe it as such; they simply justify this foolish mental and moral gymnastics by claiming a “living Constitution.”

As the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia—who repeatedly stood against such nonsense—said, “the Constitution is not an organism, it is a legal document…(it) is an enduring document but not a ‘living’ one, and its meaning must be protected and not repeatedly altered to suit the whims of society.”

And once liberals magically find a “right” in the Constitution—and thus, “make law”—we’re supposed to revere said law because of “precedent.” How absurd. If “precedent” really mattered to anyone with a sound legal and moral mind, Obergefell v. Hodges would’ve been laughed out of the courtroom in 30 seconds.

The vast majority of states that actually took the trouble to deal with marriage legislatively —including even Collins’ home state of Maine—overwhelmingly voted to establish the biblical definition of marriage as law. In other words, when actually put to a vote, 31 states in the U.S.—including very liberal states such as Maine and California—soundly rejected same-sex “marriage.” How’s that for “precedent?” By one single vote in the U.S. Supreme Court (Good Riddance, Justice Kennedy!), liberals wiped this away.

One might argue that “precedent” in the legal sense is a judicial term that refers to the rulings of a higher court. As legaldictionary.net notes,

In the modern legal system, the term precedent refers to a rule, or principle of law, that has been established by a previous ruling by a court of higher authority, such as an appeals court, or a supreme court.

Of course, there is no higher court than the one led by Him who made us. Dr. Martin Luther King alluded to this in his letter from the Birmingham jail. He noted, “[T]here are two types of laws: There are just and there are unjust laws.” And we agree with Dr. King, who agreed with Saint Augustine that, “An unjust law is no law at all.”

Dr. King also reminds us of the difference:

A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.

For human beings, there is no law more “eternal” than that which defines marriage. As I’ve often noted before, marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God’s covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. As the first three chapters of Genesis reveal, before we were even aware of the preciousness of life—because there was no death—humans were made aware of what is a marriage.

Additionally, whenever Jesus, or any other of the New Testament writers—who often used marriage as an illustration of the relationship between Jesus and His church—spoke of marriage, it was always as the union of one man and one woman. Whether life, marriage, and the like, there’s nothing with more precedent than the eternal truth. We would all—especially U.S. Senators and those on the highest courts in our land—do well to remember such.

(See this column at American Thinker and The Black Sphere.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com