The other day, the U.S. Supreme Court came down with a decision regarding the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Title VII, prohibiting employment discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin.
(42 U. S. C. §2000e–2(a)(1).
This is another example of the courts legislating from the bench. That duty is reserved to the Congress (the legislative branch), and not the judicial branch! If that is not recognized, then our Republic will become ruled by the judicial "mob"...
The following is an excerpt from the dissenting opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito:
“The Court attempts to pass off its decision as the inevitable product of the textualist school of statutory interpretation championed by our late colleague Justice Scalia, but no one should be fooled. The Court’s opinion is like a pirate ship. It sails under a textualist flag, but what it actually represents is a theory of statutory interpretation that Justice Scalia excoriated––the theory that courts should ‘update’ old statutes so that they better reflect the current values of society. See A. Scalia, A Matter of Interpretation 22 (1997). If the Court finds it appropriate to adopt this theory, it should own up to what it is doing.
“Many will applaud today’s decision because they agree on policy grounds with the Court’s updating of Title VII. But the question in these cases is not whether discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity should be outlawed. The question is whether Congress did that in 1964.
“It indisputably did not.”
My Comment: Some of the most un-natural, bizarre and anti-life causes have achieved another "victory" with so-called "transgenderism" and "gender identity" now being covered by the 1964 Civil Rights Act...
What this amounts to, is another nail in the coffin of the primary building block of society: the family. The enemies of the family know this, and use the cover of "discrimination" to derail the right of those who believe that God made two sexes, not three or four or five, ad infinitum. This decision will wipe our ability to object to, or deny serving anyone, based on our religious beliefs.
And President Trump said that we have to live with that decision? Really? Mr. President, tell the "supreme court": okay, you made the decision, now try to enforce it (a la Andrew Jackson)...
Has the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which specifically guarantees our right to the free exercise of religion, now been consigned to the dustbin of history?
It would seem so...
Pray for our country...
Viva Cristo Rey! Fr. Miguel Pro, pray for us...
Gene DeLalla
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment.