While poorly decided U.S. Supreme Court cases are a dime a dozen, prior to last Wednesday, two stood out among the most wretched and constitutionally groundless in American history. First was the 1857 Dred Scott decision. Among other things, it robbed African-Americans of both their U.S. citizenship and their dignity.
Next came the 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade. It has robbed over 55 million U.S. citizens of their very lives. For the first time in American history, the high court imagined a phantom constitutional right for women to dismember alive their own pre-born children.
Both of these cases are blights on American history. Fortunately, the first, Dred Scott, has been officially relegated to the dustbin of judicial disgrace, while the second, Roe v. Wade, continues to be used as justification for mass genocide. With each passing day, the bodies of the innocents pile up like God's chosen at Auschwitz.
Tragically, this past week we hit the unholy trifecta. A third precedential abomination was added to the mix. On Wednesday, the high court handed down two cases concerning the pagan left's abjectly bizarre efforts to redefine the age-old and immutable institution of marriage (Hollingsworth v. Perry and U.S. v. Windsor). The more egregious of the two opinions, Windsor, presumes to invalidate Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), granting limited federal recognition to sin-centric and sodomy-based same-sex "marriage."
Not only did this 5-4 decision effectively deconstruct the institution of legitimate marriage, removing all ethical and legal justification for barring similar such perverse "marriage" amalgamations as "gay marriage" (i.e., multiparty or incestuous nuptials), it also laid the groundwork to force the 37 "marriage reality" states to join the remaining 13 in a corporate "marriage equality" delusion. This is not just judicial activism; its judicial tyranny--a potentially fatal self-inflicted wound to the high court's yet waning legitimacy.
Still, while much will be written about Windsor from a legal standpoint, for now let's focus on another of the decision's inevitable outcomes: anti-Christian persecution. If, through judicial fiat, "gay marriage" ultimately becomes the law of the land, tens of millions of Christians (as well as Jews and Muslims) will be forced to choose between obedience to God and obedience to Caesar--between fidelity to conscience and government oppression.
Millions of us have already made that choice.
As we've now seen in states that fancy mock "gay marriage," for instance, the only way to force Christian individuals and business owners--such as bakers, photographers, innkeepers and florists--to lend their talents to sin-centered "gay weddings" is through the power of the police state. This amounts to a systemic, immoral and profoundly unconstitutional trampling of the First Amendment.
What follows will be a deviant-sexual-behavior-based LGBT suspect minority class with all the associated trimmings. In the eyes of government, Bible-believing Christians will be treated as modern-day racists. Any outward expression of the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic will be trumped by newfangled "gay rights" and deemed verboten. For all intents and purposes, Christianity will be criminalized. This is not mere speculation. It's been the plan all along.
Case in point: Chai Feldblum, President Obama's Equal Employment Opportunity commissioner--a lesbian activist who supports "plural marriage"--has promised as much. She admits that progressives "want to revolutionize societal norms" and believes that "gay sex is a moral good." She calls the clash between religious liberty and "sexual liberty" a "zero-sum game," meaning someone wins and someone loses. Guess who loses? Feldblum has "a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win."
Source: Charisma News
Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as vice president of Liberty Counsel Action.