Share This Episode
Family Policy Matters NC Family Policy Logo

Life, Liberty, & the Supreme Court (Part 2)

Family Policy Matters / NC Family Policy
The Truth Network Radio
September 28, 2020 12:20 pm

Life, Liberty, & the Supreme Court (Part 2)

Family Policy Matters / NC Family Policy

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 499 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

September 28, 2020 12:20 pm

This week on Family Policy Matters, NC Family brings you Part 2 of a 2-part excerpt from our Virtual Event on Life, Liberty, & the Supreme Court. This event featured John Stonestreet, Ryan Anderson, and Matt Sharp discussing recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings on the sanctity of life, religious freedom, and sexuality.

Outlaw Lawyer
Josh Whitaker & Joe Hamer
Core Christianity
Adriel Sanchez and Bill Maier
The Steve Noble Show
Steve Noble
The Masculine Journey
Sam Main
The Masculine Journey
Sam Main

Policy matters and engaging in weekly radio show and podcast produced by the North Carolina family policy Council hi this is John Ralston, presidency, family, and were grateful to have you with us for this week's program is our prayer that you will be informed, encouraged and inspired by what you hear on family policy matters and that you will fold better equipped to be a voice of persuasion for family values in your community, state and nation.

Today we bring you part two of an excerpt from NC families virtual event on life, liberty, and the Supreme Court, which took place on September 10, 2020. This event featured John Stonestreet of the Colson Center for Christian worldview Ron Anderson of the heritage foundation and Matt Sharp, an attorney with lots defending freedom involved and talk about religious freedom and LGBT issues.

Clearly a lot happening and insignificant things happening in this realm, so I tousled about that, though most of us are probably familiar with the this really goes back to a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in employment decision so you can't give a promotion to a male and deny a promotion to an equally qualified female well over the past several years there's been a push to expand those protections to include sexual orientation and gender identity, and so there had been back and forth in several lower court cases. One of them that ADF was involved in with the Harris funeral home case where we were representing devout Christian family that owned the funeral home and part of the requirement was that employees need to dress appropriately because the focus needs to be on the grieving families well. They had a long term employee Stevens that when they announced that he was going to start identifying with Amy Stevens and start dressing as a female and the funeral home said look what you do in your free time is your business but when you're on the clock. We need you to respect the families and and dresses a male.

Unfortunately, they had to part ways, and Stevens and these other cases turned around and seemed and said you have discriminated against us because of our gender identity or because our sexual orientation and were arguing that that's a form of sex discrimination under this 4050-year-old law banning sex discrimination in employment.

Well, in an opinion authored by Justice corsets, the court essentially ruled that gender identity and sexual orientation can now be part of claims of sex discrimination. The court did take pains to say, look what were limiting this to the employment context for another day.

Are we going to address issues of women's sports. This meaning often allow guys to compete in women's sports. Nor did it address the religious liberty concerns raised by all of this.

The weather religious ministries can now be subject to sex discrimination claims. If they don't hire someone who doesn't align with their biblical views about marriage or sexuality. And this is something that Alito and his descent really hammered the majority honest as they look. There are all of these concerns that are to be raised in really opened a Pandora's box by expanding the definition of sex discrimination to now include sexual orientation and gender identity.

So Ron how surprised we saw this decision and you rated it is when you asked me this term time was it Sunday and made actually announced it. I wasn't surprised.

I was surprised that Roberts went along with it was 63 rather than a 54 she's terrible.

And so, before the weeks I would've been shocked people mean that Robertson corsets we get this wrong, this is not a tough case, it should be tougher original is an actual, it should be tracked tougher natural law is for common good. I don't care what waiver of conservative jurisprudence you in alignment. This is not part 1964 we Congress and termination based of sex, a man he can't treat men and women differently because once a man once a woman they didn't mean to think there are women as if they are not right. It was a no living in accordance with the truth and he thinks he alone is mistaken about that. You should be compassionate should be respectful. We should be civil but treating a man as a man is discriminatory right and same thing is true for marriage. Having believed the nature of marriage and unit husband-and-wife isn't discriminatory and so having expectations about sexuality isn't discriminatory on the basis of sex, which is why were 37 year nap years now. The Democrats legislation for asexual radiation and gender identity to our civil rights law is why Pres. Obama issued an executive raised to the employment law indirectly had a responsibility for as the head of the executive branch of government is understood the people on the left already and the loss they had executive action and then all of a sudden you have to conservative jurists been there all along, and is really simplistic. That's what it is in active reads, discrimination, lot anytime you treat a man and a woman with distinction you're therefore discriminating and that's why Alito was exactly right thing. What will this mean for bathrooms for locker rooms for sports, religious institutions, and already leased in the fourth Circuit Court ruled the wrong way. Applying this bathrooms from the hospital I went through as a child now means doing because they won't do sex reassignment of procedures as a Catholic hospital in Baltimore taking the body seriously when it takes a different discrimination even on mortgages new simplistic. Is anything to be important conservatives president ministration for state governments make those same arguments medicine that takes the body seriously is not discriminatory sports to take the body seriously not right private facilities that take the body serious, not discriminatory. So John what you think the implications culturally or based on this opinion and what is happened since the well II think a number of things here. First, avoid uterine debut all the good news there and it's it's it's it's you know I'm not even be more pessimistic on this one. In the years because to me, this just opens the box it's it's it's impossible now to avoid dealing with schools and restrooms and all of that, these challenges will calm you will have courts on the left at the local level. Make preemptive decisions and it will force the hand and it will not take that long. Secondly, I think there has been an attempt within some religious circles to compromise on Sochi legislation on things like fairness for all and I think the end result. Once this gets applied to sports and restrooms and dorms and all that sort of stuff is that any any conscience protections you want to claim will then dismiss you from competition. It will dismiss you from joining the company of other colleges probably will end up having some ramifications for accreditation. All of this is for five or six steps down the road but it's hard to see how it's going to stop so the attempt to compromise a couple years ago I think is now off the table. It doesn't seem like there's any reason for the other side to want to do that if there ever. If there ever was the final cultural implication and this is I think the unintended consequence of gorse which is strange reasoning amendment that you know the linguistic gymnastics that he did say well you know that's not what they men in 1964 about. This is a clearly or you know what in the Civil Rights Act or whenever, but you know this is you can't do one without doing the other. Okay fine. The net result is, is that because this is tied to the Civil Rights Act. If you're on the wrong side of this year on the same side as bigots, so the cultural dismissal and public company, I think it has just been furthered by the court and I don't know how you avoid that because now you're a conscientious objector you have an exemption that the government has granted you will good news that you're on the wrong side of civil rights. I mean that's the that's the big Scarlet B letter that you have to wear now again this is all the slippery slope stuff and I know that people often say all slippery slope is not a legitimate argument and it's a logical fallacy. One man if we would just stop sliding down the slippery slope site believe that it just may just when we go at breakneck speed limits that slanted in it.

So greased it's going to be a slippery slope and I think that's this this decision, the language, the implications it's a pretty slippery slope. So, gentlemen.

As we come to the end of our discussion today. We've covered a lot of ground.

We talked about a lot of issues we've got kind of ended up in the legal but also talked about the cultural aspects, but the kind of taken a step back and looking at the big picture. What words of encouragement and advice would you give to your audience.

Ron, what if what you think.

Sure. So yes, for both encouragement and advice advice so the encouragement is that the story ends right and so a lot of our soldiers here and now. This is in our ultimate home and so things get worse before they get better. We know that ultimately they get better and that you are our our vocation isn't much to be successful as it is to be faithful right and so that's encouragement, the advice is we are entering unchartered territory on a host of issues, but there are resources out there to equip you on these issues and that is what I always think about is like how for most of us.

We feel very adept at having a conversation about the Lachish we know at the beginning of life issue right. We know how to talk about your horses, but we don't feel as comfortable talking about gay marriage or transgender identity, religious liberty or the end of assisted suicide issues. There are resources out there, some of them articles and some of that the heritage foundation similar ADF you've compiled all them you the NC family policy Council equip yourself that my life is doing the homework you need to do so that when this issue comes out of the PTA meeting or at the water cooler Little League.

You can be faithful you can bear witness to the truth on these issues in a way that will be accessible to the person you're talking to. So they don't share your faith commitments.

Figure out how to talk to them making argument that they would resonate with John and final words that those were those were great words and I think exactly right. The encouragement is that Christ is risen from the dead, so despair is a sin. Hope is the state of the of the follower of Christ and that God has intentionally according to St. Paul's sermon on Mars Hill chosen this time in this place for you, so it's not an accident that you're here and work with glad you're here. Join us.

You know there's a lot of work to do. I at I would say as far as advice be the way Re: of cocktail party pressure. This is akin to what Ryan said earlier, you know, not wanting to shake the boat here. Not wanting to know cause any any disruptions over here until you get to a place and then you turn around and you never said anything.

Maybe the best way to avoid the cocktail party pressure that we all face is to develop in our hearts and minds of what I call a theology of getting fired where you know what is it look like to follow Jesus and get fired and do it joyfully. The last thing I'll say is there's a wonderful story about Vince Lombardi who after losing the playoffs open the next year's training camp by holding up of salons and gentlemen, this is a football and I think that so much of our challenges on religious liberty go back to the fact that many Christians are secularists with a twist. In other words we think about our faith is personal private preference not is the ultimate truth T about life in the world that just briefly I always do take encouragement from things like what we saw with life movement and how it Roe V Wade is bad as it was, was really throwing the catalyst for the explosion of that, not just in more organizations and movements, but the science and so much that his help form the basis to create a culture of life that I think were gonna start seeing that with with the issues of marriage and gender identity, in particular were already thing that of more doctors speaking out and even kind of nontraditional voices on JK Rowling and Martina Navratilova have been powerful voices over there is of important woman's voice that a man can never have that and so I am encouraged to see that maybe maybe this is going to be the thing that starts getting more people bold, speaking up, but also some of the legwork. The groundwork about the science and theology that needs to be made on these issues and it takes event like that listening to family policy matters. This is been part two of the two part series from NC families virtual event on life, liberty, and the Supreme Court featuring John Stonestreet, Ryan Anderson and Matt sure to listen to part one of the series and learn more about NC families work to inform, encourage and inspire families across North Carolina go to our website it NC that's NC Thanks for listening and may God bless you and your family

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime