Supreme Court Told God He Was Wrong

Jun 22, 2020

The U.S. Supreme Court just slapped God in the face, effectively telling Him how He should have created the sexes. Six unelected judges rewrote the law and threw out common sense while they were at it. Last Monday's ruling on what have been called "The Employment Cases" dealt with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the meaning of the word "sex" in the law. This misguided ruling has major implications for society as we know it, including opening girls' bathrooms and locker rooms to men. Read on to learn more... -Mat

There has been a lot of chatter about the Supreme Court's latest ruling on "gender identity" and "sexual orientation," but most of what you read in the media downplays its adverse impact (likely because the media is celebrating the decision). The SCOTUS ruling is not only more far-reaching than the same-sex marriage case that was handed down five years ago, it is every bit as fundamentally culture-changing as Roe vs. Wade.

As Roe cast aside the natural, revealed and constitutional laws' view of human life, so the new Bostock ruling (one of the employment cases) casts aside the natural, revealed and statutory law regarding humans as being male and female.

While Roe introduced and legitimized the wholesale slaughter of millions of children, Bostock introduces and legitimizes the wholesale abolition of God's design for human sexuality.

The highest Court in our land just slapped God in the face by daring to tell the Creator He got it wrong – and that humans can create themselves in their own image!

Defend Religious Liberty & have your donation doubled by a challenge grant!

Outside of the spiritual context, there are several significant and immediate practical consequences of this decision. I'll be discussing this over a series of emails in the days ahead. But let's start with this...

The case at the core of this issue was the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In Title VII, the employment section, the word "sex" was included to protect women from discriminatory exclusion in the workplace. However, by reinventing the definition of the word "sex" to include what are presently claimed as up to 64 different genders by LGBT activists (insanely unscientific in and of itself), any protections for women are washed away by a plethora of ways biological men can usurp women.

For 56 years, 10 federal Courts of Appeal and over 30 judges correctly understood the 1964 Civil Rights Act to refer to only two sexes – men and women. The first activist court to attempt to rewrite the law was in 2017!

The six judges in the majority agree that "sex" refers to male and female. So how did they conclude it covers so-called "transgenders?" By assuming that a person can choose the gender of their liking. Thus, a man who now wants to be "identified" as a woman is actually a woman! This is absurd!

Because the Court rewrote (although it had no authority to do so) the understanding of the word "sex" to include "sexual orientation" and "gender identity," all laws and policies regarding sex will be required to include this new acceptance of multiple genders.

Understand that "sexual orientation" also includes pedophilia (what they now call a "minor-attracted person"), as well as male and female at the same time, no gender, and a long list of other perversions.

Sex-specific restrooms, locker rooms, shower facilities, college dormitories —all of which require taking into account a person's sex—must now be opened to biological males who pretend to be women. While this ruling applies to employment, the public accommodations provision is in the same 1964 law.

Defend Religious Liberty & have your donation doubled by a challenge grant!

Justice Alito, in his scathing dissent, rightly goes on to list several drastic unintended consequences to women – the very people the 1964 Civil Rights Act was meant to protect!

Justice Alito also points out that this ruling will impact girls' and women's sports (Title VIIII), in that this ruling opens the door to federal approval of men directly and unfairly competing against women. As with this ruling undermining women's employment anti-discrimination, so this law undermines discrimination against women in sports.

In subsequent emails, I will also share how this ruling will impact children.

Justice Gorsuch, who wrote the opinion, does not dispute the consequences Justice Alito mentioned. Rather, Justice Gorsuch simply states that these "are questions for future cases." Which means Liberty Counsel will likely have to litigate these cases on behalf of concerned parents, families, schools, businesses, churches and religious employers...

When your college-bound daughter is forced to room with a male...

When elementary schools force your children to use made up pro-nouns like xe, xem, and xers instead of he, him, or his...

When the gym allows men in the ladies' locker and shower rooms...

When you are fired, sanctioned, or fined for calling a man a man or a woman a woman...

Liberty Counsel will be there.

Since 1989, we have been defending liberty in court rooms coast-to-coast and all the way to the Supreme Court...and we won't stop now. The battles for Judeo–Christian values are intensifying and accelerating.

Please, help us continue the fight by donating generously today. AND a very generous friend of Liberty Counsel has set up a CHALLENGE GRANT WHICH WILL DOUBLE THE IMPACT OF EVERY DONATION! So, every dollar you give today will in effect be DOUBLED!

Select here to take advantage of this blessing now!

In Christ,

Mat Staver
Founder and Chairman