June 26, 2013

Legislated Morality

Justices 'Not Qualified' to Decide Moral Issues
Sunday, June 23rd, 2013 8:26 PM
By Sandy Fitzgerald

Judges should stop setting moral standards concerning homosexuality and other issues, according to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who believes constitutional law is being threatened by a growing belief in the "judge moralist". The conservative jurist, speaking at a meeting of the North Carolina Bar Association on Friday, just days before the Supreme Court is to hand down its decisions on California's Proposition 8  this coming week, told attorneys that judges are being bestowed with expertise to determine right vs. wrong on moral issues, The Charlotte Observer reports." (continue reading article here)

Andy’s Commentary

One word folks: Wrong.

Just so were clear, this article is not directly addressing the abominable practice that has just been okay-ed by the US Supreme Court in Calipornia. I will not be directly addressing the obvious sign of God's judgment on a nation in allowing gay marriage to proceed in the largest state population in America. I am more concerned with the fact that we supposedly put our trust in certain people because they claim to be something they cannot live up to. We foolishly trust them to defend our actual positions but spinelessly they wish to remove themselves from that role.

Judge Scalia seems to be exposing his "moral" fluctuation or even cowardice here. It appears Judge Scalia wants people to believe that he is not qualified to make moral types of decisions nor should the courts. Here's the problem. If he doesn't then someone else most certainly will. Frankly, I believe morality is one of the few things that can be legislated (moderated) but that's for a different post. We see the use of legislated morality all over the Bible, especially in the Old Testament Law. If I've read Romans 13 correctly, the judge is indeed put in the very position he is in for the exact reason that he should make these types of decisions when most within the society/culture he governs are morally or intellectually incapable of doing so. 

Originally courts in this once great country would make judicial decisions based in moral or natural law. Our founders created a Republic or a form of government that was designed based on “natural law” rather than positive law. Natural law begins with the premise that all of our rights come from God or "nature" and are inherent to our being (ontology). Positive law, on the other hand, believes that our rights are granted by the government, society or other men and therefore can be taken back by them as well.

It has not been until the 20th century that the US courts began their long godless shift away from natural or moral law and towards positive law or man-made and precedent(s) law. It is sadly ironic that in a court system and society based on positive law the government can give or take away rights, property, liberty or freedom based on the greater societal goals/needs. They can also pass laws based on what they perceive is the greater good based on a politically idealized agenda. So we get what we had today in the Supreme Court (regardless of how Judge Scalia voted). The courts therefore can now pass laws a majority of the American people do not want or they can remove liberties all in the name of the greater good or social justice. They can pass these laws on a purely subjective and relativistic basis since we no longer have a moral absolute to appeal to in our court systems...mainly God.

What is truly sad is that many of the premises and ideas behind the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution find their basis in natural or moral law. In other words, the moral basis for our country’s founding documents in this country were based in assumed moral, natural or divine known(s) or laws. As our judicial systems continue to move away from this basis, the courts make more and more of a case for the revisionists who wishes to negate or eradicate the US Constitution. 

The truth is that we have God’s Holy Scripture as an absolute benchmark of morality. This is also called divine law or natural law. The US courts (along with most postmodern courts) on the other hand want a court system based on what is called (lex humana and lex posita) positive law or posit lawThis type of law has eventually led to twisted judicial decisions in the courts, agenda driven case precedent and a gradual undermining of morality, common-sense and ethical decision-making. In other words, they're thoroughly dumbing-down criteria for deciding what is morally proper or not. Before long there will be no morality at all as that is the direction we're heading at warp speed. By allowing precedents instead of morality to dictate court rulings in some cases we have seen a shift towards rulings in favor of people even though what they stand for is immoral or amoral. This is exactly how certain immoral or dubious aspects of Sharia Law are now managing to infiltrate the American court systems. Islam is actually using the US court systems against the American people by getting court rulings in favor of certain aspects of Sharia and building precedents at the lower court levels (which eventually find their way into the higher courts).

I don’t care what the culture thinks, Scalia is part of the problem, not part of the solution when he makes the aforementioned statement. Hopefully he doesn't really believe what he said here. He may be viewed as conservative justice by many but in my eyes he's as liberal as Ruth Bader Ginsburg making a ridiculous statement like this. He is deferring responsibility to act as a tool of God in government and divesting himself of the accountability of his leadership role. In so doing he becomes just another so-called leader not leading as he has been called to do. Like so many others in our half-destroyed government, he is abdicating his God-given role as a leader and becoming a tool of the culture. I have news for Judge Scalia and others that think like him in this instance...he is going to have to legislate morality since this country has clearly given up its God and His measure of absolute morality. By doing so we have lost the only moral absolute to base our law off of and also lost His blessing for turning from Him. The question for the courts now is: Equal justice under who's law? Man or God's? Clearly it is man's law in this day and age as God is conspicuously absent. Everyone is doing what is right in their own eyes.

Jeremiah 7:24 But they did not obey or incline their ear, but walked in their own counsels and the stubbornness of their evil hearts, and went backward and not forward.

Jeremiah 23:1-4 “Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” declares the Lord. Therefore thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who care for my people: “You have scattered my flock and have driven them away, and you have not attended to them. Behold, I will attend to you for your evil deeds, declares the Lord. Then I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them, and I will bring them back to their fold, and they shall be fruitful and multiply. I will set shepherds over them who will care for them, and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall any be missing, declares the Lord

One additional observation: Judge Scalia’s  following comment is also disingenuous: 'The courts have no "scientifically demonstrable right answer." ' Meh....He's looking in the wrong direction for an answer here and I suspect he knows that too. Science is not the correct source for moral absolutism, a morally absolute source is: i.e. God.

As true Christians it behooves us to be discerning of the world around us and critically observe and view the world through a biblical lens. We cannot just accept “conservative” judges statements and beliefs at face value as if they are speaking from a Scriptural point of view just because a particular judge was appointed by Ronald Reagan and is labeled "conservative". I have found that the joining at-the-hip of Conservatives and Christianity has done little more than confuse borderline Christians and defame the awesome name of Jesus Christ. This has become especially true when a Republican candidate does something horribly immoral or boneheaded by acting completely un-Christian. In the case of Scalia, he's being cowardly by not wanting to rule on socially divisive and caustic issues like abortion and homosexual marriage. These are issues that will profoundly affect the lex terra (laws of the land) and he doesn't want to be involved.

Romans 13:1-5 ~ Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.\\

The truth is that unless the morality legislated by leaders is Biblical, it is doomed to failure. Until the day the Lord’s kingdom comes in full and the Lord reigns in full we will need to settle for a much inferior form of morality and governance  Even the justices in our courts both Supreme and non are by-and-large...probably not Christian. The Religious Right nor conservatives in general are not going to save us and neither is any other man-made organization or religion. Therefore we should not expect Biblical morality to issue forth from the Supreme Court or any other court for that matter. What we should expect is that those that are put in a position of leadership should lead. Granted, it will be in a flawed manner and that is what we should expect without Christ reigning in power but even secular leadership is put in place by God.

Unless we under-gird everything with the Bible and the Gospel, the morality of the country will never improve. The only difference between the unbeliever and the believer is that the believer accepted the Gospel and the unbeliever didn’t. By accepting the Gospel the believer accepts the truth and therefore the morality and truths of the Bible. Biblical morality would be preferred as it comes from a perfectly moral God. Any man-made morality will only be a temporary fix but any morality is better than no morality. We see what happened in the days of Noah and in the time of the Judges.

Conversely, to do nothing and allow Scalia to abdicate his role as a leader is to endorse through silence unbiblical behavior and a path ultimately towards chaos. Without the Gospel and Biblical morality, there is no true morality or order. Without any morality and order at all there is only anarchy and chaos. The example in this article is not leadership as describe in Romans 13, its abdication of it. To allow this without rebuke or comment would also be unbiblical behavior. So I've offered biblical comment.

I could clearly rebuke and reprimand the liberal justices in the courts also for many more reasons but it would be preaching to the choir at this point. Their sins are multitude and heinous in what they have allowed to pass as "laws". By-and-large their agendas are so thoroughly godless that they do not warrant mentioning on this blog as they have had too much airtime elsewhere. I just wanted to bring to people's attention that your so-called "friends" or allies in Conservative America are not always what they seem....or never are. We need to stop getting so hung up on the worldly labels, parties and ideologies and start matching all people and all morality against the Bible to see if it measures up. In heated battles that will have so many long-term effects on our families, someone had better speak up from a biblical position before we are all herded into a no-man's-land of homophobia, in-utero murder and premature obsolescence.


June 26, 2013 4:20 pm in response to Judge Scalia's DOMA vote...

I will say in defense of Scalia that his vote today aligned itself with a Biblical principle...but I suppose that is more because of an overlap of agenda than purposeful adherence tothe Bible. To Scalia this is a moral issue not a Biblical one. The problem with thinking like that is you can still be moral by man's standards and still go to Hell. Ask any Pharisee or Scribe from the time of Christ that rejected Him. In the end Scalia still as a duty to lead regardless of what he said last week. Let us pray he continues to do what he did today even if it was done with the wrong reasons in his mind. Regardless, the truth is a Sovereign God is still in control.

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...