The implications of this for all Christians parents—indeed all parents who would like to raise their children with religious values—is frightening.
As the parents’ attorney says:
"There are two major issues in this case: One is about the fact that the child is taken away just because of the parents' religious beliefs on sexuality. And the other is what a parent can speak to their child about in the confines of their own home," she said.
Honestly, what is going on with the Supreme Court. I have always thought of it as the last stand of hope and reason. I sometimes wonder how unbiased the Supreme Court really is and exactly how much pressure they get from behind the scenes and by whom.
"Supreme Court" is now kinda like a Taco Bell Taco Supreme faux /inauthentic taco---a fast food-as-justice woke joke--the only thing real is the "lettuce" (i.e. the greenbacks they're takin' in!). Ketanji Brown Jackson is leadin' the way this week sayin' the 1st Amendment "Hamstrings" our gummint (take about insanity!) So jus' like Taco Supreme which is the least supreme thing a human might eat--it seems like SCOTUS that once seemed like they're the "real item" ain't at all. Gotta lotta "beefs" with this TURRIBLE decision ya've shared here--an' with all these dubious judges spoutin nonsense (Jackson, Sotomaye, etc--full-out uninformed about the consty-2-shun--an' unable to define whut a woman is, say whut? Wull they've abandoned the Bar exam in quite a few states now so--good nooz, ya don't need ta even pass it to be a LawYer) Just as the "Supreme" beef is gmo soy-sludge, the "cheeze" is fake, an' I'm sorry ta say our judges are ersatz an' drive thru... Sorry it's come ta this--I hope things turn around for that poor fambly... truth is, a "trans child" is no more real than frakenmeat... it's all a turrible invention
Somehow, I never was terribly convinced about Trump's selections for SCOTUS. They were on the same highly questionable level as most of his other government appointees proved to be totally sub par.
Of course, Biden's SCOTUS warrior, Katanji Brown, didn't even know what a woman is, or was refusing to say. So I'm not the least bit surprised at anything this leftist dominated court does at this point.
"I sometimes wonder how unbiased the Supreme Court really is and exactly how much pressure they get from behind the scenes and by whom."
I kind of decided years ago that they're no more or less biased than any other political appointees these days-which is essentially what they are. Although I think the second part of your question depends on which justice we are talking about. For example, at least some of the people who influence Clarence Thomas have been revealed under the last couple years, yet there's still no requirement that he recuse himself from cases involving companies owned by the man who purchased Thomas'mother's home, for example...I have no doubt that at the very least the majority of the Court is getting similar "favors from friends."
How old is the kid? Has his brain developed fully to make him feel like a woman? Religion takes a back seat to this one. The SCOTUS should never have ruled on this.
The quote sounds like "attorney talk". Last stand of hope and reason? Hardly.
I don't mean here to address this case or implications of the decision, but to mention something I observed about the court itself relating to the question "what's going on with the Supreme Court".
A good many years ago I had the pleasure of meeting and spending time with one of the Supreme Court justices -- I won't say which one or when -- at the courthouse and elsewhere in DC, through a personal connection. I was amazed by this justice's dedication to the work. Blown away, really. We talked extensively about the law.
Come 2020-21 it was as if this justice became a different person, casting aside personal principles and clinging instead to the acceptable narrative. I don't know what happened, but it superficially resembled what happened with probably the majority of the other people in my life at that time. I don't think the others in my life were pressured so much as they knew nothing about psyops and they caved in to this one, in fear, as intended.
I can't imagine this justice being that naive. I suspect there was pressure, extreme pressure, but I don't know and I am not going to inquire. What I do know is that this world and its "systems" are deeply corrupt, almost unimaginably so, and that nothing of it, when examined deeply, is revealed to be what it appears to be.
Our hope lies not in this world but in the otherworldly, in God and his promises, grace, and mercy.
Your exciting headline grabs people’s attention but it actually showed your bias and revealed you didn’t research the actual case opinion. That is a hallmark of MSM reporting, quite evident in the link you also shared. I suggest subscribers, that value truth, do their own research before believing anything that anyone puts before them as truth.
This is a link to the Court of Appeals of Indiana legal opinion:
As you will see, when you peruse the case, this had nothing to do with the parents being “Catholic” but did have everything to do with the physical and mental health of the 16 yr old, which the parents didn’t dispute, but also didn’t seek help for said child. The case opinion took a whole 10 minutes to read.
While I also want courts to honor and protect parents rights, especially their religious rights, I realize that parents can’t or won’t do it, hence the need for intervention.
That you frame this an infringement of religious rights is disingenuous. But I suppose it grabs a lot of attention. For me, it shall make me question anything you write about and it should be a warning to others, as well.
As an aside, your indictment and derogatory comments of the Supreme Court are presumptuous, if in fact, you didn’t even read the Appeals Court opinion, instead relying on a lawyer’s opinion piece to a newspaper.
The truth is no matter what the SCOTUS says, this government will do as it pleases anyway. So whether SCOTUS rules favorably or not, in any case, the UniParty/Deep State/liberals (or whatever you chose to call it), will simply ignore the ruling. SCOTUS no longer is the rule of law, and just reinforces the ludicrous disregard for the Constitution.
After the vax mandates were upheld based on a case over a hundred years old, I looked up where the decision led. It is sort of a maxim that bad decisions will lead to more bad decisions and this one didn't fail. The case was used to uphold the sterilization of a poor white woman who had been born of a poor white woman. Buck v. Bell would later be cited by defendants in the Nuremberg trial. SCOTUS gave us the 'separate but equal doctrine' which created hell for black Americans for decades. They also upheld the internment of Japanese in the US even though security experts had stated they posed no risk. (Japanese in Hawaii were not interned as they were too valuable to the economy.) So, SCOTUS doesn't get it right a lot of times. This is why we need to recognize our rights come from our a creator and not the government.
This is truly terrifying. The implications are immense. And the pain and heartbreak that these parents are surely suffering is immeasurable. I can't overstate how much I feel that I'm living in the dark ages, or many better said, the new dark ages.
Heartbreaking. The politicians who advocate for this or turn a blind eye (the Supreme Court) are despicable. Whatever happens in the future, I firmly believe it won’t be from the political sphere whence cometh our help.
"Supreme Court" is now kinda like a Taco Bell Taco Supreme faux /inauthentic taco---a fast food-as-justice woke joke--the only thing real is the "lettuce" (i.e. the greenbacks they're takin' in!). Ketanji Brown Jackson is leadin' the way this week sayin' the 1st Amendment "Hamstrings" our gummint (take about insanity!) So jus' like Taco Supreme which is the least supreme thing a human might eat--it seems like SCOTUS that once seemed like they're the "real item" ain't at all. Gotta lotta "beefs" with this TURRIBLE decision ya've shared here--an' with all these dubious judges spoutin nonsense (Jackson, Sotomaye, etc--full-out uninformed about the consty-2-shun--an' unable to define whut a woman is, say whut? Wull they've abandoned the Bar exam in quite a few states now so--good nooz, ya don't need ta even pass it to be a LawYer) Just as the "Supreme" beef is gmo soy-sludge, the "cheeze" is fake, an' I'm sorry ta say our judges are ersatz an' drive thru... Sorry it's come ta this--I hope things turn around for that poor fambly... truth is, a "trans child" is no more real than frakenmeat... it's all a turrible invention
ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM
15100 N. 90th Street
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
JoinADF.com/Truth
Pillar #1: Christians are called to live out their faith publicly in speech, action, and worship.
Pillar#2: Life is a gift of God, and He doesn’t make mistakes.
Pillar#3: Parents have the authority and responsibility to direct the upbringing of their children.
So the FAMILY —not the state or school—is the Basis of Society, and parents have the RIGHT and RESPONSIBILITY to care for their children.
Somehow, I never was terribly convinced about Trump's selections for SCOTUS. They were on the same highly questionable level as most of his other government appointees proved to be totally sub par.
Of course, Biden's SCOTUS warrior, Katanji Brown, didn't even know what a woman is, or was refusing to say. So I'm not the least bit surprised at anything this leftist dominated court does at this point.
"I sometimes wonder how unbiased the Supreme Court really is and exactly how much pressure they get from behind the scenes and by whom."
I kind of decided years ago that they're no more or less biased than any other political appointees these days-which is essentially what they are. Although I think the second part of your question depends on which justice we are talking about. For example, at least some of the people who influence Clarence Thomas have been revealed under the last couple years, yet there's still no requirement that he recuse himself from cases involving companies owned by the man who purchased Thomas'mother's home, for example...I have no doubt that at the very least the majority of the Court is getting similar "favors from friends."
How old is the kid? Has his brain developed fully to make him feel like a woman? Religion takes a back seat to this one. The SCOTUS should never have ruled on this.
Maybe darker and more dystopian than the original dark ages.
The quote sounds like "attorney talk". Last stand of hope and reason? Hardly.
I don't mean here to address this case or implications of the decision, but to mention something I observed about the court itself relating to the question "what's going on with the Supreme Court".
A good many years ago I had the pleasure of meeting and spending time with one of the Supreme Court justices -- I won't say which one or when -- at the courthouse and elsewhere in DC, through a personal connection. I was amazed by this justice's dedication to the work. Blown away, really. We talked extensively about the law.
Come 2020-21 it was as if this justice became a different person, casting aside personal principles and clinging instead to the acceptable narrative. I don't know what happened, but it superficially resembled what happened with probably the majority of the other people in my life at that time. I don't think the others in my life were pressured so much as they knew nothing about psyops and they caved in to this one, in fear, as intended.
I can't imagine this justice being that naive. I suspect there was pressure, extreme pressure, but I don't know and I am not going to inquire. What I do know is that this world and its "systems" are deeply corrupt, almost unimaginably so, and that nothing of it, when examined deeply, is revealed to be what it appears to be.
Our hope lies not in this world but in the otherworldly, in God and his promises, grace, and mercy.
Your exciting headline grabs people’s attention but it actually showed your bias and revealed you didn’t research the actual case opinion. That is a hallmark of MSM reporting, quite evident in the link you also shared. I suggest subscribers, that value truth, do their own research before believing anything that anyone puts before them as truth.
This is a link to the Court of Appeals of Indiana legal opinion:
https://casetext.com/case/mc-v-ind-dept-of-child-servs-in-re-ac
As you will see, when you peruse the case, this had nothing to do with the parents being “Catholic” but did have everything to do with the physical and mental health of the 16 yr old, which the parents didn’t dispute, but also didn’t seek help for said child. The case opinion took a whole 10 minutes to read.
While I also want courts to honor and protect parents rights, especially their religious rights, I realize that parents can’t or won’t do it, hence the need for intervention.
That you frame this an infringement of religious rights is disingenuous. But I suppose it grabs a lot of attention. For me, it shall make me question anything you write about and it should be a warning to others, as well.
As an aside, your indictment and derogatory comments of the Supreme Court are presumptuous, if in fact, you didn’t even read the Appeals Court opinion, instead relying on a lawyer’s opinion piece to a newspaper.
The truth is no matter what the SCOTUS says, this government will do as it pleases anyway. So whether SCOTUS rules favorably or not, in any case, the UniParty/Deep State/liberals (or whatever you chose to call it), will simply ignore the ruling. SCOTUS no longer is the rule of law, and just reinforces the ludicrous disregard for the Constitution.
All I can think to say is "buckle up," for Christians, the ride is going to a lot more bumpy. God warned us this would happen in the last days.
After the vax mandates were upheld based on a case over a hundred years old, I looked up where the decision led. It is sort of a maxim that bad decisions will lead to more bad decisions and this one didn't fail. The case was used to uphold the sterilization of a poor white woman who had been born of a poor white woman. Buck v. Bell would later be cited by defendants in the Nuremberg trial. SCOTUS gave us the 'separate but equal doctrine' which created hell for black Americans for decades. They also upheld the internment of Japanese in the US even though security experts had stated they posed no risk. (Japanese in Hawaii were not interned as they were too valuable to the economy.) So, SCOTUS doesn't get it right a lot of times. This is why we need to recognize our rights come from our a creator and not the government.
It must become possible to de-select judges by popular vote.
This is truly terrifying. The implications are immense. And the pain and heartbreak that these parents are surely suffering is immeasurable. I can't overstate how much I feel that I'm living in the dark ages, or many better said, the new dark ages.
and to add: there are some very interesting comments on that story written on the Christian Post
It is rather shocking.
agree. This is pretty sickening.
There is so so much abusive behavior against children, and adults.... but
the supreme court is no supreme over family concerns like this.
Heartbreaking. The politicians who advocate for this or turn a blind eye (the Supreme Court) are despicable. Whatever happens in the future, I firmly believe it won’t be from the political sphere whence cometh our help.