In what has been described as the “Roe V Wade of the 21st Century,” the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 ruling that the use of the word “sex” in half-century-old anti-discrimination legislation applies to sexual orientation and gender dysphoria. In other words, the Supreme Court has thrown out the original meaning of U.S. laws and inserted decision-based or disorder-based behavior into laws designed to protect biological realities.
In Bostock vs Clayton County, the court expanded the definition of “sex” to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. When that act was passed, the legislators intended to protect discrimination against men being men or – more pertinent to the social milieu – women being women.
The 1964 Civil Rights Act forbids discrimination “on the basis of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” It has been attempted by social activists and anti-family legislators for years to add language to the bill or to pass another bill that would codify protections for sexual deviants and those who suffer from gender dysphoria, but has thus far been rejected by the consent of the governed. However, the court’s decision sidestepped the rule of law and decided retroactively to apply definitions of “sex” not intended by the intent of the Civil Rights Act authors.
This Supreme Court decision will now penalize private business owners, property owners, and institutions (perhaps even churches) for discriminating against people with low moral characters and personal immorality. For example, an employer will be punished by the government or penalized civilly for not letting a man with an adam’s apple and five o’clock shadow where women’s clothing when they go to work. Or, for another example, a small Christian-owned business can be penalized for not wanting their business associated with what they believe is a sexual perversion.
The questions of moral objections aside, there is also the problematic aspect of America’s highest court throwing authorial intent of the law out the window in favor of retrofitting laws with the latest public sentiments. Montana’s Republican lawmakers, like Steve Daines and Greg Gianforte, were silent on the first problem with Bostock Vs Clayton County (the moral objections to these behaviors) but voiced concern over the court’s “legislating from the bench.”
Congressman Greg Gianforte’s office said, “Greg believes discrimination is wrong, and he also believes Justice Alito is correct that the court legislated from the bench. That said, Greg recognizes the court’s decision as the law of the land.”
Steve Daines’ office issued a similar statement as Greg Gianforte.
However, Montana’s Democrats are ecstatic that the rule of law was ignored and the courts yet again overruled the protocol of our Democratic Republic.
Senator Jon Tester released an email affirming the ruling and attacking the Trump Administration, saying, “Federal law now affirms Montanans’ fundamental right to be protected from workplace discrimination no matter who they are or who they love. But as long as this Administration keeps threatening the civil rights of Montanans, our fight for justice for all continues.”
Kathleen Williams, who is running for Greg Gianforte’s spot in the U.S. House of Representatives against challenger, Matt Rosendale, said, “A great victory in the fight for equality! No one should be discriminated against for who they love.”
Williams’ broad-brushing of the Supreme Court ruling makes no room for discrimination against those who love children or animals, but thinking through complex issues according to underlying principles and overarching moral standards is not the strong suit of the Democratic Party.
Lt. Governor Mike Cooney, who is running for governor against Greg Gianforte, also took to Twitter to express his joy. Cooney stated, “Today’s ruling is a victory for all LGBTQ+ Montanans and another step towards equality and justice for all. No Montanan should fear discrimination or be fired because of who they are or who they love.”
Governor Steve Bullock, who is running for U.S. Senate against Steve Daines, also praised the decision, saying, “No one should have to live in fear of losing their job for who they love. Today we celebrate a victory in the fight for equality, and tomorrow we continue to work towards advancing a more equal and just society.”