Columnist.
[Friday], in one breathtaking move, the nation's highest court took for itself the power reserved for its people — overturning the votes of millions of Americans and demanding that they walk away from millennia of human history, human nature, and the explicit teachings of Scripture in the process. Exactly two years after this court took an iron gavel to federal marriage law, the same justices came back to finish the job — inventing a sweeping "right" to same-sex marriage no founding father intended. Are we disappointed? Yes — but not surprised by an increasingly activist Court that sees itself as super-legislators. While five justices may have trampled the will of more than 50 million people, they do not have the moral authority to redefine marriage. Just as Americans refused to accept the Court's decision on abortion 42 years as legitimate, they will not accept this one. Like the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, this all but ensures that America will not achieve broad social consensus on marriage. Why? Because it will be used to rob Americans of their rights in the marketplace, in the education of their children, and most importantly, in the expression of their beliefs on marriage.
The 381,517 words of the President's health care law may be a lot for Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to read, but the Supreme Court should have had no trouble with four. At the heart of the King v. Burwell ObamaCare case was one simple question: Did the words "established by the state" actually mean "established by the state?" "You would think the answer would be obvious," Justice Antonin Scalia said, "so obvious there would hardly be a need for the Supreme Court to hear a case about it." Unfortunately for Americans, nothing is obvious in Washington anymore — not even the plain language of the written law. In one breathtaking move, six justices chose to ignore those four words — and with it, Congress's clear intent on the President's health care exchange. Together, they gave the White House another license for lawlessness, costing Americans billions of dollars in illegal subsidies in the process.
What kind of government says its health care can't afford to keep people alive — but *will* pay to change their gender? Yours! Welcome to the Obama administration, located at the intersection of illogical and outrageous. In two seemingly unrelated stories [Tuesday], the House helped to highlight just how radically out of touch the President's policy is with everyday Americans. For years, the Obama administration has argued that it's cheaper to "let sick people die" than treat them. And to prove it, they wrote a little something into the President's signature law authorizing 15 unaccountable bureaucrats to make decisions from Washington about whether you deserve care — and from whom. They called it the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), or "death panel," as most people know it. Of course, the administration never hid IPAB's real agenda. In fact, the head of Medicare at the time, Donald Berwick, was quite blunt about its role in rationing care.
Somewhere in Charleston, a deeply embittered 21-year-old is sitting in a dark cell replaying scenes from the courtroom over in his mind. For the killer who hoped to incite a nation with his bloody rampage, things didn't exactly work out as planned. The nine lives he sacrificed in God's house, offerings to a centuries-old race war, did more to quell the tension than spark it. In the end, violence was met by a force much stronger: forgiveness. Sitting across from the shooter at his bond hearing, no one would have blamed the families for lashing out in anger. Instead, one by one, racked by grief, they offered an unexpected gift — grace. "I will never be able to hold her again, but I forgive you," one daughter said through her tears. "We have no room for hating, so we have to forgive."
Only in Congress can *being* a leader cost you a *leadership* job. Unfortunately, that's the risk members take when their votes are driven by their conscience and constituents — not their careers. After a rough few years between Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and the House's more conservative wing, GOP leaders have decided that some members have rocked the party's boat a little too much. As most Republicans know, there's a price for bucking leadership — and Congressman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) is paying it. The popular North Carolina member, a respected member of the House, took it on the chin over the weekend for defying Boehner on last week's rule vote for the trade bill. Like most conservatives, he knew that splitting with leadership would have its consequences. And losing his subcommittee chairmanship a few months into the new session is his.
History will criticize George W. Bush for plenty of things, but his ability to lead will not be one of them. "I have a different vision of leadership," the 43rd President once said. "A leader is someone who brings people together." Whether or not Americans agreed with where President Bush was leading, they had no doubt that he was. Seven years later, under a vastly different administration, the nation is in serious turmoil. And the strong, decisive leadership it once knew, is gone. Like his predecessor, President Obama has had his share of crises. From Sandy Hook to Boston, the tests of leadership have been significant — but the response far different. After the horror in Charleston, a weary Obama stood at the podium and acknowledged, "I've had to make statements like this too many times."
Americans want a second opinion on the country's health care law — and the Supreme Court is giving them one. Three years after the justices upheld the President's controversial legislation, the justices are taking another crack at ObamaCare — with even more on the line. That's news to most Americans, 70 percent of whom have heard little or nothing about the case. And while they may not know about the suit, they're about to feel its effects if the justices strike down the subsidies that make the coverage possible for millions of people. The "Affordable" Care Act, which is turning out to be one of the most litigated pieces of legislation in modern history, is back under the microscope — this time to decide if the IRS acted lawlessly (The IRS? Lawless?) in doling out billions of dollars in health care aid to people not meant to receive it. Under the law passed by Congress, only states that set up their own health care exchanges were eligible for subsidies.
Now that Democrats have had five years to read the health care law, most of them agree with the GOP: we need to kill at least part of the bill — before it kills Americans! The Independent Payment Advisory Panel (or "death panel," as it's been dubbed) has been a major sticking point with both parties since ObamaCare passed. Among other things, IPAB would be responsible for keeping Medicare costs down, which sounds innocent enough. But the big controversy isn't *whether* IPAB should save money — but *how* it does. As the former chief of Medicare said, it's much cheaper for the government to let sick people die than care for them. So, the President's team invented this Board, which would be hand-picked by the White House to determine who is worthy of care and who isn't. Not only would IPAB be free of congressional oversight, but it would also operate without much input from health care providers. Instead of discussing the options with your doctor, IPAB will be sitting at the controls in Washington making health decisions for your family.
As the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting began [Tuesday] in Columbus, Ohio, SBC President Dr. Ronnie Floyd, who also serves as pastor of Cross Church in Springdale, Arkansas, issued a clarion call for pastors, Southern Baptists and followers of Jesus Christ to lead in this day of growing chaos and confusion. "Now is the time to lead," he said, "and the time to stand." Dr. Floyd began by citing Christian persecution around the world and noting that within our own country, social crises abound. Using data reflected in FRC's Marriage and Religion Research Institute, Dr. Floyd emphasized that less than 50 percent of American children reach 18 in a home with both biological parents. He reminded delegates of the evil of racism and abortion, noting that 57 million unborn children have lost their lives since 1973's Roe decision, and warning that "when we devalue human life from the womb to the tomb, we deprive God of His glory."
While the nation maybe waiting to see if the Supreme Court zeros out the actions of voters in 30 states by overturning the provisions in their constitutions upholding the natural definition of marriage, voters are not idle. On Saturday, voters in San Antonio elected a mayor who has condemned the City Council's effort two years ago to make belief in natural marriage — as between one man and one woman — a disqualification for holding public office. In the spring and summer of 2013, FRC joined local activists and our state partner, Texas Values, in drawing attention to a proposed city ordinance that would have barred Christians — or anyone else who "by word or deed" had ever expressed support for natural marriage — from serving in elected or appointed office. Although the public outcry forced officials to water down the language, the law that eventually passed still violated the beliefs of businesses owners by forcing them to recognize fluid categories of sexuality and gender identity, in contradiction to deeply held personal beliefs. Only three council members, out of eleven, voted against the measure.
Governor Pat McCrory hasn't exactly been the most popular person in North Carolina after he took sides against religious liberty. Last week, the governor stunned voters by vetoing a bill that would have shielded state officials from performing same-sex "weddings." Taking a page out of Indiana's book, McCrory capitulated to the voices of religious intolerance and rejected protections for people with strong religious beliefs. Thankfully, the legislature refused to take no for an answer and overrode McCrory's veto. But if North Carolina was sending the governor a message, he didn't get it. Despite all the outrage over his decision, the governor dug in his heels and proclaimed it a "disappointing day for the rule of law and the process of passing legislation in North Carolina." The same leader who complained that elected officials should follow the law is now upset that they did! In a statement to reporters, he promised to "continue to stand up for conservative principles" (which will be a little difficult since, on this issue, he never started).
"[T]he Air Force will let high-ranking officials decide the fate of known transgenders in their ranks."
[Thursday] morning, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) shed his candidate hat and took on another campaign: chief sponsor of the five-month abortion ban. It's a role Senator Graham knows well, having introduced the same legislation last spring — under slightly different circumstances. This time around, the southern conservative has a GOP majority to give him what Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) wouldn't: a vote. After a convincing 242-184 win in the House, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act sailed into the Senate with the country's support firmly behind it! As many as 84% of people throw their support behind measures that stop abortion after the first three months of pregnancy — and that includes *a majority of women!*
If you asked Americans what the mission of the military is, most would probably say to fight and win wars. And by wars, they wouldn't mean the cultural wars. President Obama's radical social policies seem to suggest the latter, as [Tuesday's] Pentagon festivities made painfully clear. The latest Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter, who's made more headlines for his attack on values than on terrorists, led the military parade for gay pride month at the Pentagon's official party — which featured one of the Army's "transitioning" officers, among things. To a standing room-only crowd, Carter's biggest rah-rah moment was introducing Brigadier General Randy Taylor, who shared that he had to hide his relationship with his boyfriend under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT).
Liberals have done everything they can to make abortion more appealing. They've added spa robes and hot tea. They made it available on Skype, by carry-out, through pills. They've recruited celebrities to gush that its providers are "really, truly, no-kidding awesome." As the Washington Post said, "...Activists are seeking to normalize abortion, to put a human face — and even a positive spin — on the procedure." Unfortunately for them, there already is a human face on the procedure: the baby's. And no amount of Planned Parenthood gift certificates or Black Friday abortion deals can lessen the real cost in people's minds. After years of changing opinion, monsters like Kermit Gosnell only cemented what most Americans already knew — there's nothing compassionate about "choice."
When it comes to self-control, the government has a hard enough time practicing it — let alone promoting it! That's why last week's announcement from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was so important. After years of burying its head in the sand and throwing billions of dollars at an STD problem it helped create, the government finally admitted what the Bible and common sense made abundantly clear: abstinence and monogamy are the only ways to avoid disease. In its 2015 "Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines," a two-word change made all the difference. Five years ago, the CDC used to say abstinence and monogamy were "a reliable way to avoid disease." As of last Friday, the agency agrees it's "*the* most reliable way." That may not seem like a radical edit to most people, but in this administration, moral purity is as foreign a concept as political transparency.
"Gay Pride Month" is just beginning — but we can't say the same for the administration's pandering. In the last seven years, Americans have witnessed an almost perpetual parade of deviance, with the President grand marshalling them all! Now, the government's rainbow love fest is spilling over into the military, where each branch is racing to out-sexualize the other. After [Thursday's] announcement, the Air Force is taking its radicalism to new heights — announcing that it was easing the discharge policy on transgenders in advance of the pride event next Tuesday. (Apparently, we're now relaxing U.S. security standards in conjunction with P.C. holidays.) The move isn't a surprise to those familiar with new Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James, who was the first service chief to openly lobby for the gender confused to serve. "Times change," she said in December. "From my point of view, anyone who is capable of accomplishing the job should be able to serve."
Is it a lavatory or a laboratory for social change? Depends on who you ask. Under the Obama administration, what happens in the bathroom is an issue for the boardroom, thanks to the Department of Labor. In an announcement this week, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is warning the country that it's "taking on" the issue of transgender politics — and expects the business community to as well. Big Brother has already been a big nuisance, piling on regulation after regulation under ObamaCare, the EPA, IRS, and now OSHA. Its latest intrusion is a memo demanding that the W.C. become P.C. by allowing workers in offices across America to use the restroom of their choosing. "Restricting employees to using only restrooms that are not consistent with their gender identity, or segregating them from other workers by requiring them to use gender-neutral or other specific restrooms, singles those employees out and may make them fear for their physical safety."
First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes... the end of religious liberty? That's what plenty of faith-based groups are worried about, now that the Supreme Court is weeks away from potentially writing the epilogue to the First Amendment rights of millions of religious Americans. In the quote heard 'round the world from the Supreme Court arguments on same-sex "marriage," the President's top lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, confirmed everyone's worst fears — that the government would use a liberal ruling as a weapon to use against Christians. Asked if religious schools could lose their tax-exempt status for holding a natural view of marriage, Verrilli was surprisingly candid. "[I]t's certainly going to be an issue. I don't deny that, Justice Alito. It is going to be an issue." If the Court invents a constitutional reason to redefine marriage, one bad decision could trigger dozens more. Charitable statuses, tax benefits, government contracts, accreditation, professional licenses, grants, social service programs, and more could fall like dominos if the justices err.
If the government wants to boost jobs, it ought to stop driving people out of the ones they have! In places like North Carolina, help is wanted — but conscience isn't. At least six offices are scrambling to find new magistrates now that the state has made violating personal beliefs a condition of employment. When the courts struck down the Tar Heels' 2012 marriage amendment, North Carolina's Administrative Office of the Court decided to chuck the First Amendment along with it, issuing a decree that officials would either perform same-sex "marriages" or clean out their offices. Of course, the great irony here is that liberals have always encouraged the courts to impose their personal views on the law. Now, when judges want to recuse themselves because of them, the Left screams "prejudice!"
