Why Religion Shouldn’t be an Excuse for Hate
I happened to catch an article in the New York Times about how the Supreme Court is poised to find a way to carve out religious exemptions against discrimination. As I digested the implications of the article, it — once again — demonstrated to me that the conservative wing of the Supreme Court of the United States seems intent on proving that the rule of law only applies to those laws that coincide with a particularly narrow world view shared by a majority of the so-called “justices” of the highest court in the United States. Before I go there, let me emphasize for the sake of making a point that has already been made numerous times, that the purpose of the Supreme Court was to appoint IMPARTIAL justices who were intent on making sure that the laws made in the United States were not subject to the whims of a legislative branch that might lose its way. The intent of the white, mostly wealthy, men was that the court would serve as a measure of constancy when the country may find itself led astray by individuals with less than the best intentions. They recognized that the future may hold changes that they would be unable to predict. Changes such as the end of slavery, women given equal rights, the idea that everyone within the United States would be treated equally under the law.
To keep the judiciary independent and impartial, they devised a method that would — at least they thought so — require the Senate to compromise on judicial appointees. I don’t need to brief you on the fact that the whole process has, in essence, been gamed to the point where it now resembles what some people might call a kangaroo court. The intent of an impartial judiciary is to provide a neutral party who can assess matters of law without bringing their own prejudices or preconceived notions to their work. The lifetime appointment of Supreme Court justices was intended to be a protection against justices feeling pressure to decide a case a certain way for fear of losing their livelihood. But let’s remember that, until the early 1900’s the life expectancy for people was 55 years old. Today, that number is much higher.
Now back to the institutionalization of hate. Religion has long been the shield used to assign hate to marginal groups. The atrocities committed in this country in the name of Christian purity and values includes murder, rape, child sexual abuse, and, yes, that “T” word: Terrorism. In other countries, religious extremism has a similar track record. Including genocide. Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all share a common thread of contributing to this reality. As terrible as it may seem.
What are we to make of this most recent case? The person has chosen to file suit not based on an actual instance but, at least according to the New York Times article, based on the fact that they fear they may be asked to perform work for a gay/lesbian couple which would be contrary to their religious beliefs and/or a violation of their free speech. The suit seems perfectly catered to stroking the sensibilities of a Supreme Court that is neither impartial, nor all that qualified to be in the roles that they now hold. The mood of the court seems to be in favor of supporting the plaintiff and cementing discrimination into Supreme Court case law.
To me this just is more evidence of how broken our systems are. We have an anything but impartial Supreme Court who is looking out for a narrow subset of the population with views and opinions that only amplify the abuse and injustice experienced by so many groups of people. In this case, the LGBTQ+ community. They spoke falsely during their testimony before the Senate and they continue to make decisions that ultimately will erode the protections to people who need it most. I suppose it would be inflammatory to suggest that this will eventually lead to greater abuses of marginalized individuals in the name of religious freedom. And, if I am being honest, it is hard to imagine not ending up at that point more quickly than anybody expects.
And what is at the center of all this? Religion of course. Not the religion of Jesus Christ, who in my years of Catholic and Episcopal Schooling was one that preached love and acceptance of all people. No, this is a religion that preaches hate. The members of the Supreme Court who believe in this version of religion are anything but “justices.” Perhaps a better title would be: UNJUSTICES, or INJUSTICES.
We suffer as humans if we don’t continuously aspire to achieve better things. Humans are not disposable. We have come so far, but we seem to be running away from a better future for everyone in the name of … what?
That’s a question I can’t seem to find the answer to. I suspect many of the people leading us in that misguided direction would struggle to answer that question as well.
M
Copyright © 2022 - Malcolm Bolivar. All Rights Reserved.