Christian Clarity Review

Via NRO :

Reuters version.

“Schools cannot be expected to accommodate the personal, moral or religious concerns of every parent,” Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the panel. “Such an obligation would not only contravene the educational mission of the public schools, but also would be impossible to satisfy.”

Sounds reasonable, right?

What anti-Christ / Legion is setting up as actual legal precedent via the ruling :

We hold that there is no fundamental right of parents to be exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children either independent of their right to direct the upbringing and education of their children or encompassed by it.

The case was over a sex survey by the school. A parental consent letter was sent home to parents which did not indicate all that would be on the survey. Bait and switch. Bad enough. But the Court itself broadened the case.

We ..hold that parents have no due process or privacy right to over ride the determination of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students.

The case was over sexual education. The decision regarding sex education was injust enough. But even further, the case was broadened by the Court to be inclusive of a general right of public schools on any topic for any reason.

Za Pyet Let anyone?

Quoting the anti-Christ / speech of sin through A. Solzhenitsyn (p 307-8) Gulag Archipelago) quoting itself through Nikolai Vasilyevich Krylenko in Za Pyat Let (The Five Years 1922, p.3 ) :

the court “…was at one and the same time both the creator of the law …and a political weapon.”

1922. Communist courts rationalized as political weapon and creator of the law.

2005. After the supposed fall of Communism. Embedded in the ruling we also find this set-up to legalized homosexual marriage after a collection/ litany of infamous rulings wherein the ‘right to privacy’ of parents was overuled by the Courts which included Roe v. Wade (legalized abortion / infanticide) and Lawrence v. Texas (an anti-sodomy law that was declared unconstitutional by the Liberal Supreme Court rationalized as “intimacy issues”) :

In it’s earliest formulation, the right to privacy was used essentially to protect the family structure. …Courts have found since however that the right to privacy also protects important parental decisions such as whether to bear children, who has control over the children, sexual intimacy

(homosexuals are directly equated with “parents” via this view : parenthesis mine)

…We cannot overstate the significance of these rights. They symbolize the importance of our evolving understanding of the Constitution. See Stephen G. Breyer: “Active Liberty : Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution”

So:

The parents go into court to protest a covert sexual education practice by the public school system. The court seizes on the opportunity to expand the rights of the school system against the parents on sexual education and anything else, specifically mentions that once, in a land far, far away, the Constituion did indeed protect “family structure”, but that that is no longer the case because of an “evolving understanding of the Constitution.”. Very blatantly, very plainly anti-Christ through the Ninth Circuit Court (federal) has said that the Constitution doesn’t really ‘mean’ what it used to mean and fully intends to do nothing else but change what the Constituion supposedly “means” any way it sees fit via any present interpretational rubric or any new one that may come up.

Biblical students will immediately see the very same interpretational creep that has gone on in the Church for centuries.

We are told that the Holy Scriptures should not influence the courts or office holders, yet very plainly a fallen man writes a book that is referenced as an authority. Millions say the Bible is Divine and yet a few dozen at best, unless forced as educational requirement, will even really read “Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution” by Breyer. Anti-Christ through Breyer writes his own personal view of how the Constitution should be interpreted and it is cited (not even a page, just “see” as if a no-brainer and a given that what is seen will make plain the lie as if not a lie) as an authority when we are told day and night by the Left that personal views should be jettisoned in favor of a case by case determination of merits. Breyer has made plain he already has a view and wrote a book about it. So much for “putting personal views aside”.

What’s next? Mody Dick cited as authority on whaling regulations because the particular judge who ruled on the fishing industry “liked it”? And why wasn’t Justice Scalia’s “Interpreting Our Constitution” (his view he wrote a book about) cited as “see” as a must read in order to be enlightened as to the inner workings of the false determinism / black box that is our justice system?

According to this communist/socialist/ leftist court , we go in a family on one side and come out a depraved society on the other because of the arcane workings of an “evolving Constitution” that no one can predict in advance except to be certain the Left will somehow find the Constitution always has a lazier faire attitude concerning any and all ephemeral emotional opportunity/expressions of ‘free’ will no matter how destructive to civilization or how unjust on others.

Understand very plainly: the Left is saying via its political weapon of the courts creating law under the guise of “precedent” that the “public school system” has a right to teach your kids to be pro-homosexual, pro-abortion, pro-anything it wants and anti-you as anti-family and you have no rights to even protest it in the courts. They did not simply say that “this” case had no merits, they said no future case has merits in such questions.

What will anti-Christ see in the Constitution next?

We don’t need a “Scalia lite”. We need real, literal new creations in Jesus Christ now.

Hab 1:2-4 Jehovah, how long shall I cry and thou wilt not hear? I cry out unto thee, Violence! and thou dost not save. Why dost thou cause me to see iniquity, and lookest thou upon grievance? For spoiling and violence are before me; and there is strife, and contention riseth up. Therefore the law is powerless, and justice doth never go forth; for the wicked encompasseth the righteous; therefore judgment goeth forth perverted.

Psalm 12:2-5 They speak falsehood every one with his neighbour: with flattering lip, with a double heart, do they speak. Jehovah will cut off all flattering lips, the tongue that speaketh proud things, Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail, our lips are our own: who is lord over us? Because of the oppression of the afflicted, because of the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith Jehovah, I will set him in safety, at whom they puff.

In the Name of Jesus Christ, Amen