Applauding an Illegitimate Ruling and Ignoring a Lawful One

President Obama applauded and celebrated the Supreme Court decision that illegitimately and lawlessly enshrined same-sex marriage into the United States Constitution and forced it on every state in the union. It wasn’t as if the states had been silent on this issue. Dozens of state constitutional amendments affirming marriage as being the union of one man and one woman had been adopted through due process, but the Supreme Court jettisoned these laws, as well as thousands of years of tradition and social policy. We should not be surprised at Obama’s reaction, given the pattern of lawlessness exhibited by this president during his tenure.

How telling it is, therefore—and how consistent with the established pattern—that President Obama and his administration would totally ignore the Supreme Court’s lawful ruling that privately held family owned businesses are not required to purchase insurance policies for their employees that include abortion and abortion-inducing drugs. A July 10, 2015 press release from the Family Research Council states, “Family Research Council (FRC) responded today to a new final rule issued by the Obama administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The rule mandates that non-profit organizations be forced to pay for coverage that includes sterilizations, contraception and drugs that have the potential to destroy an unborn child.” Jamie Dangers, Legislative Assistant at the Family Research Council, explained, “The Obama administration is offering a variation of an old accounting gimmick which still mandates that the Little Sisters of the Poor, Notre Dame, and many other religious non-profits offer coverage with objectionable benefits.…Even more incredible, HHS is now applying this scheme to family-owned businesses such as Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties which already won relief from the government mandate by the Supreme Court. The Obama administration is disregarding the Court’s ruling declaring this mandate a violation of the family owned business’s religious freedoms.”

Let’s return to the marriage ruling for a moment. A news article reports that a legal brief submitted to the Alabama Supreme Court “argues there is precedent in the U.S. for a state Supreme Court to reject a ‘U.S. Supreme Court mandate which is unlawful.’… The brief submitted by Liberty Counsel to the state court notes that the Wisconsin Supreme Court refused to follow the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in [the 1857] Dred Scott [ruling], which ‘said that blacks were not entitled to full protection as citizens.’”

Do we need to wonder how the Obama administration would respond if the Alabama Supreme Court or any other state Supreme Court, acting constitutionally, were to refuse recognize the U.S. Supreme Court’s marriage ruling?

Unfortunately, the lawlessness continues unabated.

Related articles:

Despite Repeated Supreme Court Losses, Obama Continues Fight With Little Sisters, Religious Groups Over Birth Control, Abortifacients

Obama Beats Nuns in Birth Control Mandate Battle; Fight Not Over, Little Sisters Say

Judges: Nuns Must Obey Obama


Copyright © 2015 by B. Nathaniel Sullivan. All Rights Reserved.

Who Meets the People’s Needs?

While many believe government exists to meet people’s needs, Scripture teaches individual responsibility. So does history. Settlers in both Jamestown and Plymouth initially sought to produce food and wealth according to a communal system. Workers contributed the fruits of their labors to a “common store” on which all relied. This approach pushed both settlements to the brink of starvation. Yet when land was assigned and people could reap the benefits of their own work, the communities prospered.

The Bible commends reward for hard work among able-bodied people. Proverbs 14:23 says, “In all labor there is profit.” Paul told the Thessalonians that whoever wouldn’t work shouldn’t be allowed to eat (see 2 Thess. 3:10), and he told Timothy that “if anyone does not provide for his own,…he…is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim. 5:8). It isn’t government’s job to meet the people’s needs. That job belongs to the people themselves.

  • Genesis 2:15
  • Exodus 20:8-9
  • Proverbs 6:6-11
  • Proverbs 12:14
  • Proverbs 14:23
  • Ecclesiastes 3:13
  • Ecclesiastes 5:12
  • Romans 12:11
  • Ephesians 4:28
  • 2 Thessalonians 3:6-12
  • 1 Timothy 5:3-8

Alvin J. Schmidt, Under the Influence: How Christianity Transformed Civilization, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 211-212. This work has been rereleased under the title How Christianity Changed the World.

Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture has been taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2015 by B. Nathaniel Sullivan. All Rights Reserved.

The Purpose of Government

On tax day, 2015, we do well to consider the purpose of government. Most people today, including most Christians, believe government exists to meet the needs of its citizens. Scripture says otherwise. In Romans 13, when Paul directed the Roman Christians to be good citizens by obeying civil authorities, he explained that civil leaders affirm those who do right and punish evildoers. “Do you want to be unafraid of the authority?” Paul asked. “Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same” (v. 3). Peter echoed this principle in 1 Peter 2:13-14.

God established governments to promote and maintain order in society by punishing those who do wrong and honoring those who do right. This is not their only duty, but this task is primary.

This truth gives rise to some important questions. How are the people’s needs to be met? What happens when civil authorities don’t know right from wrong? Stay tuned. We’ll explore some of these issues in the very near future.

Romans 13:1-7

1 Peter 2:13-17

Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture has been taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2015 by B. Nathaniel Sullivan. All Rights Reserved.