June 12, 2024 / Return to Godliness

Hey, Calvary Fremont –

We’ve hit the most disgusting low possible in American history. A line has been crossed which assures us that there is no enduring tomorrow for our great nation. A Supreme Court Justice was actually recorded agreeing that this nation needs to return to godliness. This is shocking and repulsive. How can ungodliness expect to get a fair hearing when at least one of our Supreme Judges doesn’t believe this is a good thing!? How dare he hold a moral vision that departs from the mainstream culture? How dare he have a moral compass that doesn’t celebrate the right to murder babies in the womb and remove the breasts of impressionable young girls and cut off the not-yet-fully-formed penises of adolescent boys with not-yet-fully-formed brains? With his nostalgia for a moral vision of yesteryear he is no position to give guidance to this great nation. A Supreme Judge standing against the slaughter of babies and the butchering of our children needs to step aside. A Supreme Judge in agreement with a point of moral discourse has assuredly disqualified himself from rendering a competent verdict.

The Supreme Judges are to interpret law and not impose a moral structure upon Americans – or  so we are told. Yet law itself, any law, is the imposition of a moral structure. But someone will object and say that you can’t legislate morality. Hmmm… We’ll ask him, “Do you believe murder is immoral?” Undoubtedly, he will say, “Yes.” We’ll inquire further, “Do you think there should be a law against murder?” Undoubtedly, he will say, “Yes.” We’ll say, “Congratulations, you’ve just legislated morality.” He will say, “Huh?” You can legislate morality – but what you can’t legislate is righteousness. There is law on the books against murder, but there is no law on the books against hating another person. You can go to jail for murder, but not for hate.

All law, any law is itself the imposition of a moral order of things. Flawed law is the imposition of flawed morality. The law that once allowed abortion enshrined the morality of individual autonomy and the non-personhood of life in the womb. These are moral judgments which made their way into legal statutes. A competing moral vision reversed this. All law is the expression of a moral vision and all lawmakers have a moral code – flawed or otherwise. To expect a Supreme Judge or a drunkard in the gutter to be morally neutral is quite a naïve view of human nature.

The Supreme Judge agreed that we need to return to godliness. He didn’t agree to America being a Christian nation, or that we need to return to a church-going America. He didn’t agree that the State should give preferential treatment to Christianity or that Jesus is the only hope for our nation. He agreed that we should return to godliness. What Muslim wouldn’t agree with this? What person of any religious persuasion would prefer ungodliness to godliness? What right-minded individual prefers the flawed morality of ungodliness to the morality of godliness?

Many are berating Justice Alito for giving voice to such a reprehensible sentiment. I say, “Thank you Justice Alito for being a decent man.”

Be blessed and stay healthy and follow Jesus – Pastor Tim