As horrible as it is to ban abortion in Texas and it is horrible, the religious architect of the law has set his sights on criminalizing homosexuality and banning same-sex marriage, according to an amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court.
It is not uncommon for interested parties to provide information, skills and insights as “court friends” that may affect the issues in a particular case under consideration. However, the so-called “friend of the court” is not a party to the case even though their intention is to influence a verdict that is particularly favorable to that “friend”; In this particular case it is the religious obsession of the “friend”.
Former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell has worked as a clerk for the now deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and has worked hard for the right-wing, evangelical organization Alliance Defending Freedom and the Texas-based Right to Life.
Mitchell is the short author of Amicus in short and his special obsession is denying women proper control of their own body and reproductive health. He wants to control society and human nature by criminalizing homosexuality according to his religious convictions.
The lawyer is a deeply religious Catholic and has worked for the past decade to legally deny women the freedom to control reproductive health; But it is not his only emotion.
In late June, Mitchell wrote in front of his friends in a deeply religious Supreme Court in support of Mississippi’s abortion ban on behalf of the Texas Right to Life organization.
The gist of Mitchell’s appeal to Catholics in the Supreme Court is that if the Conservatives do the right thing by the Vatican and vice versa, abortion will be banned. Rowe vs. Wade, it will force women “Practice abstaining from sex as a means of controlling their reproductive life.
Mitchell summarizes his Amicus:
“Women can control their reproductive life without the chance of abortion; They can do it Abstain from sexual intercourse. When this court announces the annulment of the judgment, that person can do so Simply change their behavior in response to a court decision If she no longer wants to take the risk of an unwanted pregnancy. (Author Brave)
However, forcing only women to take the life of a clustered nun or produce offspring is not the only Taliban-like brutality in Mitchell’s mind. He claims that as a “friend” of religious conservatives in the High Court, there are two more “illegal” judgments that need to be overturned.
Mitchell’s Amicus Short Question about the validity of 2003 Lawrence v. Texas Roy: That decision has banned homosexuality across the country.
Mitchell also wants 2015 Obergefell vs. Hodges The verdict, which legalized same-sex marriage, is the opposite. Mitchell asserted to the conservative majority that the judgments of Lawrence v. Texas and Auvergne v. Hodges were both heinous “judicial decisions” that had no source of law which probably “Protect their existence. ”
To get a clear picture of where a religious fanatic is going with his theological leanings and with the strong support of the fanatical evangelical rights, he claims that Roe v. Wade doesn’t have to cancel “Inter-cial race marriage threats, “But it will allow the High Court to ban the trustee”Homosexual behavior and gay marriage. ”
“The opposite Rowe Interracial marriage will not be threatened, but the news is not as good for those hoping to preserve court-invented rights for homosexuality and same-sex marriage … from these ‘rights’ to abortion rights Rowe, Judicial Convocations, and no other source of law to protect their existence. This does not mean that the court should be dismissed Lawrence And Upper skin If it decides to cancel Rowe And Casey In this case. But the court will not hesitate to write an opinion that hangs those decisions with a thread. Lawrence And Upper skin, Although much less dangerous to human life, as illegal Rowe. ”
It is important to note that Mitchell’s amicus brief was directed only to his deep religious “friends” in the High Court; Each of whom is deeply aware of his crusade to control women and created a Papal Encyclopaedia of the Land Act of 1968 by Judicial Fiat. He, like the minority religious extremists, is leading America towards an oc theocracy, wants religion as the law of the land, and must recognize that the new Catholic institution is being recognized as the supreme court of the country. Banning women’s right to choose or criminalizing homosexuality is not a social value in America and will not contribute to the common good. But it will establish the religious basis of the law in America.
Mitchell’s intent is to advance an oc theistic obsession with controlling women that religious conservatives in the high court actually called for – especially Clarence Thomas. Thomas has urged religious rights Republicans in particular to oust Roe as well as to ban contraception in accordance with his Catholic faith. And Amy Connie Barrett, the self-proclaimed “handmaiden” has made it abundantly clear that her allegiance to her extremist Catholic faith as the main influence of her existence.
Of course the Constitution is very clear that there can be no law to establish any religion, but like the predominance of Republicans today, the religious conservatives in the Supreme Court have repeatedly shown that they have very little use for the Constitution – especially where religion is concerned.
American women and the LGBTQ community should shake off their shoes that America’s religious minorities have for them. What is happening in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan is an example of what evangelical rights extremists have left for America. As “friends of the court,” those small American Taliban are on the path to complete control of minority women and they show greed to capture members of the LGBTQ community. On land the Supreme Court enacts laws from the bench according to their deeply held religious views, no Constitution or Congress will be able to stop them.
Audio Engineer and Instructor for SAE. Opp / Ed writes comments that support secular humanitarian causes, and expose the oppression of women, the poor and minorities. An advocate for freedom of religion and, in particular, freedom of any religion.
Born in the South, raised in the Midwest and California for a strong vision of America; It doesn’t look good
Former Minister, Lifelong Musician, Mahayana Zen-Buddhist.