Supreme Court Responds to Christian Plea for Relief from Anti-Christian Attacks
News provided by
April 22, 2019
April 22, 2019
WASHINGTON, April 22, 2019 /Standard Newswire/ -- Public Advocate heartily thanks the U.S. Supreme Court for taking up the issue of the wrongful expansion of Title VII rights via the reinterpretation of "discrimination on the basis of sex" to include sexual activity.
"Most cases don't get heard and we are elated that Christians get two hearings at the Supreme Court on cases in which non-existent or fabricated legislation seems to restrict the religious beliefs of Christians in two separate cases," says Eugene Delgaudio, president of Public Advocate.
Full statement of Eugene Delgaudio on Supreme Court taking up two cases Altitude Express v. Zarda and Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC:
ON THE WRONGFUL EXPANSION OF FEDERAL LAW WITHOUT LEGISLATION
This clause in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was clearly intended to prevent discrimination on the basis of biological sex or gender -- i.e. being a Man or a Woman.
It was never intended to address sexual behavior -- such as homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality. Nor was it intended to address the practice of pretending to change one's gender/sex -- i.e. transsexuality/transgenderism.
The Homosexual Lobby and their allies have pushed a false narrative across the country that all such perverse behavior is already enshrined in the Civil Rights Act due to the flexible grammatical nature of the word "sex."
President Obama illegally used his power of executive orders to mandate this false interpretation across the federal government.
And lower Circuit Courts have issued rulings that drastically reinterpreted this clause.
However, none of this is supported in the legislation that was voted upon by Congress and signed into law. And no legislation has ever been passed since to alter this language.
ON THE MATTER OF HARRIS FUNERAL HOMES
In Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC, the funeral home is fighting for their right to terminate the employment of employees who choose to identify and present themselves at work as the wrong gender.
Furthermore, the owner of the business is a strong Christian whose faith holds that "transgenderism" is immoral -- he believes that endorsing such behavior in his business would be a violation of his faith.
Clearly the First Amendment protects the right of Christian business owners to employ workers whom they feel morally comfortable with. Furthermore, "transgender" is clearly not a protected category under Title VII and thus this law cannot be used to punish Harris Funeral.
ON THE MATTER OF ALTITUDE EXPRESS v. ZARDA
In Altitude Express v. Zarda, a terminated employee sought revenge on his employer by claiming he was only fired over his homosexual behavior. Regardless of whether this is true or not, Title VII, rightfully understood, in no way protects the practitioners of homosexuality from being terminated from work over such practices.
IN SUMMARY ON BOTH CASES.
Delgaudio concluded: Public Advocate of the United States filed an Amicus brief in support of Harris Funeral Homes and in support of Altitude Express. In fact, ours was the only brief filed in defense of Altitude Express.
This is America's chance to set the story straight on Title VII, and Public Advocate will be in this fight every step of the way.
With President Trump's two appointments of Constitutionalists to the Supreme Court, this is an excellent time to address this issue. Activist judges should not be allowed to legislate from the bench.
Public Advocate Amicus Briefs in Harris Funeral v. EEOC and, separately, Atltitude Express v. Zarda posted here: http://publicadvocateusa.org/news/article.php?article=11468
Hon. Eugene Delgaudio
SOURCE Public Advocate