CMDA's The Point

Message at Supreme Court: Constitution Protects Both Minority and Majority Viewpoints

November 7, 2019

by Jonathan Imbody


I recently spoke outside the Supreme Court in the face of raucous protests on the day of oral arguments in a case involving transgender individuals and alleged sex discrimination, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSpeeches had resumed outside the court after a bomb scare had prompted police to clear the area.

Members of the LGBT community relentlessly hassled and harried speakers on our side of the argument by launching wailing sirens, shouting with bullhorns in the faces of speakers and chanting mantras like “homophobe” while we spoke (a special irony given that our speakers included a lesbian and a former transgender man). I imagine their side had some reasonable arguments to make, but I could hear none over the sirens, bullhorn and chanting.

My remarks follow:

In a recent national poll of faith-based health professionals, virtually all of them declared, “I care for all patients in need, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identification, or family makeup, with sensitivity and compassion, even when I cannot validate their choices.”

So they treat all patients with care and compassion, but they need the freedom to recognize and rely on biology when treating their patients.

But some people think that to show compassion and respect for transgender individuals, the government has to force everyone to ignore not only the clear evidence of biology but also the clear meaning of the law.

In that same poll, 91 percent of those faith-based health professionals also said they oppose “Redefining ‘sex’ in federal discrimination laws to mean gender identity, defined as one’s internal sense of being ‘male, female, neither or a combination of male and female.'”

That’s why a few ideological members of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and activist judges have rejected the plain meaning of sex discrimination that Congress, women and doctors have all understood and relied upon for decades.

In the process, these activists are threatening to undermine the very protections against sex discrimination that Congress enacted, which have transformed opportunities for women.

So this case today is as much about the law and individual freedom as it is about gender.
We will have no individual freedom in our country if the government can require you to believe whatever the government wants you to believe.

The genius of our nation’s constitutional protection of individual rights and freedom is not only that the minority is protected from the tyranny of the majority, but also that the majority is protected from the tyranny of the minority. The goal of our democratic republic is protecting the greatest freedom for each one of us, protecting us from government coercion, whether our views align with the majority or with a minority.

So let’s all work together to protect each other’s freedom to choose our beliefs, and to act in accordance with those beliefs, without government coercion.

Speakers included the mother (center, in red) of a girl who transitioned against the mother’s will through the intervention of government authorities.  
Speeches resumed after police cleared the area for a bomb scare.  
Dr. Allen Josephson (left), former chief of the Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology at the University of Louisville, spoke about how he lost his position after expressing his professional opinions on the treatment of youth experiencing gender dysphoria.  



About Jonathan Imbody

Jonathan previously served as CMDA's Federal Policy Analyst and as CMDA's liaison with the federal government in Washington, D.C. A veteran writer of more than 30 years, Jonathan authored Faith Steps, which encourages and equips Christians to engage in public policy issues. He has published more than 100 commentaries in The Washington Post, USA Today, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Chicago Sun-Times and many other national publications. Jonathan's writing focuses on public policy issues including freedom of faith, conscience and speech; human trafficking; abortion; assisted suicide; stem cell research; the role of faith in health; international health; healthcare policy; sexual risk avoidance and HIV/AIDS. Jonathan received his bachelor's degree in journalism and speech communications from the Pennsylvania State University, a master's degree from Penn State in counseling and education and a certificate in biblical and theological studies from the Alliance Theological Seminary in New York. Jonathan's wife Amy is an author and leads the Redemptive Education movement. They have four children and four grandchildren.

1 Comment

  1. Avatar Larry C Roberts, MD, MA on November 27, 2019 at 9:34 am

    We no longer live in a democratic republic, but a statist society in which the state trumps the individual. The state, divorced from natural law, has become the highest moral authority and the font from which all rights are said to flow. The belief in natural rights bestowed upon us by God, such as the right to life, mean nothing to the statists who follow the teachings of Marx and Lenin. The LGBT movement, like all Marxist-Leninist movements, is about class warfare and the pursuit of raw power. There is no room for Christians in this world view, but we must neither despair nor surrender, for our King has already triumphed over the forces of evil.

Leave a Comment