We now live in a culture which has boldly asserted that one's identity--including self-constructed identity--is reality. It represents the human rights of an individual. This perspective has been officially recognized by the US Supreme Court.
One's personal self-image represents one's self-esteem. Modern secularist society frowns on the idea that one's self-esteem may be traduced by the law, or by anything else for that matter.
In the 1992 Planned Parenthood case, Justice Kennedy notoriously stated: "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe and of the mystery of human life." [Augusto Zimmermann, Christian Foundations of the Common Law. Volume 2: The United States. (Brisbane: Connor Court Publishing, 2018), p. 182.]But there is a sub-text lurking behind in the shadows.
In the end, someone--or some authority--is going to have to decide cases. It is assumed that the US Supreme Court will be up to that task. Hence, our lives are to be ruled over by an amoral power.
As Zimmermann puts it:
There is no claim to self-evident moral truths in the (Kennedy's) statement. The final outcome is a legal system devoid of moral truths. Such a statement is akin to establishing a "new covenant" for the American people: "We will be your court and you will be our people." The People have a "right" to decide for themselves what is right and wrong, provided, of course, it is generally accepted that there is no higher authority "in heaven and on earth" than the judges of the Supreme Court. [Ibid.]Does this fill us with hope? Not when the courts are now discovering and recognizing "human rights" under every rock and behind every gorse bush because it seemed like a good idea at the time.
No comments:
Post a Comment