Many have tried to stand back and not get involved. It is natural to want to allow things to play out without getting involved. Getting involved can be costly. It can cause us to pay a price. We could get hurt; we could be sued. And in this day of political activism, there is the fear of marches and riots.
Yet, there comes a time when the issue is so clear that one cannot long standby and do nothing. For ten states, that time came last week.
Christian News reports
Ten more states have filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration over its requirement that school districts allow male students who identify as female and vice versa to use the restroom that correlates with their “gender identity.”
Nebraska, Arkansas, Kansas, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming now join the list of states that are challenging directives from the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice issued in May.
As I reported, eleven states had filed a lawsuit challenging the directives set down by the two federal departments. This is going to be a pivotal legal battle and one that Obama and his administration will put a lot of effort into winning. But this is going to be hard with the recent events in Charlotte, the place this fight started.
Many have tried to make this a battle of rights and discrimination. It is neither. It is a battle of law. This concept of law is lost because the Churches’ failure to adhere to God’s Law. In the absence of Legal absolutes, we are left with opinions.
And according to Christian News, Nebraska’s Attorney General Peterson framed it this way.
“The recent action by these two federal agencies to require showers, locker rooms, and bathrooms be open to both sexes based solely on the student’s choice, circumvents this established law by ignoring the appropriate legislative process necessary to change such a law,” Peterson stated. “It also supersedes local school districts’ authority to address student issues on an individualized, professional and private basis.”
In other words, the administration reads the meaning back into the law that they want it to say rather than letting the words mean what they mean.
We hope that this will cause the administration to rethink their stand, but if history serves us, we know he will not.