 |
| SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts "divining" on the Hobby Lobby opinion |
For those of you who dare not muddle through the legalize, which I must say, Justice Ruth Ginsburg's dissent was eloquently scathing, have fun.
The controversy at hand is not, or rather, should not, be centered on an all male majority "He-Man-Women-haters Club" nor should it be on a woman's ability to have equal access to necessary medicine and medical procedures similar to men as Viagra is covered for men.
The issue at hand, which has failed to see the light of the legal and political pundits, is child welfare.
Yes, the Hobby Lobby case is about child welfare.
Some years ago, 2007, I worked with Michigan House Republicans to craft a Resolution on protecting Parental Rights. This was taken to the federal level to be the Parental Rights Amendment.
The underlying base of the Parental Rights Amendment was the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
RFRA had been successfully used in cases involving Child Protective Services improperly removing children from parents. The premise was, and is, parenting is a religious belief which bars government intervention, unless there is a "compelling governmental interest".
During the Michigan crafting period of its Parental Rights Resolution, the state was in its darkest days of defalcation of federal funding of child welfare. It was a free-for-all where anyone who had a child welfare contract with the state could and would double, triple, phantom-bill, typically, Medicaid.
Court cases were fictitious whereby the family court policy of Lincoln Hall of Justice, under leadership of, then, Referee Kelly Ann Ramsey and Judge Judy Hartsfield where children, as young as 2 years of age, were being prosecuted as juvenile delinquents and contemporaneously adjudicated as wards of the court for foster care placement without a single person (no attorney, no parent, no Assistant Attorney General, no human being) ever being in the courtroom because all the orders were "rubber stamped". Parents were tried of child abuse where there were never any charges nor pleas nor evidence entered into the record. (emphasis added.)
The Democratic leadership of Wayne County refused to publicly address the issue because money was being funneled to election campaigns via organizations like Black Family Development and even Michigan Supreme Court Justice Maura Corrigan (now, DHS Director).
West Michigan Republicans, many evangelical Christians, began to examine the application of RFRA into numerous other areas under the guise of economic prosperity of the family through the promotion of Christian values.
Now, the power of RFRA applications have been honed to parsimoniously craft a national agenda of child welfare via the Hobby Lobby.
Unbeknownst to the anti-abortion, pro-life, advocates, their rally cry to "save the babies" in basted in the juices of "compassionate cleansing". This is the advocacy for children of poor, who are typically cognitively and psychologically developmentally disabled, to become productive, low wage, future workers of corporations and purge the human gene pool by naturally controlling human reproduction through the installation of "good Christian values" of abstinence, marriage and reducing life expectancy with chemical constraints of psychotropic medications, complete with social repression of sexual orientation, creativity and personal expression.
 |
| The logic of future cheap labor |
It begins with the removal of the child from the legal custody of the parent, either in vitro or ex vitro.
The Christian campaign of "saving the child" begins with the codification of a zygote/fetus for personhood. The grant of legal custody and guardianship of the child is quickly being reclaimed as chattel as part of the national platform for the conservative movement but what is even more foreshadowing of this ruling is the possibility of that grant at the moment of conception. This is the thrust of religious fervor behind the pro life movement. "
If a woman is to abort or prevent, then her legal rights to the child have defaulted to the state. The promotion of child protective services, eventually, under the theory of Christian compassion, removes that child from its human host as economic preservation of future productivity in human capital as the likelihood of that child growing up to pay taxes is not statistically significant according to conservative think tanks.
This conservation of Christian values revisits an era of err for which I identify as the beginning of civil rights, specifically the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Emancipation Proclamation "erred" as it did not address the future grant of custody and guardianship of posterity.
Children are acknowledged in the U.S. Constitution as "our posterity" and this is what this precursive ruling addresses: the "peculiar institution" of child welfare, in the name of a Christian God.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
1 comment:
I see you SOPOP FKA ODJ, you squamulous quisling. Fear not death, for you have no soul.
Post a Comment