Supreme Court enables states to defund Planned Parenthood

The Supreme Court is expected to announce major decisions this morning on birthright citizenship, age verification for pornography sites, and several other contentious issues. However, its ruling yesterday is already making headlines: the court handed down a decision that could pave the way for states to defund Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the US.

The Court did not address the organization directly. Rather, the justices ruled that beneficiaries of Medicaid cannot sue if they believe their right to a free choice of healthcare provider has been violated. States are therefore free to stop providing Medicaid taxpayer funds to organizations whose services they do not wish to underwrite. Since nearly half of those treated at Planned Parenthood use Medicaid, this could significantly defund the organization in states that oppose abortion.

Those of us who believe life begins at conception will be grateful for legal rulings that protect the preborn. But we are unwise to base our hopes for our culture on such decisions.

When the Supreme Court overturns the states

For example, yesterday marked the tenth anniversary of Obergefell v. Hodges, the US Supreme Court’s ruling that discovered a right to same-sex marriage in the US Constitution. The ruling legalized so-called “marriage equality” even though, as Axios reports, thirty-two states have constitutional and/or legislative bans against it.

Measures in Idaho, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota have been introduced that would reverse the decision. In Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas, lawmakers have introduced bills creating a category called “covenant marriage.”

Obergefell is akin to the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that discovered a right to abortion in the Constitution. At the time, thirty states had laws prohibiting abortion; twenty others permitted it only under certain circumstances.

The two rulings highlight the tension inherent in our legislative and political system: When should the Supreme Court overrule laws passed by states?

The former is comprised of unelected justices who serve lifetime appointments; the latter are the product of lawmakers elected by the people they represent. In a democratic republic, you would think the latter would prevail over the former. But in rulings such as the 1967 Loving v. Virginia decision legalizing interracial marriage, the Court sometimes overturns state laws in ways that many of us consider to be appropriate.

The “indispensable supports” of democracy

The question points to a topic we have reason to discuss often in this space: How do we best promote the morality that is foundational to democracy?

As I noted yesterday, our nation’s founders believed that, in the words of George Washington, “religion and morality are indispensable supports” to our system of governance. This is because we are ruled not by kings or theocrats but by laws our leaders enact, our courts interpret, and our authorities enforce. Because “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23), the leaders we elect are as fallen as the people who elect them, and the laws they produce will often reflect this fact.

From abortion to marriage to euthanasia, we are watching Western society continue to slide down this slippery slope today.

We can and should enact laws that protect society against our fallen natures and worst impulses. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. observed, “Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.” I’m glad we have laws forbidding murder and theft—even though such laws do not transform those who would kill and steal, they make it more difficult for them to act on their desires.

But as the persistence of crime shows, no amount of human effort can change the human heart. And when society as a whole embraces unbiblical immorality, the laws it enacts can reinforce sin rather than restraining sinners.

“Knocking on the door of an empty house”

Here we find a foundational reason the gospel is so necessary and so urgent.

A drowning person can only be saved by someone who is not drowning. Only the Christian faith offers us a sinless Savior whose salvation makes us a “new creation” (2 Corinthians 5:17) as the “children of God” (John 1:12).

Two simple but sanctifying consequences follow.

One: Our greatest service to humanity lies in persuading humans to trust in Jesus. Everything else we can do for our fellow man is done best as a means to this end. We are not to be cultural warriors trying to defeat our ideological enemies but cultural missionaries committed to “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15) wherever and however we can.

As T. J. Green noted, “Words not spoken in love are like knocking on the door of an empty house. You can make a lot of noise, but no one will respond.”

Two: We can best speak the truth in love when we recognize our deep personal need for such love. I am no less a sinner than Ali Khamenei. I am just as tempted by immorality as those who champion elective abortion and same-sex marriage. The transformation begun by the Spirit at my salvation must continue today as I submit to him and seek his will over my own.

Paul advised us, “Walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Galatians 5:16). There is no way to experience the latter without choosing the former, but choosing the former always accomplishes the latter.

Oswald Chambers noted, “Sanctification means being made one with Jesus so that the disposition that ruled him will rule us. It will cost everything that is not of God in us.” But this is a price well worth paying.

As the Puritan Thomas Watson observed,

“Till sin be bitter, Christ will not be sweet.”

Will Christ “be sweet” to you today?

Note: For practical ways to join God in the transformation of our minds and hearts, please see my latest website article, “Is artificial intelligence ruining our brains?”

Quote for the day:

“Sanctification is the real change in man from the sordidness of sin to the purity of God’s image.” —William Ames (1576–1633)

Our latest website resources:

• Is artificial intelligence ruining our brains?
• Trump bombs Iran, NYC election shocker, Bezos wedding & casual-dining favorites
• Shooter assaulted church filled with children for VBS: Four reasons to trust Jesus at all costs
• What happens when a theoretical physicist finds faith in Christ?
• Israel vs. Iran, MAGA’s divide, AI warnings & the Pentagon Pizza Index