The concept of intersectionality suggests a person with supposedly intersecting identities (such as being both black and a woman) is able to simultaneously experience discrimination as a result of being both a black person and a woman. Naturally, this creates a perception that black women, for instance, are categorically and uniquely different from both black men and white women. Essentially, intersectionality claims a person’s supposedly various “identities” makes them wholly different than other “kinds” of people. This is a worldly philosophy—but many evangelicals have fallen for it.

We’ve reached a point in evangelicalism when we’ve become so desensitized by abortion and so manipulated by critical race theorists that some of us would unashamedly celebrate the confirmation of an unjust Supreme Court Justice because she’s black.

Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed to America’s Supreme Court a couple of days ago—making her the first black woman to receive that honour.

However, she is the latest dishonourable character in the honourable role.

Just as she infamously claims she doesn’t know what a woman is—she also claims she doesn’t know when life begins.

In a better society, her claims would make her unfit for any consequential role. But in our depraved society, she’s a Supreme Court Justice.

Her history as a judicial activist for abortion is one of the reasons why Joe Biden nominated her (with strong support from Planned Parenthood and NARAL) in keeping with his promise to select a judge who would help strengthen and expand abortion laws in America.

And yet because she’s black, some evangelical leaders and organizations essentially joined abortion and LGBTQ activists to celebrate Judge ackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

The president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission from the Southern Baptist Convention said:

“Despite the philosophical and legal differences individuals like me will have with her, Judge Jackson’s confirmation is a history-making moment. We should appreciate it as such. If we lose the ability to do that, we lose something that makes America an exceptional nation.”

Another influential evangelical said: “I disagree with her judicial philosophy but I celebrate the history of Judge Jackson’s appointment and am praying for wisdom and discernment as she serves on the highest court.”

Clearly, these evangelicals and others who shared similar reactions disagree with Judge Jackson’s judicial activism.

However, if Judge Jackson believed five year old children do not have a right to life, would they simply label that as “philosophical and legal differences”? Would they simply say they disagree with her “judicial philosophy“?

Would they celebrate her supposedly historic confirmation if she believed five year old children do not have a right to life?

Read More