Albert Mohler goes off on a hissy-fit about transgenders, Title IX, and the Constitution.
Now, when you hear the Title XI [sic] cited, you need to ask what is it. It goes back to 1972. Legislation that Congress adopted, and that the President of the United States signed into law, which modified the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It put in the issue of gender. It put in the fact that the federal government and the money that would follow the federal government must come with an understanding of no discrimination of the basis of sex. Now, let’s just state the obvious as we have had to state it before. There is no way with credibility or with the slightest amount of intellectual integrity to claim that either in 1964 when the Civil Rights Act was passed, or that in 1972 when the education amendments, including Title XI, were adopted, that anyone involved in the process in any way thought that what would be described as LGBTQ would have been included. They are not included. They were not envisioned. They were not discussed. It was not a part of the national conversation. Period.
That’s true, but irrelevant. Properly put, the question is this: How do we implement the principal embraced by this legislation in light of what we know now but didn’t know then?
The abiding example is privacy, nowhere mentioned in the Constitution but everywhere implicit. This is why the Supreme Court may restrict the use of cell phone records by police, even though the Founders never heard of them.
Mohler knows that, too. What really offends him is that in this matter his childish, binary conception of gender has been disrupted (little boys have whatsits, and little girls do not). Human sexuality is a composite of many traits, however, some innate and some possibly plastic: plumbing, orientation, identity, others coming to light as research progresses. It’s no big deal, really — or, at least, it shouldn’t be. Unhappily, the stupid are like the poor: They’ll always be with us.