I’ll admit it right up front: I love Star Trek. There…I feel much better now. I also have to admit that I did not watch as much of the original series as I did the subsequent reboots. I did, however, watch all of the movies made by the cast of the original series, and when I think of the phrase “the needs of the many” I always come back to Star Trek II. Now for those of you who haven’t seen it, which is probably because you have no desire to at this point, there is a scene at the end in which Spock is dying. It’s an emotional scene between Mr. Spock and Kirk, and here is the dialogue:
Spock: Do not grieve, Admiral. It is logical. The needs of the many, outweigh...
Kirk: The needs of the few.
Spock: Or the one.
Some people may say it isn’t wise to get your philosophy or theology from Star Trek, and normally they would be right, but I say to them: “warp speed ahead Captain!”
There is some sound logic in the quote above. Normally, we wouldn’t make public policy based on just one person. Public policy is supposed to be made for the most good for the most people. That’s how it should be. Lately, though, we have seen a trend that is exactly the opposite.
Public policy is now written to advance the agenda of the individual, at the expense of the masses.
Take the bathroom debate that is happening in cities, states, and municipalities all over the United States. Schools and businesses are being forced to allow individuals to use the opposite restrooms than that of their biological identity. To deny them is to be labeled hateful, bigoted, ignorant, and many other choice words. No thought, however, is given to the people who would have to actually share a bathroom with an unexpected visitor. Little girls and boys having to use a public restroom could find themselves face to face with a person of the opposite sex. But it doesn’t stop with public restrooms. Locker rooms in our schools are at risk as well. According to a Washington Post article:
On Monday, the Obama administration again weighed in on the issue with the release of a report slamming a suburban Chicago public school district for not providing a transgender student with access to the girls’ locker rooms.
The report, which caps a two-year investigation, found that Township High School District 211 in Palatine, Ill., unfairly denied the transgender teenager — who was undergoing hormone therapy but had not undergone gender reassignment surgery — access to school facilities in violation of Title IX, that bars discrimination in federally funded education programs, causing her “isolation,” “ostracism” and at least one “tearful breakdown.”
Recapping the article, the Obama administration is threatening to cut off federal funding to Township High School for not allowing a boy to use the girl’s locker rooms. There has been a 14 page report filed on behalf of the boy, and here is one of the findings of the investigation:
Investigation revealed that, except with respect to locker room access, the District has treated Student A consistent with her gender identity as a girl. This includes identifying Student A by her female name and with female pronouns, providing her with full access to all girl’s restrooms, and allowing her to participate in girls interscholastic athletics. However, although Student A must change clothes for mandatory PE class and for her teams practices and competitions, the District has denied Student A access to its girls locker rooms.
This school district has capitulated in every conceivable manner, except for allowing this student to use the opposite gender locker rooms. Again, this is proof that the battle will never stop until the opposite side gets every single thing they want and that you must be happy about it. Nowhere, in either the report or the Washington Post story, does it mention how the girls who would have to share a locker room with a boy feel about the matter choosing instead to report on the harassment this student has felt since they began to “transition” to a girl. Instead, the OCR (Office of Civil Rights that is behind the report) stated that the girls should basically just get over it:
“Those female students wishing to protect their own private bodies from exposure to being observed in a state of undress by other girls in the locker rooms, including transgender girls, could change behind a privacy curtain,” according to the report.
Brian Harris, the superintendent of a nearby school district told the Daily Herald, as reported by the Washington Post, “this is not a kid issue. This is an adult issue.”
I wholeheartedly disagree.
Here is the federal government, a school official, and the Washington Post telling society that the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many. This isn’t new business though, and we can actually see this played out in Scripture.
The ancient kings of Israel were guilty of this as well. Read 2 Kings 2 about Jehoram, the son of Ahab. Verses 2 and 3 say that he did evil in the sight of the Lord, and that he made Israel to sin. What we see here is that he did what he wanted, regardless of the consequences to the people of Israel.
When the focus turns towards the good of the one, it is usually the many that suffer. When the kings of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, bad things happened to the people, and when they did follow the Lord, then good things happened to the people.
Instead of sacrificing the good of the many for the few, the few can make sacrifices to the benefit of the many. Take the Gospel for example.
It was God’s will that one man, the God-Man, should die for the salvation of many. The death of Jesus is the only solution to the sin problem that the world faces and God provided that salvation for the believer at the expense of His own Son.
By relying on that sacrifice we, the masses, are emboldened to fight these changes by the few. An article on One News Now reiterates this, showing that we don’t have to succumb to the few:
The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance was soundly rejected Tuesday by a vote of 61 percent to 39 percent. The defeat came after a nearly 18-month battle in the nation's fourth-largest city.
The ordinance would have applied to businesses that serve the public, such as restaurants and hotels, private employers, housing, city employment and city contracting. It would have allowed residents to file a complaint if they felt they had been discriminated against based on the various protected categories. Religious institutions would have been exempt. Violators would have faced fines up to $5,000.
The battle by some to impose the whims of the few on the many is not over but we have the solution to this problem, and that is the death of God’s Son for the redemption of mankind. Bringing all of these problems back to the sin issue at the hearts of men is the only way that they can be solved, and in the meantime, we keep fighting.