fbpx
Search Results For:

Search Results for: constitution – Page 30

Is there a moral obligation for the US not to enact Donald Trump’s proposed ban on Muslim travel into the US?
Voters will not respond favorably to a political party that offers them moral principles—especially principles rooted in the past—without also showing a real concern for their concrete interests.
Rank and file Republican activists and voters revere marriage and will act to defend it. GOP candidates should understand that failing to defend marriage can come at a very high price.
In evaluating potential nominees to the Supreme Court, Republican presidents should seriously consider state supreme court justices. Their independence gives a clearer indication of how they would behave if appointed to the high court.
Like John C. Calhoun, who famously embraced slavery as a “positive good,” the abortion movement of 2016 has shifted from seeing abortion as a “necessary evil” to celebrating it as good for women and society.
President Obama has sacrificed the well-being of our nation’s youth on the altar of ideology.
A groundbreaking study of America’s first great political debate under our Constitution provides indispensable political education and guidance for our polarized and confused politics today.
A humane civil society requires an ecosystem of religious freedom.
Kim R. Holmes's new book interweaves abstract philosophy with history, empirical data, and concrete narrative.
Who is willing—and able—to step up and be this candidate?
Same-sex marriage is not the only option for gays and lesbians who seek the personal fulfillment and familial happiness that is the universal desire of the human heart.
The Governor and Attorney General of Texas should obey the law, not the Supreme Court’s ambiguous abstractions. They should continue to secure the fundamental liberty of vulnerable Texans and make the abortion industry assert its super-claim-rights in court.
The Obama administration not only enforces but unilaterally expands some civil rights laws, such as when “sex” became “gender identity” in Title IX. Yet it promotes exceptions, loopholes, and countervailing arguments for other civil rights protections, such as conscience rights for those who oppose abortion.
After it was accepted that criminalizing speech was a desirable way to produce better citizens, finding a stopping point has proven almost impossible. Although the US has the legal protections for freedom of speech that Europe lacks, a culture of censorship is emerging here as well.
This Fourth of July, if you believe that the work we do improves the political discourse that is so vital to the preservation of our republic, won’t you make a gift to support the work of Public Discourse?
There comes a time where gross disregard for human life and for our constitutional order should stir us from docile obedience and impel us to resistance.
The Supreme Court’s latest abortion decision is a significant setback for women and the unborn.
An excellent new book, written with admirable clarity, demonstrates the compatibility—indeed the happy and mutually fulfilling companionship—of faith and reason, even and especially in matters of public life.
In our emerging legal climate, Christians are to be admired for their dedication to moral principle, and they are welcome to act in accordance with it at home and at church. But once they venture into public, our new legal overlords tell us, they must act according to a different set of norms.
There will be no true justice—and no real political discourse—until the Rawlsian illusion of neutrality is rejected and the Rawlsian tyranny strangling political discourse is overthrown. The second of two parts.
John Rawls’s philosophy of jurisprudence permeates America’s top universities and law schools. The acceptance of his principles foreordained the Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage and will do the same in future cases involving euthanasia, transgender rights, and polygamy. Part one of two.
Despite arguments to the contrary, pro-lifers simply cannot support federal funding for Planned Parenthood. If the price for a seat at the public justice table is taxpayer funding for the nation’s leading abortion provider, it may be time to think about another table.
If a non-teleological process produced human morality, then how can we find a measuring rod for morality outside of nature that allows us to prefer “moral” behaviors to “immoral” behaviors?
The gross misappropriation of executive power to utterly remake the meaning of very basic legal terms threatens not only the structure of our government. It threatens the rule of law itself. This distortion of legal language is a particular threat to laws concerning women.