fbpx
Search Results For:

Search Results for: contest – Page 9

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.
By invoking the principles of the Declaration of Independence, Republicans can wholeheartedly embrace the ideas of integration, inclusion, and respect in a way that remains consistent with their commitments to morality, patriotism, and liberty.
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.
Though he certainly finds fault in distorted versions of Christian ideals, Shakespeare pays tribute to the truth, beauty, and goodness of genuine Christian virtue.
A new study examines the risk of depression and other negative outcomes among adolescents and young adults raised by same-sex couples.
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.
Christianity has never seen the pursuit of virtue as incompatible with private possession of wealth.
If the federal government, via the interpretive activity of one of its executive departments, can issue mandates to the states regarding bathrooms, it is hard to imagine an area of local governance shielded from federal scrutiny.
Becoming parents shocks us out of our normal state of being. It compels us to love others more deeply and to act upon that love more fully.
Rights in the modern world are meaningless, existing only at the will of a sovereign lawmaker. A return to “perfectionist jurisprudence,” in which rights are derived from plural authorities, at least some of which are higher that the human sovereign, and constructed on genuine human goods, would restore the structural integrity and normative currency of human rights.
Supporters of “same-sex marriage” claim that its opponents are bigots, like racists or misogynists, whose views should not be tolerated in the public square. In fact, marriage traditionalists are not bigoted but rather are realistic and honest about what marriage actually is.
Very soon, the classic scenarios of artificial intelligence from science fiction will become reality. Recognizing the moral and ethical concerns such achievements will raise can help us begin to address them. Whether the development of new technology will be good or bad will depend on how we use it.
The American Founders created a careful system to prevent the election of the power-hungry. Progressive-led changes to the electoral process in the twentieth century, however, make it all too easy for ambitious demagogues to seize control—as first Obama did, and now Trump is doing to far worse ends.
Because it is often used imprecisely, the term “futile” can cause confusion and exacerbate conflict in disagreements about end-of-life care. It is more helpful for patients, families, and physicians to discuss the benefits and burdens of medical procedures.
Anyone interested in defending marriage and family life must first expose the built-in biases and hidden moral teaching within the contemporary liberal perspective.
In debates over marriage and abortion, we should make arguments based on constitutional texts and judicial precedent. But would it be legitimate also for judges to consider overarching questions of justice and natural law?
To properly understand due process, we must grasp the key distinctions between law and decrees and between law and morality. If judges are authoritative arbiters of the “logic of morals,” we have subjected ourselves to an unelected, life-tenured legal elite whose reach exceeds our grasp.
The liberal campaign to redefine marriage is not over. Attempts to secure constitutional rights to polygamy and polyamory are on the way. Conservatives must pursue a new strategy to thwart private corporations from undermining public morality if we hope to prevent further changes to the institution of marriage and protect other vital elements of public morality.
When voters and legislators act on religiously informed moral convictions in making the law, it may entail a blending of religion and politics that is disquieting to the secular liberal mind, but it closes no gap in the “separation of church and state.”
Conservatives are called bigots because those who embrace the new sexual mores are beholden to the new tolerance as a plausibility structure. Postmodern liberals cannot comprehend the idea that one could simultaneously reject a belief and accept the person who holds it.
If passed, the Equality Act would empower the government to discriminate against those who do not accept a sexually permissive understanding of human nature that denies sexual complementarity.
As skeptics in Ireland feared and the naïve in the United States are now realizing, “marriage equality” inevitably leads to the push for “family equality” through third-party reproduction.
There remain two views on the question of marriage, but they keep talking past each other. One holds that “love wins”—so one shouldn’t stand in the way of love. The other respects the anthropological truth about marriage.