From Christianity Today:In a 5-4 decision this morning, the Supreme Court said that a California law school can require a Christian group to open its leadership positions to all students, including those who disagree with the group’s statement of faith.From the Constitution (we know this as . . . . Continue Reading »
Oh ... Bird is the word.So much could be said. But there some times that leaving people to speak for themselves seems quite . . . . Continue Reading »
For whatever reason, the six-year venture of the Women’s Bioethics Project has come to an end with a recent announcement that they are closing their doors. But their work is not really finished, it is evolving. Kathryn Hinsch writes on the organization’s website:We need ways to . . . . Continue Reading »
Some good things, but mostly bad. I hate to say that about a Will Smith (co-producer) movie. But that’s the way it is.There was homage paid to the original Karate Kid. As a bit of parody, when (Mr. Han) Jackie Chan attempted to catch a fly with his chopsticks, he became frustrated with the . . . . Continue Reading »
Martha Nussbaum, one of America’s leading public intellectuals, has devoted considerable attention in the last few years to the role that disgust and shame play in our individual and collective lives, particularly in the law.The book that got it all started was Hiding from Humanity: Disgust, . . . . Continue Reading »
In a provocative 2006 article in the Intercollegiate Studies Review , Remi Brague asks whether non-theocratic polities are possible. If “theocracy” means “rule by clerics,” the answer is obviously Yes. But Brague doesn’t think that’s the most helpful . . . . Continue Reading »
Phillip Blond ( Red Tory: How Left and Right Have Broken Britain and How We Can Fix it ) offers a succinct summary of why liberal political order descends to tyranny. Liberalism is, on Blond’s definition, a political order erected on the assumption that human beings are fundamentally . . . . Continue Reading »
Philip Blond calls the family “a deeply radical and indeed feminist institution” because it “binds men to women and offers a cultural account of how they should behave towards one another.” On the other hand, progressive demolition of the family has left unmarried women . . . . Continue Reading »
Jameson Graber responds to my post yesterday on the individualism of the Tea Party movement: “This quote in your post caught my attention: ‘Today, populist rhetoric “fires up emotions by appealing to individual opinion, individual autonomy, and individual choice, all in the service . . . . Continue Reading »
Mark Lilla makes little effort to disguise his contempt for the Tea Party movement ( New York Review of Books , May 27). His contempt is contemptible, and his charges that the Tea Partiers have “anarchist” tendencies and are animated by “anger” are off-base. A few . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
