Those of us who still possess some ability to think critically and dispassionately about important issues should, I think, be concerned for the republic that we have received from the hands of previous, and dare I say, more godly generations.
At Public Discourse, Jon Shields questions how human sentiments dominate the philosophical truths of the pro-life movement. How can we more effectively spread a universal pro-life message to all than just being swayed by "human sentiments"? Additionally, does his ideas extend to the debates on gay marriage?
In an era when representative government is despised and democratic accountability has resulted in the creation of undemocratic and unaccountable elites, do not be surprised that monarchy becomes ever more popular.
Donna Harrison writes on NRO: The recent New York Times article by Pam Belluck, asserting that so-called abortifacient drugs may not be abortive at all, is a wonderful example of convolution of facts to obscure reality.