The sad irony of contraception’s desire to cling to sex without its procreative consequences is that in its separating of the unitive from the procreative, both union and procreation have been removed from sex itself, rendering the act empty and meaningless.
This week’s 7-2 decision in favor of Trinity Lutheran Church goes a long way toward restoring order to the Supreme Court’s religious liberty jurisprudence.
Our enslavement to technology leaves us alienated, depressed, and distracted, first of all by disrupting the cultivation of virtue in the home. Andy Crouch has written a thoughtful and practical guide for families looking to redirect their attention from technology to what really matters.
An article recently published in a prestigious medical journal argues that conscientious objection should be eliminated from the practice of medicine. The argument is unsound, its conclusion dangerous and inhumane.
Fr. James Martin, SJ, has attempted to build a bridge between the Catholic Church and the LGBT community, but by shirking the difficulty of confrontation, he has traded genuine encounter for a thin and generic substitute.
When President Trump announced his exit from the Paris Climate Accord, the usual suspects responded with their usual agitation and doomsaying. How can so many people subscribe to an idea—and so vehemently—that rests on so little?
Not only are parents solicitous for their children’s many needs, but until children reach the age of reason, they must “borrow” their parents’ reason. The natural unity of parent and child thus parallels the organic unity of a mature human being.
Thinking about artificial wombs helps clarify the moral significance of the bodily and the biological—in particular, the significance of pregnancy and maternity.
Understanding the author of America’s Declaration of Independence is easier said than done. He may have hated big government, but big government was born of the rationalism that he loved.
John Stuart Mill foreshadows the deeply intolerant faith and agenda of contemporary liberalism.
The effort to combat climate change aspires to feats of social control, coordination, and foresight that are unprecedented in the history of politics. Our expectations for the movement ought to be tempered by our knowledge of human limitations.
Recent years have seen countless—and specious—legislative, judicial, and administrative attempts to block those with unwanted same-sex attraction from seeking healing and transformation through professional therapy.
Those trying to block the nomination of Russell Vought are not protecting religious pluralism but are rather demanding that all public servants be relativists.
Athletes should be judged on talent, heart, and work ethic—not politics. Our national sports teams should represent the whole country, not any one political niche.
Doctors currently have no way of predicting which gender dysphoric children will persist in their gender dysphoria, and yet they are pushing the minimum age for irreversible hormone therapy and surgery as low as possible.
It is often alleged that the American founders lacked a unified and coherent political theory. To the contrary, a recent book by Thomas West shows that the founders broadly agreed on a philosophy of natural rights, calling for both the protection of liberty and the promotion of virtue.
In a heated Twitter exchange with Senator Ted Cruz, Harvard professor Joyce Chaplin recently claimed that recognition by the “international community” created the United States in 1783. From an international lawyer’s standpoint, this is nonsense.
Nick Spencer’s recent collection of essays reminds us to appreciate the complex relationship between Christianity and modernity.
The relationship between Edmund Burke and Adam Smith underscores a fundamental connection between virtue and liberty.
Men are men, and women are women. There is no third option.
Our universities are struggling under competing epistemological trends. Teaching students to master these requires developing their power to listen.
If conservatives want to seriously help address issues related to Islam, the Muslim world, and encounters with the West, they need to escape their narrow information networks.
Agree or disagree with Donald Trump's approach to Islamic immigration, the United States must come to terms with such immigration's cultural and demographic implications.
On Thomistic principles, Trump’s ban on Syrian refugees whose lives are in danger is not morally justifiable. Bans on other travelers and immigrants, however, are not as problematic.
President Trump’s executive order on immigration is deeply troubling, because it inflicts suffering on “the least of these” for political gain. This demeans the office of the President and robs the United States of its moral high ground in the War on Terror.
Is there a moral obligation for the US not to enact Donald Trump’s proposed ban on Muslim travel into the US?
Our nation faces an assimilation crisis as many Middle Eastern immigrants reject our culture, which they perceive as libertine. We could improve the situation through a renewed commitment to our founding principles, particularly the reunification of faith and reason.
A best-selling new novel taps into an angst that has become an obsession in Europe.
Europe can only emerge from its downward spiral by putting religious faith and respect for history and tradition at the center of our communal and personal lives.