While this weekend's conference threatens to repeat the failures of Bretton Woods, the work of economist Wilhelm Röpke may recommend a more successful approach.
Michael New's criticism of a recent study has come in for criticism itself. He responds that the study suffers from methodological mistakes and faulty presentation.
As the recent film "Obsession" points out, Islamist radicalism poses a grave threat to the freedoms of constitutional democracies. But "Obsession" largely ignores potential solutions and a host of moderate Islamic voices that have gone unheard.
The author of a recent abortion study answers Michael New's criticisms.
Social Conservatives in America would do well to consider recent events in the U.K.
Archbishop Chaput writes to the editors of Public Discourse
Doug Kmiec writes a public letter
The Obama apologists are at it again, this time attacking Archbishop Charles Chaput for speaking out against their candidate's pro-abortion views. But the latest salvo from Doug Kmiec is a tangled web of falsehoods and fallacies.
Can the Democratic Party's awkward position on infanticide and abortion be regarded as simply a lesser matter in an ensemble of "other issues" of higher standing? Or does that position challenge the very coherence of everything else that a liberal party proclaims itself to be?
Colorado's Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) has the reputation of being America's best and most effective fiscal limit. However, it is under attack once again. On Election Day, Colorado residents will vote on Amendment 59 which would permanently nullify TABOR's revenue limit by requiring that all surplus revenues be spent on schools. This is an important election for fiscal conservatives. If Amendment 59 wins, TABOR will likely be reduced to a historical footnote. A defeat of Amendment 59, however, would have implications that will be felt well beyond Colorado. Indeed, a revitalized TABOR could give fiscal conservatives something that they have lacked--an effective model that can be used in other states.
Marriage between a man and a woman is rooted in our nature--"in biology, not bigotry"--sex between men and women makes babies, society needs babies, and babies need a father as well as a mother. But the proponents of same-sex marriage want the government to declare in law that there is no difference between same-sex and opposite-sex unions, and anyone who thinks otherwise is promoting bigotry. This will have major ramifications for those who believe in marriage in the traditional sense--especially religious citizens and organizations.
Catholics in Alliance recently released a study questioning the effectiveness of pro-life legislation and arguing that greater spending on welfare programs was a better strategy for reducing abortion. Unfortunately, their study is seriously flawed. Rigorous analysis of their own data indicates that increased welfare spending only has little to no impact on abortion. Public funding restrictions and informed-consent laws, however, are effective at reducing abortion rates.