I am astonished by how many people think a deadly pandemic is the right time to foment the spirit of rebellion and pick a fight with the government over what many will inevitably see as our right to infect others. That’s what it looks like to our neighbors. They do not see this as a testimony of our unshakable faith, but as evidence of callous unconcern for their lives and the lives of the police, grocery workers, mailmen, health workers, and garbage men with whom we all interact.
Author: Maggie Gallagher (Maggie Gallagher)
The truth about something as important as marriage cannot be the price we pay to live with each other. The challenge of our time is to find new ways to combine truth and love. Giving up marriage is too high a price to pay. And it is not the last good we will be asked to surrender, unless we find the courage to stand.
A new proposal for reducing unnecessary divorce gets to the heart of the problem: the current system seeks to meet a divorcing couple’s every need—except for time and education on reconciliation.
The decline of manhood and norms around sex, marriage, and family produces for young women what may in fact have to be endured. But it shouldn't be celebrated.
Monday's Presidential Forum broke new ground.
Presidential candidates in the next election should uphold marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
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.