Search Results For:

Search Results for: same-sex marriage – Page 9

John Rawls’s philosophy of jurisprudence permeates America’s top universities and law schools. The acceptance of his principles foreordained the Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage and will do the same in future cases involving euthanasia, transgender rights, and polygamy. Part one of two.
Both the majority opinion in last summer's same-sex marriage case and recent public statements point to a troubling lack of coherence in Justice Anthony Kennedy's thinking.
As a legal opinion, Obergefell is an utter failure, relying as it does on a tenuous and historically ungrounded jurisprudence of “dignity.” The debate over same-sex marriage is not over. A constitutional ruling so shoddily reasoned, so completely and easily dismantled by the dissents, must paper over a cause that cannot ultimately win in an open debate.
Evangelicals are learning to model both grace and truth when discussing homosexuality and same-sex marriage.
Same-sex marriage may pose a grave threat to religious liberty, but the cultural conditions and assumptions that make that threat possible are rooted in heterosexual behavior and the idea that everyone has a right to consequence-free sexual intimacy.
It remains unclear whether sexual orientation is genetically determined. Even if it is, that doesn’t justify advocacy for same-sex marriage.
The oral arguments on Proposition 8 at the Supreme Court suggest that there is very good reason to believe that the declaration of a “right” to same-sex marriage will set us on the path to polygamy.
An Augustinian reading of the present moment would help social conservatives resist both triumphalism and despair. The renewal and invigoration now visible among many social conservatives may be a genuine mercy: a sign that the moral imagination—worn down though it is by the exhaustion of ambient progressivism—has not been entirely extinguished, and that many still perceive the disorder produced when freedom is detached from truth, embodiment, family, duty, and the created order.  
The work, eleven years in, begins with honesty; the admission that Obergefell was not a neutral expansion of rights but a substitution of one set of duties for another, and that the duties it displaced were owed chiefly to children
Religious freedom for everyone, everywhere? 
Pascal’s theology is sublime, beautiful, and all-consuming. But it reflects the life of a celibate mystic rather than that of the statesman who must transmit Christian culture. Statesmen after all must wager. 
My oath, with God as witness, to uphold the rule of law must matter more than the judgment of any peer or historian.
Policies matter, as do choices by individuals, families, and congregations. But ultimately our hope, both for rolling back the sexual revolution and then keeping it at bay, is in the grace of God. 
President Trump plays extreme hardball by American standards, some of it blatantly authoritarian. Conservatives lose credibility when they deny this. But Trump’s election and reelection were, in part, a reaction to decades of undemocratic progressive change in the courts, bureaucracy, and public education—itself a kind of hardball. Liberals who deny or downplay these phenomena only feed populist anger.
The aftershocks of the sexual revolution continue to play out not only on the legal and political planes but in churches, schools, and charities. For American Protestants in particular, debates about what counts as authority and what faithfulness means for human sexuality are as unavoidable as they are important.  
The single most durable legacy of Obergefell, it would seem, is the damage it has done to the culture of marriage and family in the United States. 
This is the conservatism we need: not nostalgia and anachronistic social conservatism, not progressive liberalism with better branding, but a bold conservatism of clearly articulated ideals for human flourishing.
The natural law account of parental rights is a substantively robust and reason-based position—one that must be defended for all Americans of all faiths and shades of belief.
Parents’ authority over their children’s education is being challenged as much today as it was a century ago. Pierce remains a solid basis on which parents can insist on their proper place in the family and society. 
To be sure, there remain some true-believing via media Protestants who are morally and theologically conservative and continue to attempt to strike the balance between high and low. But whatever their future, they will not be resuming their place at the commanding heights of the culture.
Law necessarily has a moral foundation. Exploring that foundation can help us understand what law can and should be. The project of finding anchoring truths is well worth undertaking, and the natural law tradition has something to contribute to that.
Even if Catholic postliberalism is no longer the intellectual avant-garde, populism is poised to shape the next few years of American politics.
In their denominations and elsewhere in the church, some progressive Baby Boomers have been caught by surprise at younger people not sharing their cultural values. But should they have been surprised at this generational rift in the church? Looking at how different generations have been formed morally, socially, and culturally may help address this question.