Michael and Shaun Willis, brothers and attorneys at Willis & Willis, PLC in Kalamazoo, Mich., have filed suit against the federal government’s mandate regarding the inclusion of artificial birth control, abortificients and abortion as part of employee health care. The brothers are both committed Christians and staunchly pro-life; one is Catholic, one Protestant. In addition to their law practice, they have a legal aid organization, doing pro bono work for the homeless in southeast Michigan. They also fund scholarships for children of military parents who’ve been killed or disabled in combat. This fund, the Corporal Christopher Kelly Willis Foundation, is a memorial to their brother, who was killed in an auto accident after returning home from active duty. (more…)
In his famous 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech, Martin Luther King, Jr. declared,
I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.
MLK decried equality for children of all races, and his monumental contribution to the realization of this dream should forever be remembered. However, it seems that some education reformers in the U.S. have already forgotten the words of King. Alabama, Mississippi, Virginia, and Florida have all implemented new race-based standards into their public education systems with the approval of the Department of Education. While No Child Left Behind did divide children into subgroups based on ethnicity, it did not set different standards according to those subgroups. The race-based standards in these four states do not alter curricula or test questions, but they set different goals for percentages of students expected to pass based on the racial subgroups. (more…)
In its fullest and most robust sense, religion is the human person’s being in right relation to the divine, says Robert George, and all of us have a duty, in conscience, to seek the truth and to honor the freedom of all men and women everywhere to do the same:
. . . the existential raising of religious questions, the honest identification of answers, and the fulfilling of what one sincerely believes to be one’s duties in the light of those answers are all parts of the human good of religion. But if that is true, then respect for a person’s well-being, or more simply respect for the person, demands respect for his or her flourishing as a seeker of religious truth and as one who lives in line with his or her best judgments of what is true in spiritual matters. And that, in turn, requires respect for everyone’s liberty in the religious quest—the quest to understand religious truth and order one’s life in line with it.
Because faith of any type, including religious faith, cannot be authentic—it cannot be faith—unless it is free, respect for the person—that is to say, respect for his or her dignity as a free and rational creature—requires respect for his or her religious liberty. That is why it makes sense, from the point of view of reason, and not merely from the point of view of the revealed teaching of a particular faith—though many faiths proclaim the right to religious freedom on theological and not merely philosophical grounds—to understand religious freedom as a fundamental human right.
Ed Stetzter thinks so. In a Christianity Today article, Stetzer says our fundamental rights – rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights – are getting abused. He says alarm bells should be sounding among Christians, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Our Founding Fathers saw the Bill of Rights as providing barriers against government overreach and abuse.
People (particularly people in governments with power) could not be trusted to have no checks on their power. Why? Well, some of it had to do with history. For example, a bill of rights was an English concept preceeding the American experiment. But, some of those colonists held the view because of biblical convictions about fallen nature and the need to protect rights that some might want to take away.
Yet, Christians today do not sound much like the Christians then.
While Big Brother’s eyes grow stronger, some Christians just shut their eyes tighter. Perhaps if we better understood current events, we might consider their skeptical approach to the government power.
What a Conservative Knows: Fear of God is the Beginning of Wisdom
Russell Kirk, The Imaginative Conservative
There could be no conservatism without a religious foundation, and it is conservative people, by and large, who defend religion in our time.
Detroit: A Ground Zero for Innovation?
T. Kurt Jaros, Values & Capitalism
With the loss of public services, even emergency services, what are people to do? Answer: Turn to the private sector.
Five Myths About Pope Francis
William Doino Jr., First Things
He has been called an “improv pope,” a pope of many surprises, but the biggest surprise of all is that Francis continues to elude all efforts to classify him.
We Work to Change the World
Anne Bradley, Institute for Faith, Work, and Economics
Have you ever been in the middle of your day, stressed out and in a panic over what you need to do, and begin to wonder why you even care? I mean, it’s just a job, right?
Humility is probably one of the most difficult human virtues to achieve. For me, as a Hungarian intern at the Acton Institute, listening to Samuel Gregg’s June lecture in Grand Rapids on his new book, Becoming Europe about the Old Continent’s crisis is instructive. Relations between the United States and major European powers have been testy from time to time, of course, but Europe seems to lack self-criticism.
Aging Europe, an unsustainable social model, a two-speed Europe: these are some key expressions we hear about Europe every day. Each of these phrases reflects a problem with the evolution of European society and the free market. Actually, it seems as if the continent is living out its teenager years unsure whether to commit to social-democracy or the free market. Meanwhile, doing both of them wrong. As we can expect from a teenager, the symptoms refer to deeper-rooted problems. (more…)
When it comes to household income, progressives tend to start with their intuitive understanding of fairness (i.e., some people have a lot more income than others), move to the solution (redistribution of income and wealth from those who have more to those who have less), and only then to develop a metric that justifies implementing their solution: income inequality.
Because of this roundabout approach, you rarely hear progressives argue that income inequality is a problem since for them it just is an injustice — and that wealth redistribution is the primary solution. When conservatives and libertarians disagree about whether it even is an issue we should be concerned with, we are considered heart-hearted apologists for an immoral capitalist system.
The truth, however, is that we don’t care about income inequality because relative differences in income tell us nothing about fairness or the just distribution of wealth. What we care about — what everyone should care about — is whether people have adequate opportunities to increase their household’s income, and hence, improve their standard of living. While there is no truly adequate gauge to measure such opportunities, we can get a fair estimate based on measurements of social mobility.