You are here

Reflections

Consisting of relflections in a variety of categories, including:
<ul>
<li>scripture (homiletic reflections)
<li>philosophy (metaphysics or epistemology)
<li>morality
<li>psychology
<li>spiritual development
<li>science or mathematics
<li>technology
<li>medicine
<li>Church documents
<li>catechesis
</ul>

On putative moral partisanship

Topics: 

What separates the partisan moral philosopher from the non-partisan is that the latter believe no particular group of people has a greater claim to merit self-indulgence or to be especially indulged by society. What separates partisan moral philosophers from each other is the group they have decided most deserves to be indulged by the rest of society.

Clinton 2.0?

Madam Clinton, should she survive legal challenges, will be a formidable candidate in the general election. She will have the full weight of the broadcast media behind her (apart from talk radio), as well as most of print and cable. Segments of society that will be backing (with sizable majorities in each case) her include Blacks, Hispanics, LGBTQ, academia, welfare recipients and retirees who depend on Social Security and Medicare. Furthermore, since she is a classical corporatist, she will have most of Wall Street and most of the professional bureaucrats in government behind her.

On "civil unions" and related schema

In a position statement (probably from a few years ago) on the nature of marriage and its recognition and regulation by civil society (see "One Man, One Woman, For Life: Lead Messages on Marriage Redefinition"), the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops stated the following about "civil unions", etc.

On the origin of "the wrong side of history"

I've come across the glib phrase "the wrong side of history" rather a lot, lately. According to a comment on the provenance of this phrase found in the link attached here, it is related to the phrase "God is on our side." I find that to be a very revealing comment.

On the social and legal implications of "Obergefell v. Hodges"

On Friday, June 16, the United States Supreme Court handed down its decision in the case Obergefell v. Hodges, known popularly (or infamously) as "The same-sex marriage case." In a 5 to 4 decision, the court ruled in favor of James Obergefell, and against the State of Ohio (with Governor John Kasich identified as the original defendant in the case Obergefell v. Kasich, the Ohio Director of the Department of Health, Richard Hodges, became the defendant). The original suit concerned Mr. Obergefell's claim to

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Reflections