Thursday, April 4, 2013
Behind the Success of Political Islam. By Dalibor Rohac.
Behind the Success of Political Islam. by Dalibor Rohac. The National Interest, April 3, 2013.
Capitalism’s Corruptions. By Daniel Henninger
Capitalism’s Corruptions. By Daniel Henninger. Wall Street Journal, April 3, 2013. Also find it here.
The President Gives Hollywood a Pass on Violence. By Campbell Brown.
The President Gives Hollywood a Pass on Violence. By Campbell Brown. Wall Street Journal, April 3, 2013. Also find it here.
A Dictator’s Guide on Ruling for Life. By Alexei Zakharov.
A Dictator’s Guide on Ruling for Life. By Alexei Zakharov. The Moscow Times, April 4, 2013.
Syria Has a Massive Rape Crisis. By Lauren Wolfe.
Syria Has a Massive Rape Crisis. By Lauren Wolfe. The Atlantic, April 3, 2013.
The War Over the Family As a War of Religion. By Peter Berger.
How to end wars of religion, and why this probably won’t work with the war over the family. By Peter Berger. The American Interest, April 3, 2013.
Catholics have a Pope. Should the rest of us care? By Peter Berger. The American Interest, March 20, 2013.
Catholics have a Pope. Should the rest of us care? By Peter Berger. The American Interest, March 20, 2013.
Why Obama Failed in the Middle East. By Aaron David Miller.
Why Obama Failed in the Middle East. By Aaron David Miller. Foreign Policy, April 2, 2013.
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Social Justice: A Solution in Search of a Problem. By John Steele Gordon.
Social Justice: A Solution in Search of a Problem. By John Steele Gordon. Commentary, April 2, 2013.
Social Justice Theory: A Solution in Search of a Problem. By David C. Rose. Library of Law and Liberty, April 1, 2013.
Social Justice Theory: A Solution in Search of a Problem. By David C. Rose. Library of Law and Liberty, April 1, 2013.
Time for a Thoughtful Egypt Policy. By Max Boot.
Time for a Thoughtful Egypt Policy. By Max Boot. Commentary, April 2, 2013.
Egypt Takes Another Step Toward Autocracy. By Eric Trager. Real Clear World, April 2, 2013. Also find it here.
Egypt Between Morsi and a Failed State. By Aki Peritz. US News and World Report, April 2, 2013.
More on Egypt and Morsi here.
Egypt Takes Another Step Toward Autocracy. By Eric Trager. Real Clear World, April 2, 2013. Also find it here.
Egypt Between Morsi and a Failed State. By Aki Peritz. US News and World Report, April 2, 2013.
More on Egypt and Morsi here.
Beyond the Post-Cold War World. By George Friedman.
Beyond the Post-Cold War World. By George Friedman. Real Clear World, April 2, 2013.
Western Classical Liberalism Is Dead. By George Jonas.
Classical liberalism: a church without a congregation. By George Jonas. National Post, April 3, 2013.
The Sad State of Liberal Education at Bowdoin. By Peter Berkowitz.
The Sad State of Liberal Education at Bowdoin. By Peter Berkowitz. Real Clear Politics, April 3, 2013.
What Does Bowdoin Teach? How a Contemporary Liberal Arts College Shapes Students. By Michael Toscano and Peter Wood. National Association of Scholars, April 3, 2013. PDF.
What Parents Don’t Know About Bowdoin. By Amity Shlaes. Bloomberg, April 3, 2013.
The Golf Shot Heard Round the Academic World. By David Feith. Wall Street Journal, April 5, 2013. Also find it here.
Bowdoin Convocation 2010 Address. By Barry Mills. Bowdoin Campus News, September 2, 2010. Video here and here.
A Golf Story. By Thomas D. Klingenstein. Claremont Review of Books, April 17, 2011. PDF.
What Students Don’t Learn at Bowdoin College. By Rush Limbaugh. RushLimbaugh.com, April 8, 2013.
What Does Bowdoin Teach? How a Contemporary Liberal Arts College Shapes Students. By Michael Toscano and Peter Wood. National Association of Scholars, April 3, 2013. PDF.
What Parents Don’t Know About Bowdoin. By Amity Shlaes. Bloomberg, April 3, 2013.
The Golf Shot Heard Round the Academic World. By David Feith. Wall Street Journal, April 5, 2013. Also find it here.
Bowdoin Convocation 2010 Address. By Barry Mills. Bowdoin Campus News, September 2, 2010. Video here and here.
A Golf Story. By Thomas D. Klingenstein. Claremont Review of Books, April 17, 2011. PDF.
What Students Don’t Learn at Bowdoin College. By Rush Limbaugh. RushLimbaugh.com, April 8, 2013.
Bill O’Reilly vs. Rush Limbaugh. By Peter Beinart.
Bill O’Reilly vs. Rush Limbaugh. By Peter Beinart. The Daily Beast, April 1, 2013.
The right-wing fight over “Bible thumping.” By William Saletan. Slate, April 3, 2013. Also find it here.
Evangelist Bryan Fischer Furious At “Pompous, Arrogant Windbag” O’Reilly For “Bible Thumping” Remark. By Andrew Kirell. Mediaite, April 4, 2013.
Bill O’Reilly and the “Bible Thumpers.” By John Kerr. Media Matters for America, April 4, 2013.
O’Reilly Criticizes “The Demagogues On The Right” Who Took Issue With His Bible Thumper Comments. To Whom Might He Be Referring? By David Shere. Media Matters for America, April 4, 2013.
The right-wing fight over “Bible thumping.” By William Saletan. Slate, April 3, 2013. Also find it here.
Evangelist Bryan Fischer Furious At “Pompous, Arrogant Windbag” O’Reilly For “Bible Thumping” Remark. By Andrew Kirell. Mediaite, April 4, 2013.
Bill O’Reilly and the “Bible Thumpers.” By John Kerr. Media Matters for America, April 4, 2013.
O’Reilly Criticizes “The Demagogues On The Right” Who Took Issue With His Bible Thumper Comments. To Whom Might He Be Referring? By David Shere. Media Matters for America, April 4, 2013.
Why Everyone in the Middle East Can’t Just Get Along. By George Jonas.
Why everyone in the Middle East can’t just get along. By George Jonas. National Post, March 30, 2013.
Political Moderation and the Conservative Disposition. By Peter Wehner.
Political Moderation and the Conservative Disposition. By Peter Wehner. Commentary, April 1, 2013.
Tipping Points: Is the Culture War Over? By Steve Hochstadt.
Tipping Points: Is the Culture War Over? By Steve Hochstadt. History News Network, April 1, 2013.
Jacksonian Historian Robert V. Remini (1921-2013) Has Passed Away.
Robert Remini has passed away. History News Network, March 31, 2013. Also find it here.
The Middle East War on Christians. By Kirsten Powers.
Middle East Christians need our protection. By Kirsten Powers. USA Today, April 2, 2013.
Baby Boomers and the “Gray Divorce” Boom. By Susan L. Brown.
A “gray divorce” boom. By Susan L. Brown. Los Angeles Times, March 31, 2013.
Middle East “Democracy.” By Thomas Sowell.
Middle East “Democracy.” By Thomas Sowell. Real Clear Politics, April 2, 2013.
Sowell:
The Obama administration treated the creation of “democracy” in the Middle East as a Good Thing. Ironically, those who created the United States of America viewed democracy with fear—and created a Constitutional republic instead.
Everything depends on how you define democracy. In its most basic sense, democracy means majority rule. But there can be majority rule in a free country or in a country with an authoritarian or even a dictatorial government.
In this age of sloppy uses of words, many people include freedom in their conception of democracy. But whether democracy leads to freedom is an open question, not a foregone conclusion.
In the United States, when the Union army of occupation withdrew from the South, years after the Civil War, majority rule returned to the Southern states—and the freedom of blacks was drastically restricted from what it had been under military rule.
Those who applauded the spread of democracy in the Middle East seemed to assume that the “Arab Spring” meant greater freedom. But there was no reason to assume that beforehand—and certainly no reason to believe it after the fact. Christians in Egypt have already lost whatever security they had under Hosni Mubarak.
The idea that “all people want freedom” is one of those feel-good phrases that some people indulge in. But you do not get a free country just because everybody wants freedom—for themselves. You can have a free country only when people are willing to let other people have freedom.
Nazis were free to be Nazis under Hitler and Communists were free to be Communists under Stalin and Mao. But nobody else was free.
Toleration for others is a precondition for a free society—and it is hard to think of more intolerant societies than most of those in the Middle East. There have been female heads of state in some other Islamic countries, but not in the Middle East.
Democracy in the Middle East context means majority selection of which individuals get the power to oppress. Why would anyone have seriously believed that it would mean anything more than that? Certainly not from the history of the region.
Too many people tend to think of democracy as a consumer good, so that high voter turnout on election day makes them happy. But the purpose of an election is not to make people feel good about participating. Its purpose is to select the best leaders available, to whom the well-being, and ultimately the lives, of the people can be entrusted. That is serious business.
Voting is not an end in itself. Had there been universal access to the ballot in Europe centuries ago, in an age of mass illiteracy, it is very unlikely that this would have led to freedom, and far more likely that the continent would have collapsed into confusion and anarchy—and been ripe to be enslaved by conquerors with more realistic governments.
Restrictions on who can vote have been based on assessments of who can best choose the nation’s leaders. Those assessments have varied from country to country, and from one era to another, and no doubt some restrictions make more sense than others. But the fundamental point here is that elections have far more serious purposes than participation.
Most Western nations had freedom long before they had democracy. Women have been voting in the United States less than a century. But, even before women could vote in England or America, they had freedoms that women in many Middle Eastern countries can only dream about today.
“Arab Spring” democracy has certainly not increased women’s freedom, nor was there ever any reason to expect that it would.
Why then was Barack Obama so hyped over his “achievement” in having helped put new rulers into power in the Middle East? First of all, this is a man with a monumental ego, to whom every avenue to self-aggrandizement is welcomed, whether it is ObamaCare or realigning the Middle East.
Either or both may end in utter disaster for others, but that is hardly a deterrent to Obama. What some see as a failure of his Middle East policy is a success in carrying out his vision of a historic realignment. The lives that are lost and the increased dangers of international turmoil are to him just “bumps in the road” on the path to his place in history.
Sowell:
The Obama administration treated the creation of “democracy” in the Middle East as a Good Thing. Ironically, those who created the United States of America viewed democracy with fear—and created a Constitutional republic instead.
Everything depends on how you define democracy. In its most basic sense, democracy means majority rule. But there can be majority rule in a free country or in a country with an authoritarian or even a dictatorial government.
In this age of sloppy uses of words, many people include freedom in their conception of democracy. But whether democracy leads to freedom is an open question, not a foregone conclusion.
In the United States, when the Union army of occupation withdrew from the South, years after the Civil War, majority rule returned to the Southern states—and the freedom of blacks was drastically restricted from what it had been under military rule.
Those who applauded the spread of democracy in the Middle East seemed to assume that the “Arab Spring” meant greater freedom. But there was no reason to assume that beforehand—and certainly no reason to believe it after the fact. Christians in Egypt have already lost whatever security they had under Hosni Mubarak.
The idea that “all people want freedom” is one of those feel-good phrases that some people indulge in. But you do not get a free country just because everybody wants freedom—for themselves. You can have a free country only when people are willing to let other people have freedom.
Nazis were free to be Nazis under Hitler and Communists were free to be Communists under Stalin and Mao. But nobody else was free.
Toleration for others is a precondition for a free society—and it is hard to think of more intolerant societies than most of those in the Middle East. There have been female heads of state in some other Islamic countries, but not in the Middle East.
Democracy in the Middle East context means majority selection of which individuals get the power to oppress. Why would anyone have seriously believed that it would mean anything more than that? Certainly not from the history of the region.
Too many people tend to think of democracy as a consumer good, so that high voter turnout on election day makes them happy. But the purpose of an election is not to make people feel good about participating. Its purpose is to select the best leaders available, to whom the well-being, and ultimately the lives, of the people can be entrusted. That is serious business.
Voting is not an end in itself. Had there been universal access to the ballot in Europe centuries ago, in an age of mass illiteracy, it is very unlikely that this would have led to freedom, and far more likely that the continent would have collapsed into confusion and anarchy—and been ripe to be enslaved by conquerors with more realistic governments.
Restrictions on who can vote have been based on assessments of who can best choose the nation’s leaders. Those assessments have varied from country to country, and from one era to another, and no doubt some restrictions make more sense than others. But the fundamental point here is that elections have far more serious purposes than participation.
Most Western nations had freedom long before they had democracy. Women have been voting in the United States less than a century. But, even before women could vote in England or America, they had freedoms that women in many Middle Eastern countries can only dream about today.
“Arab Spring” democracy has certainly not increased women’s freedom, nor was there ever any reason to expect that it would.
Why then was Barack Obama so hyped over his “achievement” in having helped put new rulers into power in the Middle East? First of all, this is a man with a monumental ego, to whom every avenue to self-aggrandizement is welcomed, whether it is ObamaCare or realigning the Middle East.
Either or both may end in utter disaster for others, but that is hardly a deterrent to Obama. What some see as a failure of his Middle East policy is a success in carrying out his vision of a historic realignment. The lives that are lost and the increased dangers of international turmoil are to him just “bumps in the road” on the path to his place in history.
Fear of a Liberal America. By George Packer.
Fear of a Liberal America. By George Packer. The New Yorker, April 2, 2013.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Charles Krauthammer on Obama’s Easter Sermon Controversy.
Charles Krauthammer on Obama’s Easter sermon controversy. Video. The O’Reilly Factor. Fox News, April 2, 2013.
The Bible vs. Heart. By Dennis Prager.
The Bible vs. Heart. By Dennis Prager. Real Clear Politics, April 2, 2013. Also find it here.
Prager:
I offer the single most politically incorrect statement a modern American – indeed a modern Westerner, period – can make: I first look to the Bible for moral guidance and for wisdom.
I say this even though I am not a Christian (I am a Jew, and a non-Orthodox one at that). And I say this even though I attended an Ivy League graduate school (Columbia), where I learned nothing about the Bible there except that it was irrelevant, outdated and frequently immoral.
I say this because there is nothing – not any religious or secular body of work – that comes close to the Bible in forming the moral bases of Western civilization and therefore of nearly all moral progress in the world.
It was this book that guided every one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, including those described as “deists.” It is the book that formed the foundational values of every major American university. It is the book from which every morally great American from George Washington to Abraham Lincoln to the Rev. (yes, “the Reverend,” almost always omitted today in favor of his secular credential, “Dr.”) Martin Luther King, Jr., got his values.
It is this book that gave humanity the Ten Commandments, the greatest moral code ever devised. It not only codified the essential moral rules for society, it announced that the Creator of the universe stands behind them, demands them and judges humans’ compliance with them.
It gave humanity the great moral rule, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
It taught humanity the unprecedented and unparalleled concept that all human beings are created equal because all human beings – of every race, ethnicity, nationality and both male and female – are created in God’s image.
It taught people not to trust the human heart, but to be guided by moral law even when the heart pulled in a different direction.
This is the book that taught humanity that human sacrifice is an abomination.
This is the book that de-sexualized God – a first in human history.
This is the book that alone launched humanity on the long road to abolishing slavery. It was not only Bible-believers (what we would today call “religious fundamentalists”) who led the only crusade in the world against slavery, it was the Bible itself, thousands of years before, that taught that God abhors slavery. It legislated that one cannot return a slave to his owner and banned kidnapping for slaves in the Ten Commandments.
Stealing people, kidnapping, was the most widespread source of slavery, and “Thou shall not steal” was first a ban on stealing humans and then on stealing property.
It was this book that taught people the wisdom of Job and of Ecclesiastes, unparalleled masterpieces of world wisdom literature.
Without this book, there would not have been Western civilization, or Western science, or Western human rights, or the abolitionist movement, or the United States of America, the freest, most prosperous, most opportunity-giving society ever formed.
For well over a generation, we have been living on “cut-flower ethics.” We have removed ethics from the Bible-based soil that gave them life and think they can survive removed from that soil. Fools and those possessing an arrogance bordering on self-deification think we will long survive as a decent society without teaching the Bible and without consulting it for moral guidance and wisdom.
If not from the Bible, from where should people get their values and morals? The university? The New York Times editorial page? They have been wrong on virtually every great issue of good and evil in our generation.
They mocked Ronald Reagan for calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire.” More than any other group in the world, Western intellectuals supported Stalin, Mao and other Communist monsters. They are utterly morally confused concerning one of the most morally clear conflicts of our time – the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict. The universities and their media supporters have taught a generation of Americans the idiocy that men and women are basically the same. And they are the institutions that teach that America's founders were essentially moral reprobates – sexist and racist rich white men.
When the current executive editor of the New York Times, Jill Abramson, was appointed to that position she announced that “In my house growing up, The Times substituted for religion.” The quote spoke volumes about the substitution of elite media for religion and the Bible in shaping contemporary America.
The other modern substitute for the Bible is the heart. We live in the Age of Feelings, and an entire generation of Americans has been raised to consult their heart to determine right and wrong.
If you trust the human heart, you should be delighted with this development. But those of us raised with biblical wisdom do not trust the heart. So when we are told by almost every university, by almost every news source, by almost every entertainment medium that the heart demands what is probably the most radical social transformation since Western civilization began – redefining marriage, society’s most basic institution, in terms of gender – it may be wiser to trust the biblical understanding of marriage rather than the heart’s.
My heart, too, supports same-sex marriage. But relying on the heart alone is a terribly flawed guide to social policy. And it is the Bible that has produced all of the world’s most compassionate societies.
This, then, is the great modern battle: the Bible and the heart vs. the heart alone.
Prager:
I offer the single most politically incorrect statement a modern American – indeed a modern Westerner, period – can make: I first look to the Bible for moral guidance and for wisdom.
I say this even though I am not a Christian (I am a Jew, and a non-Orthodox one at that). And I say this even though I attended an Ivy League graduate school (Columbia), where I learned nothing about the Bible there except that it was irrelevant, outdated and frequently immoral.
I say this because there is nothing – not any religious or secular body of work – that comes close to the Bible in forming the moral bases of Western civilization and therefore of nearly all moral progress in the world.
It was this book that guided every one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, including those described as “deists.” It is the book that formed the foundational values of every major American university. It is the book from which every morally great American from George Washington to Abraham Lincoln to the Rev. (yes, “the Reverend,” almost always omitted today in favor of his secular credential, “Dr.”) Martin Luther King, Jr., got his values.
It is this book that gave humanity the Ten Commandments, the greatest moral code ever devised. It not only codified the essential moral rules for society, it announced that the Creator of the universe stands behind them, demands them and judges humans’ compliance with them.
It gave humanity the great moral rule, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
It taught humanity the unprecedented and unparalleled concept that all human beings are created equal because all human beings – of every race, ethnicity, nationality and both male and female – are created in God’s image.
It taught people not to trust the human heart, but to be guided by moral law even when the heart pulled in a different direction.
This is the book that taught humanity that human sacrifice is an abomination.
This is the book that de-sexualized God – a first in human history.
This is the book that alone launched humanity on the long road to abolishing slavery. It was not only Bible-believers (what we would today call “religious fundamentalists”) who led the only crusade in the world against slavery, it was the Bible itself, thousands of years before, that taught that God abhors slavery. It legislated that one cannot return a slave to his owner and banned kidnapping for slaves in the Ten Commandments.
Stealing people, kidnapping, was the most widespread source of slavery, and “Thou shall not steal” was first a ban on stealing humans and then on stealing property.
It was this book that taught people the wisdom of Job and of Ecclesiastes, unparalleled masterpieces of world wisdom literature.
Without this book, there would not have been Western civilization, or Western science, or Western human rights, or the abolitionist movement, or the United States of America, the freest, most prosperous, most opportunity-giving society ever formed.
For well over a generation, we have been living on “cut-flower ethics.” We have removed ethics from the Bible-based soil that gave them life and think they can survive removed from that soil. Fools and those possessing an arrogance bordering on self-deification think we will long survive as a decent society without teaching the Bible and without consulting it for moral guidance and wisdom.
If not from the Bible, from where should people get their values and morals? The university? The New York Times editorial page? They have been wrong on virtually every great issue of good and evil in our generation.
They mocked Ronald Reagan for calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire.” More than any other group in the world, Western intellectuals supported Stalin, Mao and other Communist monsters. They are utterly morally confused concerning one of the most morally clear conflicts of our time – the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict. The universities and their media supporters have taught a generation of Americans the idiocy that men and women are basically the same. And they are the institutions that teach that America's founders were essentially moral reprobates – sexist and racist rich white men.
When the current executive editor of the New York Times, Jill Abramson, was appointed to that position she announced that “In my house growing up, The Times substituted for religion.” The quote spoke volumes about the substitution of elite media for religion and the Bible in shaping contemporary America.
The other modern substitute for the Bible is the heart. We live in the Age of Feelings, and an entire generation of Americans has been raised to consult their heart to determine right and wrong.
If you trust the human heart, you should be delighted with this development. But those of us raised with biblical wisdom do not trust the heart. So when we are told by almost every university, by almost every news source, by almost every entertainment medium that the heart demands what is probably the most radical social transformation since Western civilization began – redefining marriage, society’s most basic institution, in terms of gender – it may be wiser to trust the biblical understanding of marriage rather than the heart’s.
My heart, too, supports same-sex marriage. But relying on the heart alone is a terribly flawed guide to social policy. And it is the Bible that has produced all of the world’s most compassionate societies.
This, then, is the great modern battle: the Bible and the heart vs. the heart alone.
Mark Levin: “I Am Sick And Tired Of My Country Being Attacked From Within.”
Mark Levin: “I Am Sick And Tired Of My Country Being Attacked From Within.” Real Clear Politics, March 29, 2013. Also at The Right Scoop.
How Did the Right Lose on Gay Marriage? By Jennifer Rubin.
How did the right lose on gay marriage? By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, March 31, 2013.
Don’t blame gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 1, 2013.
Marriage Looks Different Now. By Ross Douthat. New York Times, March 30, 2013.
Coming Out Ahead: Why gay marriage is on the way. By Ramesh Ponnuru. National Review, July 28, 2003. Also find it here.
Jim DeMint’s Misfire on Marriage. By David Boaz. Cato Institute, March 27, 2013.
What Do Social Conservatives Want? By David Boaz. Cato Institute, September 20, 2010.
Now, let’s get straight on marriage. By David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch. New York Daily News, March 31, 2013.
Idle threats on gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Is anyone coming out to oppose gay marriage? By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Knot Yet: The Benefits and Costs of Delayed Marriage in America. By Kay Hymowitz, Jason S. Carroll, W. Bradford Wilcox, and Kelleen Kaye. National Marriage Project, March 2013. PDF. Video of panel at Brookings.
When Marriage Disappears: The Retreat from Marriage in Middle America. National Marriage Project, 2010. PDF.
The Lessons of Social Conservatism’sSetbacks. By W. James Antle III. The American Conservative, April 4, 2013.
Gay Marriage and Public Opinion. By Jennifer Rubin. NJBR, March 24, 2013.
Sex After Christianity. By Rod Dreher. NJBR, March 27, 2013 with related articles.
Don’t blame gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 1, 2013.
Marriage Looks Different Now. By Ross Douthat. New York Times, March 30, 2013.
Coming Out Ahead: Why gay marriage is on the way. By Ramesh Ponnuru. National Review, July 28, 2003. Also find it here.
Jim DeMint’s Misfire on Marriage. By David Boaz. Cato Institute, March 27, 2013.
What Do Social Conservatives Want? By David Boaz. Cato Institute, September 20, 2010.
Now, let’s get straight on marriage. By David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch. New York Daily News, March 31, 2013.
Idle threats on gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Is anyone coming out to oppose gay marriage? By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Knot Yet: The Benefits and Costs of Delayed Marriage in America. By Kay Hymowitz, Jason S. Carroll, W. Bradford Wilcox, and Kelleen Kaye. National Marriage Project, March 2013. PDF. Video of panel at Brookings.
When Marriage Disappears: The Retreat from Marriage in Middle America. National Marriage Project, 2010. PDF.
The Lessons of Social Conservatism’sSetbacks. By W. James Antle III. The American Conservative, April 4, 2013.
Gay Marriage and Public Opinion. By Jennifer Rubin. NJBR, March 24, 2013.
Sex After Christianity. By Rod Dreher. NJBR, March 27, 2013 with related articles.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)