Amy Sullivan at The New Republic discusses the very good news about the drop in the abortion rate and also calls out pro-life activists who seem uninterested in this news. One has the feeling that these groups - National Right-to-Life, American Life League, LifeSiteNews - are more interested in their institutional preservation (and GOP affiliation) than they are in accomplishing anything substantive like, I don't know, lowering the abortion rate.
I was distressed this morning to see the headline on my friend E. J. Dionne’s column: “Democrats need their own Grover.” Of course, writers do not select their own headlines, editors do that, so E.J. is not responsible for this headline, nor does his article really claim that Democrats need a liberal equivalent of Mr.
That is the question asked, and answered, by Robert Christian at the brilliant blog Millennial. Read it by clicking here.
I am proud to say I have never purchased a single item at a Wal-Mart. Sadly, I have been utterly unsuccessful in my efforts to convince my dad to abstain from that corporation. But, in this morning's Post, Harold Meyerson details the link between the latest outrage, the death of dozens of workers at a plant in Bangladesh, and the on-going scandal of Wal-Mart's employee policies. This company is evil.
In this morning's paper I read that Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader, took issue with President Obama's effort to enlist the support of the American people in his effort to reach a deal on the fiscal cliff. McConnell said, "the time for campaigning is over." Well, his words would seem less offensive if he and his Republican congressional friends were willing to recognize the results of the most recently concluded campaign.
Distinctly Catholic: Michael Sean Winters notes with interest a comment on LifeSiteNews that connects the right to life with immigration enforcement.
Yesterday, I began a discussion of John Noonan’s “The Lustre of Our Country: The American Experience of Religious Freedom.” And, I finished on what I think is a key issue, namely, the extent to which the reduction of religion to ethics in the public square actually represents a triumph for secularism, a kind of utilitarianism which, over time, leaves even the ethical teachings themselves vulnerable because they are so publicly divorced from the truth claims from which they originally flowed.
This article at Crisis magazine by Anthony Esolen is stunning in every regard, except insight.
I suppose hoping that the New York Times is capable of seeing anything except in terms of the standard, and now boring, left v. right divide, is hoping for too much. So, it was fun to read this article in the Times about Cardinal Dolan's fervent support for the canonization of Day. But, no one except the Times has an excuse for trying to enlist Day as their champion in any intra-ecclesial wars.
Earlier this year, I was frustrated that some commentators were taking swipes at the Obama administration because, at times, its representatives spoke of freedom of worship instead of freedom of religion. Of course, Franklin Roosevelt and others had used the two terms interchangeably.