Constitutional conflicts can arise when religious language and behavior take an aggressive and domineering posture toward government and society as a whole.
What sustains the Constitution? Founders distrusted power, built checks on ambition, and trusted agency as divine.
Can the state limit parental rights or define religion? The Court strengthens protections for faith in key rulings.
Should judges defy the president for the Constitution? True fidelity means law over personal allegiance.
Are we electing presidents for the right reasons? Protecting the Constitution is their duty, not policy debates.
How do anti-Mormon activists impact temple projects? Their opposition often inadvertently aids government approval.
Do relationship programs work? Evidence points to modest benefits while couples face other cultural hurdles.
What keeps poverty persistent despite government aid? Looking under our welfare myths, we find inefficiencies in welfare programs, challenges faced by the poor, and poorly placed welfare distribution.
Those who indict prior generations for “lying” because their histories differ from modern-day telling’s in scope or emphasis, plainly demonstrate what anthropologists call “ethnocentrism.” That’s a problem. And it’s time to hold these accusers more accountable for the real-life, human impact of their allegations.
The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia will have significant implications for religious freedom.
If journalists had greater religious literacy, they could have predicted and addressed religious concerns that vaccine passports resembled the mark of the beast rather than resorting to ridicule.
