Monthly Archives: May 2010

Restored

I wish I could embed this video here; I can at least link to it: Restored.

Why Rise Above?

This entry is part 1 of 4 in the series Rising Above

This week I had a very encouraging talk with a literary agent about my book project. He likes the idea, at least; at the time of our talk he hadn’t seen the actual written proposal yet. Today I got a couple invitations to write, and I finished off an article someone else had asked me

Agent Intellect: “Evil”

“chills” Well put. From Agent Intellect

So Great Faith

Joseph Bottum Joe Carter, writing at First Things, speaks of atheists’ uncanny powers of belief. Brief, biting, and exactly on the mark. (See the first comment regarding the correction made here ).

Created For Love

I’ve been a semi-self-imposed quarantine for the past 48 hours. I say “semi” because my wife is enforcing it, too. It’s a virus; you don’t want to know any more than that. I wasn’t worth much at all yesterday, even to read a page or two from a magazine. Today has been better—I read a

Creative Minority Report: “Marriage as a Life Issue”

From Creative Minority Report: Marriage as a Life Issue: Guttmacher points out that “the overwhelming majority of women having abortions (85%) were unmarried.” … Abortion is a symptom of a lack of love…. real committed love…. Maybe one of the most pro-life actions one can take is defending marriage.

“Christian faith and modern British politics, a layman’s view”

From mattghg in the UK, a principle applicable anywhere: My own view is that it is extremely puzzling for a government to legislate in such a way as to make ‘incitement to x’ illegal, when ‘x’ itself isn’t illegal. Take incitement to murder (right). Murder is illegal, and so for incitement to murder to be

Further on “Why the Debate” (Intelligent Design and Thomism)

The responses to my question, “Why The Debate?” on Intelligent Design and Thomist theology have been most instructive for me. Blogging is for learning, too. Holopupenko disagreed with my characterization of Intelligent Design as a reductio-like approach, asking, How do you think Meyer or Behe or Dembski would respond if you pressed them to re-characterize