Ed Simon reviews Nigel Smith’s Ranter Writings: Spiritual Liberty and Sexual Freedom in the English Revolution. Continue Reading →
By S. Brent Plate An audio interview with fellow Rachel Wagner about how she got from Blake to digital media and why. Continue Reading →
Where is Jesus’ foreskin? Listen to David Farley discuss An Irreverent Curiosity: In Search of the Church’s Strangest Relic in Italy’s Oddest Town on NPR’s Rick Steve Show.
Does Daddy Know Best? Ann Pellegrini on the nature of recent attempts to further limit women’s privacy and reproductive choice.
Are imagination and science really at war? An excerpt from Lawrence Lipking’s “Facts and Dreams” at The New Republic:
To some extent the so-called conflict seems bogus. A benevolent reading of Blake’s proverb [What is now proved was once, only imagined” from The Marriage of Heaven and Hell] might reduce it to common sense, or to a maxim that any scientist might follow in applying for a grant to test an idea. No idea, no funding; no imagined Higgs boson, no CERN. In this respect the hypothetical construct that drives attempts to prove or disprove it is not the opposite of science but its prime mover. Imagination and proof couple together as tightly as mind and body, or as Blake’s visions and the books that he makes with his hands. Great scientists are visionaries, too.
Is Obama the Devil? Ok, ok. Is he anti-religion? Social conservative Steve Chapman writes at Reason, that Obama hasn’t been all that bad for faith-based organizations, critiques that he’s anti-religious freedom be damned.
How much money does the state of Indiana give to “family values” organization Indiana Family Institute each year? Andy Kopsa does the accounting at Nuvo.
What’s so funny about the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia’s recent Fatwa? Paul Mutter tracks journalist Hamza Kashgari’s extradition for tweeting about Muhammad.
What is informed consent? Governor Bob McDonnell, who opposes Virginia’s mandate that all women seeking an abortion be given a sonogram (often requiring an invasive procedure), still loses points for allowing that such information is “informed consent.” McDonnell said, “Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state.” Sure enough. But don’t we think pregnant women know they’re pregnant? How much information must patients be given? How can the state determine when a patient really understands the procedure they face? How can a doctor? These questions are asked and answered all the time. Check out Thaddeus Pope’s recent notes on a “futile care” case in Canada. Continue Reading →