- Abortion destroys fathers, too
- Does opposing same-sex 'marriage' make you a bigot? No
- Bill to protect state definitions of marriage introduced
- What's up with vasectomies?
- College student moonlighting as porn star claims it makes her 'free'
- RNC chairman: ‘March for Life was a little bit of a wake-up call’
- The “best argument for abortion” was just completely demolished
- Secular press goes ballistic over Pope's 'civil unions' remark
Father of Aborted Baby: I Never Got to See My Daughter or Hold Her in My Arms.
Is everyone who opposes gay marriage a bigot? If a photographer declines to participate in a same-sex wedding, should she be held legally liable, on that basis alone, for discrimination?
Lawmakers in Washington, D.C., have introduced bills bolstering the ability of individual states to declare what they will and will not recognize as a marriage and enforce that definition within state boundaries.
You know how it often is with barbecues: the “guy group” congregates together — this time we stood around the backyard with our beers — while “the wives” were inside chatting in the living room. Not all the men at the barbecue were Catholic; there were a few nominals, and me, and some men from other Christian traditions.
The Duke University student who moonlights as a porn star to pay her tuition says the venerable North Carolina school backs her controversial side gig.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said that attending the 2014 March for Life gave him “a little bit of a wake-up call” about the fact that the Republican Party needs to lay greater emphasis on its commitment to the pro-life cause.
"It might be quite sanitary and pleasant to refer to abortion as a woman ‘withdrawing support’ from her child, but the procedure goes beyond this. During a ‘termination,’ the baby is actively killed. It is crushed, dismembered, poisoned, or torn apart. It is killed. It is actively, actually, purposefully, intentionally killed."
Yesterday Corriere della Sera, one of Italy’s mainstream daily papers published another “wide-ranging” interview with Pope Francis, and the usual round of arguments, disputes and triumphant whoops exploded over what the pope said, didn’t say, was mistranslated or misinterpreted or misrepresented as saying, in the press and the blogosphere.