One need not believe in God, or the existence of a spiritual realm, to understand the simple fact that human life begins at fertilization.  One need not be religious to believe that "all human beings are equal in worth and dignity."  These two points are at the core of pro-life convictions.  Robert George makes these arguments (and more) with depth and crystal clarity in this article, where he answers questions from the questionable Douglas Kmiec (who calls himself pro-life, but vigorously supported decidedly non-pro-life Barack Obama).

From my journal last night:

It seems to me that we expect too much of capitalism if we expect it (or any other economic system that might be proposed to replace it) to keep people from being greedy, or to force people to act morally in general.  While a given economic system may provide an atmosphere that is more or less conducive than other economic systems for generally moral behavior, a society is not defined solely (or even primarily) by its predominant economic system.  There are a whole host of facets to a society; a partial list might include artistic, psychological, spiritual, cultural, etc. facets.  Each of these facets could be defined by a principle, philosophy, or system.  A healthy society will be composed of and structured by a number of different definitions, each for its associated facet.

We can't expect capitalism to provide the superstructure for general social morality any more than cubism or literary criticism would be fit to tell us how to structure our financial markets.

This article talks about one of the (presumably) unintended consequences of the CPSIA: children's books printed before 1985 are presumed to be printed with lead-based ink, and therefore (by the logic of the law) not allowed to be read by children.  Thus, huge numbers of old children's books are being destroyed, rather than face the legal wrath of the CPSC.

I'm no trained economist, but lately I've been reading through Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics.  It's been an eye-opening experience.  What I've read there resonates with the observations in this analysis of the Stimulus bill being passed by Congress.  In short, the Stimulus is an absolutely horrible piece of anti-economics, an abomination that doesn't stand a chance of achieving what is being claimed for it.

This article is a good overview of a current story making the rounds.  An 18-year-old woman goes to get an abortion, but has the 23-week-old baby before the abortionist can start the procedure.  The non-medical owner of the clinic cuts the umbilical cord and throws the baby, placenta, etc. into a biohazard bag and throws the living baby away.  The doctor who was supposed to show up and do the abortion has now apparently lost his license.

I told my wife and a friend of ours, separately, about the story.  Both of them pro-life, both of them nurses, they both expressed sadness, but then said something to the effect of, "So what's the difference?" 

This is a great checklist towards more civil dialogue.

This entry in the First Things blog strikes some familiar chords for me.  Over the years I have read First Things, I too have been very thankful for the journal (and thus for the man Neuhaus) as a life preserver thrown to me in the midst of a confusing and confused culture. 

Too many of the Christians I have known have had little interest in the life of the mind, while too few of the intellectuals I have known felt any great attachment to a conservative reading of Scripture.  First Things has shown (and, God willing, will continue to show) me how one can think deeply and clearly about God and the world while remaining faithful to the Bible and the Body of Christ.

I read yet another article today praising the approach to teaching kids to read known as Direct Instruction.  It adds to the evidence that I suspect the primary problem with education in America is not lack of funds (the whole "I wish we had to have a bake sale for the military" line of argument) but instead the approach to education.  In the article linked above, a crowd responded positively to the idea that "creativity" is important in teaching kids to read.  And, being an artist of sorts, I resonate initially with the idea that creativity is something we need to make sure is not stifled or starved out of children (or adults, for that matter). 

Last week, one of my favorite authors, one who has been very influential to my worldview over the last 10-15 years, died.  Richard John Neuhaus was the editor-at-large of First Things, the sine qua non of my monthly reading.  I've been reading several remembrances of his over the past few days, but this quote stood out to me as something I need to take heed of:

I asked him his secret for being so prodigious a reader and writer. His response I took initially as a non-sequitur, until I had a chance to reflect on it more and put it into practice. His secret, he told me, was to make sure he did his morning prayer before he began to read the newspaper. Once he had put God first and received his help for the day, he could then get to the work God was asking him to do with greater concentration. God seemed to multiply his efforts.

"The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully."

"...There is nothing at all complicated about the utter wrongness of abortion, and making it all seem complicated mitigates that wrongness not at all."