Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Contributors -- Introduction / George, Robert P. -- Chapter One. Marbury v. Madison and the Theory of Judicial Supremacy / Tushnet, Mark -- Chapter Two. "Despotism in Some Form": Marbury v. Madison / Waldron, Jeremy -- Chapter Three. Dred, Scott v. Sandford and Its Legacy / Sunstein, Cass R. -- Chapter Four. Politics and Judicial Responsibility: Dred Scott v. Sandford / McPherson, James M. -- Chapter Five. Lochner v. New York and the Cast of Our Laws / Arkes, Hadley -- Chapter Six. The Substance of Process: Lochner v. New York / Drakeman, Donald -- Chapter Seven. Brown v. Board of Education and "Originalism" / Maltz, Earl -- Chapter Eight. Originalism - The Deceptive Evil: Brown v. Board of Education / Murphy, Walter F. -- Chapter Nine. Roe v. Wade: Speaking the Unspeakable / Elshtain, Jean Bethke -- Chapter Ten. Judicial Power and Abortion Politics: Roe v. Wade / Will, George -- Index

It is a common supposition among many of our cultural elites that a constitutional "wall of separation" between church and state precludes religious believers from bringing their beliefs to bear on public matters. This is because secular liberals typically assume that their own positions on morally charged issues of public policy are the fruit of pure reason, while those of their morally conservative opponents reflect an irrational religious faith. In The Clash of Orthodoxies Robert George shows that this supposition is wrong on both counts. Challenging liberalism's claim to represent the triumph of reason, George argues that on controversial issues like abortion, stem-cell research, euthanasia, homosexuality, and same-sex marriage, traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs are actually rationally superior to secular liberal alternatives. Drawing on the natural law philosophical tradition, George demolishes various secularist pretenses, such as the notion that the very young and very old among us are somehow subpersonal and not worthy of full legal protection. He reveals the dubious person/body dualism implicit in secularist arguments, and he demonstrates the flawed reasoning behind the idea that the state ought to be neutral regarding competing understandings of the nature and value of marriage. George also revisits the controversy surrounding his participation in the First Things "End of Democracy?" symposium, in which he considered the relevance of Catholic teachings regarding the legitimacy of political regimes to the contemporary American situation. George argues that because natural law and natural rights doctrine lie at the foundation of the American republic, the judicial reading of the Constitution that has undermined democracy in order to enshrine the secularist agenda is deeply flawed. In advancing his thesis, George argues for a return to