Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for March, 2006

I started doing this because there was so much activity on the CC blog and I figured some people who read this one might be somewhat interested in the CC discussion but not interested enough to follow it all. But it’s gotten pretty quiet over there, so one can easily read all of today’s posts. Still, I’ll keep this up for another day or two.

An interesting exchange in the continuing effort to insist on a false choice between Taliban-style violent theocracy and Euro-American pornocracy: post 1 and post 2.

One quick note about the quote from Roger Scruton, which is fine up until the point where he says " In the United
States, where pornography is protected as free speech, people are able
to accept that this assault on human dignity is the price we must pay
for freedoms too precious to relinquish."

I take very strenuous exception to that: (a) many, many people do not in fact accept it (b) that is not, in fact, a necessary trade-off. Sure, a halfway free society is going to allow many things that would be considered indecent in Taliban eyes, but it does not have to allow the free distribution of hard-core pornography. Unless you think the United States was not a free country before about 1970 or so. The pornography license was established by libertines and ideologues over the protests of many, if not most, of our citizenry and could be disestablished by sensible courts.

Maclin Horton

Read Full Post »

It’s all about me.

Bruce Frohnen on Religion, Conservatism, and America.

Emailer Dave provides a quip from his mother which we can probably all relate to.

I finished the book last night but have been too busy today to write about it. In a nutshell, I think Rod has done a very fine thing in issuing this very strong challenge to the conservatism. There’s one passage in particular that I want to quote–maybe later this evening, but if not then tomorrow.

Maclin Horton

Read Full Post »

Well, you could just start here with Rod Dreher’s intro and then read up. Here’s his basic point:

I didn’t set out to write this book with this in mind, but it became
clear to me that the base of this entire neo-traditionalist sensibility
is religious conviction. It quickly became clear in doing my research
that almost everyone to whom I’d spoken was in some serious way a
religious believer. Why is that? I think it’s because people who are
serious about their religion understand in their bones how devotion to
God and to His laws must be the basis for ordering our own lives, and
that of our society.

and then read up on the page. Most of the points made are familiar to people who read this blog, I expect. Maybe the most striking exchange is when Rod prints an angry email from a reader named Graeme, who sees — guess what? — a theocracy! in all this — and Bruce Froehnen replies quite bracingly.

This note by Rod on the quandary posed by changing one’s religion is probably apropos for a lot of us hwo are converts.

Maclin Horton

Read Full Post »

Thought I would do this for the mildly interested and the too-busy. The current topic is environmentalism.

Officially the current topic is environmentalism, but Rod Dreher goes slightly off-topic, on the GOP’s history with regard to family policy. He’s mostly referring to a piece by Alan Carlson. Which reminds me that I’ve been meaning for a couple of weeks to link to this fascinating and important Carlson piece from a recent issue of Touchstone. Whether you detest the Democrats or the Republicans more, you’ll find ammunition for your animosity here.

Bruce Frohnen, a law professor, on the legal obstacles to a "free-market" approach; I use the quotes because his point is an important one about the distortion of the law in favor of corporations.
).
Rod Dreher on progress. Caleb Stegall on the same topic (quoting Eric Voegelin at length), then John Lukacs.

Maclin Horton

Read Full Post »

St. Edith Stein 3

I suppose what I’m doing is having a kind of dialogue with her.

Maclin Horton

Read Full Post »

Frederica Mathewes-Green thinks the subtitle of Crunch Cons is misleading. Rod Dreher says people have taken it in a way he didn’t intend and it’s going to change for the paperback edition. 

Maclin Horton

Read Full Post »

Lending plausibility to what I said yesterday, in response to a question from Frederica Mathewes-Green as to what he’s learned so far from critics of Crunchy Cons, Rod Dreher says:

To the extent
that the way I wrote the book leads people to think I’m just trying to
baptize organic broccoli and Birkenstocks as right-wing, I regret it.
(Click to read the whole response).

Her response:
"It seems to me that the most consistent and fundamental criticism has been:
‘You’re just baptizing your own taste.’"
(Likewise)

Maclin Horton

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »