Conservative columnist David French denounced the United States Supreme Court's recent decision to not grant a hearing for a suit against a Washington state law that compels pharmacies to provide abortion-inducing drugs despite any religious objections.
The high court refused to grant an appeal in the case of Stormans v. Wiesman, which involves Christian pharmacists suing Washington over a law mandating that pharmacies provide drugs like Plan B and Ella despite conscience objections.
In a Tuesday National Review column, French called the Supreme Court "pitiful" for refusing to hear Stormans' appeal. more >>
Prominent conservative author and essayist Mary Eberstadt has released a new book that aims to show liberals of "reason" just how intolerant and incivil today's secularist political Left has become toward traditional religious beliefs on marriage, sex and abortion.
Eberstadt, the author of a number of books who has also been published in The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Time magazine, National Review, First Things and other news outlets, released her new book, It's Dangerous to Believe: Religious Freedom and Its Enemies, last week and spoke in Washington on Tuesday to discuss the main takeaways from her work.
"Today, as opposed to 40 years ago, [social issues] are no longer contested. They are regarded as settled. The progressive secularists side has chalked up victory after victory on cases involving school prayer, obscenity, abortion and same-sex marriage," Eberstadt told attendees at a lunchtime discussion at the Heritage Foundation on Tuesday. more >>
Should a doctor be allowed to end a patient's life by painless means if the patient requests it? In the 1940s and 1950s, most Americans thought the practice should be illegal, but now 69 percent say it should be legal, according to a new study.
As many as 69 percent in the U.S. say physicians should be allowed to end patients' lives by painless means, and 51 percent say they would consider ending their own lives if they personally had a disease that could not be cured and they were living in severe pain, a new Values and Beliefs poll by Gallup found.
"When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient's life by some painless means if the patient and his or her family request it?" Gallup asked this question on telephone interviews conducted May 4-8, with a random sample of 1,025 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. more >>
The U.S. Supreme Court denied a hearing for pharmacists appealing a Washington State law mandating that they provide abortion-inducing drugs despite their religious objections.
A majority of the eight-member high court decided Tuesday morning to not hear an appeal in Stormans v. Wiesman, allowing a ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to stand.
While the decision to reject a hearing for the Stormans case was given without comment, Justice Samuel Alito authored a dissent to the decision. more >>
At the Presbyterian Church in America's General Assembly lin Mobile, Alabama, last week, delegates voted overwhelmingly in favor of an overture that offered an apology for past and present actions of racism.
"Therefore be it resolved, that the 44th 11 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America does recognize, confess, and condemn these past and continuing racial sins and failure to love brothers and sisters from minority cultures in accordance with what the Gospel requires," reads the overature, called "Pursuing Racial Reconciliation and the Advance of the Gospel."
"Be it further resolved, that this General Assembly praises and recommits itself to the Gospel task of racial reconciliation, diligently seeking effective courses of action to further that goal, with humility, sincerity and zeal, for the glory of God and the furtherance of the Gospel …" more >>
Monday's Supreme Court decision striking down a Texas law that requires abortion clinics to have sterilized surgical facilities and abortionists to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals is a sign that the abortion industry is getting a "free pass" on critical medical safety standards, prominent pro-life activists are saying.
In Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-3 to strike down two key components of Texas' House Bill 2. The high court ruled that the law's requirement that abortionists have admitting privileges to nearby hospitals and abortion clinics be regulated as surgical centers was a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
"It sets a national precedent because it is a 5-3 decision," Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, told The Christian Post on Monday. "We think what it means is that states are not able to pass reasonable safety standards to regulate abortion facilities, to bring them up to the same standards of care that patients enjoy for similar procedures other than abortion." more >>