ADF

Owen Strachan: A Cultural Battle for the Restroom


If you were to ask—just a few short years ago—the site of our hottest cultural disagreement, who’d have guessed it would be the restroom?

It’s true. In recent years, Western society has faced a major push to overhaul our understanding of the sexes. We’re told our categories of “man” and “woman” are unfair … too binary. In deference to those struggling with gender identity, we’re urged to re-envision society from the ground up—or should I say, the bathroom floor up.

But this new secular orthodoxy is getting some serious pushback. Recently, The Economist ran an editorial by a “transsexual” person who said this: “Biological sex is real and is the very foundation of our species.” Author Kristina Harrison argues that denying this reality will set women and children up for exploitation.

The author is right.

There’s a better way forward that is compassionate but recognizes that we really have been created male and female.

Read More »

David Davenport: Judges Should Respect The Constitution More Than Precedent


Below the surface of Senate hearings on whether Judge Brett Kavanaugh should be confirmed to the Supreme Court is a tug of war that should be brought to light.  It is a battle between a judge’s commitment to follow judicial precedents versus faithfulness to the Constitution itself.

Federal courts tack right and left, as Republican and Democratic presidents appoint their judges.  More liberal judges increase federal power and conservative judges restrain it.  But when liberal courts take the law to the left, they set precedents that conservative judges feel obligated to follow, even when the decisions were not constitutionally sound.

There is value in precedent—without it the legal system would become unpredictable and unstable. But more important is following the Constitution itself. We need judges who will do both. But we don’t want slaves to precedent—whether or not that precedent is faithful to the Constitution.

Read More »

Lanhee Chen: An Alliance Worth Defending


There’s been a lot of talk recently about whether NATO—an alliance started after World War II—is still relevant in today’s world.  The answer is a simple and unequivocal “yes.” It is.

The alliance is on the front lines of our efforts to counteract Russia’s growing ambitions in Europe and beyond.  But NATO does need to evolve, to meet the growing threats of the 21st century. It should be oriented, for example, toward efforts to counter the growing threats of cyber-terrorism and Russian efforts to meddle in democratic elections in member nations.

And: NATO members must contribute their fair share. President Trump is right to press our European allies to invest more in their own defensive capacities.

But NATO has been, and continues to be, an integral part of our national  security strategy.

It’s an alliance worth defending.

Read More »

A Supreme Court Nominee and the Confirmation Battle that Awaits


Townhall Review – July 14, 2018

Hugh Hewitt is joined by Leonard Leo, head of the Federalist Society, to look at the confirmation process for the newly-nominated U. S. Supreme Court Justice. Mike Gallagher turns to Wendy Long to examine the vicious partisanship expected during the confirmation process. CNN’s legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin joins Hugh Hewitt with his analysis of the nominee and the confirmation. Michael Medved speaks with economist Stephen Moore about the latest jobs report. Larry Elder’s guest, Walter Williams, author, columnist, and economics professor at George Mason University, explains why parenting is the number one problem facing education in our African-American urban areas. Mike Gallagher discusses NATO with Michael Desch, Director of the National Security Center at Notre Dame. Dennis Prager asks some questions about the growing “rudeness” phenomenon.

Read More »

Hugh Hewitt: Judge Kavanaugh Is Justice John Roberts 2.0


The nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court by President Trump marks what could well be the first ever reliable majority or what conservative legal scholars call “originalist” and “textualist” Justices on the Supreme Court.

If confirmed, it’s a triumph for the conservative legal movement that took 30 years to achieve, but it’s almost here—at long last. In temperament, character and judicial philosophy Judge Kavanaugh is very much Justice John Roberts 2.0

This doesn’t mean a reactionary or right wing activist radical court, but rather one committed to the Constitution and to precedent, to religious liberty and free speech, to property rights and the Second Amendment.

Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation will be dispositive if the question: “Should I have voted for Trump?” arises.

The answer of course is, “Yes.”

Read More »