The Idaho Supreme Court ruled the state constitution does not include a fundamental right to abortion and the framers and adopters of the Inalienable Rights Clause did not intend to implicitly protect abortion as a fundamental right.
As countries around the world pursue the potential advantages of a CBDC, citizens must remain vigilant and ensure their rights to privacy and freedom are protected.
As the prospect of central bank digital currency (CBDC) rises, citizens must be aware of its potential impacts on their privacy and freedom. Governments must ensure that citizens’ rights are respected so the benefits of CBDC don’t come at the expense of citizens’ control of their own finances.
By Dr. Ted McAllister and Dr. Andrew Yuengert – Any university that is serious about its Christian mission must recognize that today it confronts an educational establishment that operates with a vision that is incompatible with the most basic philosophical commitments of a Christian institution.
Jesus overturned the money-changer tables in the Temple, declaring corruption and greed to be over. His action focused attention on the Roman system of temple currency and highlighted the unfair exchange rates. His action declared the money-changers to be “bankrupt” in the most literal sense.
Regardless of what you think about abortion, the Supreme Court’s rationale in Dobbs severely limits the scope of the Bill of Rights. What the Court could have done differently.Â
A bill making its way through the California legislature would make it legal to encourage the terminally ill to engage in physician-assisted suicide.
Federal court rules ACLU lacks standing to sue Catholic hospitals that refuse to provide abortion and contraceptive services
March 2016 has been punctuated by violence. On March 4, a group of terrorists attacked a convent and nursing home run by the Missionaries of Charity, also known as Mother Teresa’s Home, in Yemen. Sixteen people, including eight residents, four nuns, and several other volunteers were killed.
This morning the eight-member United States Supreme Court heard the contraceptive mandate cases that were consolidated under the name Zubik v. Burwell (Docket Number 15-191). (See transcript.) They key issue in all the cases was religious employers who rejected the method of receiving the “religious employer exemption” to the Affordable Care Act (2010) which required group health plans and insurance issues to offer plans that provided “approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity.”