There are moments when I could imagine being a lexicographer. One of the most interesting stories of the last few centuries must be how rapturous intensity of feeling came to be regarded as a good thing rather than a bad one, and the terms we use to describe it became words of praise.
Question:
Can you suggest – for starters -- just one thing to read about contemporary religion clause jurisprudence? Have you written anything about it? And what did the Framers themselves mean by the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses?
Here is more I’ve learned about blogging. If you missed the previous post, you can pick it up here.
A reader who is considering blogging asks me to blog about blogging. Since I’ve been at it for a few years, what have learned?
Maybe not much. Presently the site is pulling five to six thousand hits a month. That may sound like a lot, but in the blogosphere, it isn’t really.
If you think you are called to be a scholar of the liberal arts, I encourage you. But let me rattle your thinking a little about how to do it.
Question:
My question is really double. Or triple. First, disparagement of natural law has been a common theme in most of my law school courses. I expected that. What I didn’t expect is that everyone calls natural law theory “natural rights theory.” Is there a historical or ideological reason for this change in terms? If so, could you comment on it?
The sluggish economy, combined with the failure of the political class, has does more than put people out of work. Another result is that for the time being, the two dominant sentiments among the population are no longer liberal and conservative, but leftist and nativist.
The lesson of recent history – in every realm from politics to popular culture -- is that you can push the boundaries of the sayable just by saying it, and you can push the boundaries of the doable just by doing it.
Unfortunately, the barbarians have been quicker to learn the lesson.