In the Detroit Free Press, John explains the Court’s decision in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case. From the piece: The case was not “narrowly decided” in the sense of being a close verdict: Indeed, it was a 7-2 decision. But it was “narrowly written,” in the sense of applying only to this particular commission’s treatment of this particular […]
The Message of Masterpiece Read More »
At The New York Times, John explains how to draw a line between some of the cake cases in the news. From the article: Therein lies the crucial difference between the cases: Silva’s objection was about what she sold; a design-based objection. Phillips’s objection was about to whom it was sold; a user-based objection. The gay
Slicing the Cake Cases Read More »
At Slate, John explains why a recent case involving a Kentucky shop that refused to print an LGBT Pride t-shirt was rightly decided. From the piece: [T]he legal boundaries that produce such implications are the very same ones that protect the baker who declines to write “Homosexuality is a detestable sin”; the print shop owner
John on the Kentucky Print Shop Case Read More »
In a Detroit Free Press op-ed, John calls for nuance in reactions to the Orlando shooting: In Mateen’s case, there’s less evidence of religious extremism inciting murder than of a violent individual reaching for the nearest violent ideology to justify his violent tendencies — tendencies that arose from various causes, both religious and secular .
Reflections on the Orlando Massacre Read More »
At The Philosophers’ Magazine, as part of an issue on “50 New Ideas In Philosophy,” John discusses the emergence and future of LGBTQ philosophy as “applied” philosophy. An excerpt: [M]uch of what occurs under the mantle of applied ethics is neither applied nor ethics. The word “applied” suggests taking a developed theory and then drawing
Applied Philosophy Out of the Closet Read More »
At the Detroit Free Press, I give a brief lesson on the pursuit of wisdom. From the op-ed: By mocking philosophy, and the humanities more generally, Rubio devalues the pursuit of wisdom: the critical scrutiny of our fundamental beliefs and convictions; the quest to understand the world and our place in it, the exploration of great
Why Marco Rubio Needs Philosophy Read More »
At CU-Boulder’s What’s Wrong? blog, my colleague Katherine Kim and I consider some of the pros and cons of religious arbitration. From the essay: An important feature of liberal (i.e. free) states is to protect citizens’ moral agency, allowing them to align their actions with their moral convictions. Many citizens base their moral convictions on
What’s Wrong with Religious Arbitration? Read More »
At the CU-Boulder “What’s Wrong?” blog, I respond to religious conservatives who claim that anti-discrimination laws that cover sexual orientation strip them of their liberty. From the essay: It’s worth emphasizing, however, that this concern is not unique to same-sex marriage. Oregon prohibits discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of “race, color, religion, sex,
“Bake Me a Cake”: Three Paths for Balancing Liberty and Equality Read More »
In response to Dan Johnson, who critiques my New York Times piece “Gay Rights and the Race Analogy,” I offer a rejoinder at The Partially Examined Life. An excerpt: I actually support antidiscrimination laws that cover sexual orientation and gender identity. But I think we need a better argument for them than “because … segregated
Rejoinder to Dan Johnson Read More »
Yesterday at the Detroit Free Press I argued that supporting Kim Davis’s religious liberty doesn’t mean tolerating her refusal to do her job as county clerk. “Religious liberty does not entitle the bearer to line-item vetoes for essential job functions,” I wrote. In passing I mentioned that she has been divorced multiple times, which shows
Davis Defenders No Better at Interpreting Bible than Interpreting Constitution Read More »