Can Christian Adoption Agencies be Defended? - Part I

Recently I read about some efforts by the ACLU in Michigan to challenge the status of Christian adoption agencies.  Many similar programs have been shut down across the country because of their practice of only adopting children to homes with a mother and father.** That is to say, not because they have bad track records or unacceptable waiting periods, but because their opponents claim they are employing arbitrary bigotry and bronze-age superstitions.

That’s what I want to look at today.  Is there a defense to be made for these Christian adoption programs?  Is there a way to challenge the assertion that they employ bigotry?

**(Wait a minute… abortion-rights-supporters always say Christians don’t care about children after they’re born.  Why do all these Christian adoption agencies exist?  That’s odd... )

My 2018 Bible Talk - 3 Critiques of the Gospels

Two years ago I gave the "Bible Talk" at our parish's youth retreat.  This year I was slated to be the back-up speaker.  So I prepared this presentation just in case.

In it, I explore three critiques you hear about the Bible and why they don't work. Hope you enjoy!

Consequentialism, and the Justifying the A-Bomb

Like most American kids, I learned about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in elementary school history class.  I was shown the image of the mushroom cloud and perhaps a few destroyed buildings.  But then I was shown the fanfare in New York City celebrating the surrender of the Japanese and the closing of World War II.

Regarding the morality of dropping the atomic bomb, I learned – and wholeheartedly believed – the following argument:

“Yes, the atomic bomb killed tens of thousands of people.  That is the horror of war.  However, the other option was to invade Japan.  That would have resulted in a brutal fight against a determined enemy which would likely cost millions of human lives.  So which do you choose?  The option that kills tens of thousands, or the one that kills millions?”

The obvious answer is the one that involves less death.  Thus the dropping of the atomic bomb, while unpleasant and sad, was a justifiable and necessary event that saved millions of lives.

But as I grew in my understanding of the Christian faith, I had to ask myself… is that true?

Answering the "Unanswerable" Clinic Dilemma

Dear Apologist, I was asked a question about having to choose between saving frozen embryos or saving a toddler from a burning building.  I want to choose the two year-old, but I think this undercuts the pro-life assertion about life beginning at conception.  Help!

Good Without God: Can Natural Explanations Succeed?

In a previous post we began looking at moral philosophy.  I began by exploring the concept of God as “the Good”.  Then I explained how this translates into the real, objective moral facts and duties which we intuitively know exist.

Today we’re turning our attention to materialistic, non-theistic attempts to do the same. But before we do that, let's set out the goalpost again.  We are trying to explain the existence of objective moral facts and duties:

“A standard of right and wrong – good and evil – which superintends human actions.  Moral facts which exist independently of human minds, to which we have a duty to conform our lives.”

Can these two most common secular attempts to ground objective morality successfully clear that goal?  Let’s find out.