Marc Stier at Large

There is a Greek word, kalon, that refers to someone whose grace and nobility is so impressive that it is in fact beautiful. The human being on this planet whose life is best described by that word died today. Mandela showed us that a political life can be what it so rarely is, graceful, noble, and beautiful. Continue reading

The key issue is not just whether corporations have a right to religious freedom that allows them to escape government regulations that have a secular purpose. It is also, and more importantly, whether anyone has a religious right to escape from such regulations. Except with regard to regulations that impinge on religious ritual practices, I think the answer is no. If you look back at the text that gave one of the first and still most powerful arguments for religious freedom, Locke’s Essay on Toleration, you will see that religious freedom is not the freedom to have one’s own religious beliefs trump laws that have a legitimate purpose in serving the common good or protecting the rights of other. Continue reading

So I recognized something fascinating today. I sometimes try to explain to progressives that the barriers to some of the policies they favor, like single payer, are not just or mainly corporate contributions but, first, the structural features of our government that make it extremely difficult to enact legislation and, second, the anti-statist views of Americans that lead them to distrust large expansions of government power. And they always say I’m wrong, especially about the anti-statist views of Americans. But let the US government do something of which they disapprove, e.g., collecting the meta-data from phone conversations, or make a botch of something, e.g., the ACA website, and you find these same progressives expressing views that echo the borderline paranoid anti-government, anti-statist arguments of the right. Now they are the ones who are suspicious of or impatient with the “damn government.” My point is not just that the left is… Continue reading

The Republicans are angry that Democrats, by eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court justices, are doing something so undemocratic, so unconstitutional, so disrespecting of minority rights that … Republicans are threatening to do the exact same thing once in power. This is the type of ethics that you find among kindergarteners (“you stole my toy, so it’s okay to steal yours”), or among people who believe in some crude version of an eye-for-an-eye. If McConnell and his caucus are serious, they should change the rules back once they have a majority. But of course they won’t. The whole display is a charade. The only surprise is how blatantly obvious the charade is. Continue reading

I, for one, have no trouble with George Bush speaking before a group that seeks to convert Jews. Of course, I disagree with the notion that underlies the effort to convert Jews, that there is only one path to salvation or redemption by God. But my religious belief doesn’t depend on what other people think. And I care more about whether someone respects me as an individual than whether they respect my religious (or philosophical or political beliefs.) It’s a sign of respect for people as individuals that we try to reason with them and convince them of the truth as we see it. Tolerance means allowing others to speak their minds and act on their beliefs, not being wishy-washy about one’s own beliefs. Continue reading