What is the best way to communicate the truth about human dignity in the public square? Are secular terms to be preferred, since they are not easily and quickly dismissed by non-believers? Or are explicitly and purely secular arguments simply not up to snuff for demonstrating the sanctity of all human life? See the proceedings of the Human Life Review ‘s recent symposium , “Truth-Telling in the Public Square.”
. . . while all of the nine contributors to “Truth-Telling in the Public Square” agree on the inviolability of human life, each comes at the question of how best to argue for it in the public square from their own unique, and engaging, angle. Some come down on the side of the secular, some the sacred, and some think each argument makes sense . . . to a point. Some question whether one can persuade through argument at all.
. . . the reader follows the twists and turns of a fascinating discussion which reflects the richness of our Western, Judeo-Christian culture. Contributors look to, for example, ancient Greece (Hippocrates, Euclid), the Talmud, the Gospel and papal encyclicals, to natural law, and to American history and the abolitionist movement. Remarkably, you may come away agreeing with both Blackburn and Smith.
Among the contributers were Timothy Cardinal Dolan, and our magazine’s very own David Mills and Rusty Reno. Their articles can be found by visiting the Human Life Review homepage and scrolling down.
