What the coronavirus has revealed is not so much a new reality but the fault lines of an already existing clash that was bound to occur.

A simple pro-life analysis does not yield much fruit or shed much light on how the government should act in foreign policy.

Though the Bible does not give us a clear schematic of how we are to order our political life, it does something more profound: it gives us a frame for all reality, history, and humanity.

The realism in Christian Realism lies in the tension between the redemption and hope that the Gospel brings for a world ensnared in sin and cynicism, and the reality that sin and its effects are still pervasive and will continue to cripple and limit the possibilities for justice this side of paradise.

The debate in America about Iran is not about war vs. peace. That is not the debate because that is not the choice.

There is a deep split over foreign policy within the psyche of the Democratic Party.

If we are going to get anywhere in this debate about liberalism, we should take on the strongest arguments from our opponents and not their weakest or most caricatured. While I do not think Christians should see liberal democracy as the enemy, I do think its critics often have a point.

In the wake of the Washington Post’s big document dump of secret government and military communications about the war in Afghanistan, a fresh wave of calls for pulling out of Afghanistan is sounding across the media.

A basic rule of discriminating moral reasoning is that we are only obliged to do an action that we are able to do. That is, an ought implies a can.

If William McRaven is truly concerned about the trust the military has earned across our society, he would be more reluctant to drag it into the political muck.