The allied judges at Nuremburg had little sympathy for the reply, “I was just following orders.” What if the defendants had said, “I was just following my conscience?” Would that have made a difference? Would it have made what they did right? We often treat an appeal to conscience as a justification for our behavior. Does conscience really justify? Read

My description of the natural law in Part I as the naturally knowable law of right and wrong is likely to prompt an objection. How can the idea of a moral law known to all people square with the undeniable fact of widespread moral disagreement between sincere and thoughtful people? If everyone can know, for example, that sex is right and good and humanly fulfilling only in marriage, why do so many people seem not to know it? Read

Western ethical tradition, as far back as Aristotle and even further, has acknowledged that moral truth exists; that its existence does not depend upon the customs or opinions of individuals or groups; that people can know it exists and so know the difference between right and wrong; that its knowability is, as it were, part of the order of the universe; and that all people are bound to obedience to this natural moral order, even if their obedience causes them rejection, suffering and even death. Read

Now that recreational pot smoking is legal in seven states and the District of Columbia (and for medical and pseudo-medical reasons in twenty more), many good people are wondering, why not pot? You can eat it, vape it, mook it, dab it, tinc it, and rub it. Everyone is doing it to relax, stir creativity and awaken their libido. Why the heck not join in? Read