What can you hold against a man that is well read, knows both sides of an issue sincerely, but rejects yours?
Chesterton was admired and respected by his most ardent opponents similarly. That is our Christian/Jewish ideal!
Yes, we believe our side is more right by far and ought be the way of the land, but if your opponent is honest, knowledgeable about your own points, and still disagrees, then at least you ought respect him as a person.
The judge is doing that with Jon and is that himself. Praise that!!!
Two not-low-information voters!
Just what we whine about needing!
Maybe my personal dictatorship WOULD make me happier after all?
” ... you ought respect him as a person.”
I said nothing about whether or not I respect the Judge as a person. I simply cannot see how he reconciles his self-proclaimed “traditional Catholicism” with libertarianism. But maybe you can enlighten me about how it is possible to espouse both doctrines and not get tied up in intellectual knots. You can start with their respective views on, say, abortion.