The State of First Things, March 2010

Reviewing the March 2010 issue feels like cheating. It is the 20th Anniversary issue, and they decided to do a Best of First Things issue. The format was interesting--they have around a half-dozen short paragraphs from assorted issues from each of the 20 years plus reprints of seven full-length articles.

The summary--First Things used to be very, very good. Determining whether it still is that good is the whole point of this series of reviews.

There is a real need for a magazine like First Things; there simply aren't any other places which have a serious discussion of the place of religion in the Public Square. On the whole, the magazine has done a great job putting religious thought back into the center of the political discussion. The one mistake was the issue they ran about the End of Democracy, in which they wondered when it was time to remove support for the American Government, with some vague hints about armed resistance. A serious mistake, that--but I suspect Neuhaus was happy about all the attention it drew to the magazine. The general point of the essays was entirely correct, however--increasingly, democracy is dying in America as Americans now look to an unelected Supreme Court to decide all matters of right and wrong.

The other interesting feature of First Things is that it is funny. Indeed, conservative publications tend to be funnier than liberal publications. Reprinted in this issue, for example, is the essay in which Alan Jacobs absolutely destroys Kahlil Gibran's collected works by mocking them in style and substance for three pages--it is funny, brilliant and devastating. You can read it here.


Also, consider this, written by Robert George in "Killing Abortionists: A Symposium" from 1994:

"I am personally opposed to killing abortionists. However, inasmuch as my personal opposition to this practice is rooted in a sectarian (Catholic) religious belief in the sanctity of human life, I am unwilling to impose it on others who may, as a matter of conscience, take a different view. Of course, I am entirely in favor of policies aimed at removing the root causes of violence against abortionists. Indeed, I would go so far as to support mandatory one-week waiting periods, and even nonjudgmental counseling, for people who are contemplating the choice of killing an abortionist. I believe in policies that reduce the urgent need some people feel to kill abortionists while, at the same time, respecting the rights of conscience of my fellow citizens who believe that the killing of abortionists is sometimes a tragic necessity--not a good, but a lesser evil. In short, I am moderately pro-choice."

That's why I keep reading First Things.