Interaction between Peter Singer and Christian ethics, to the extent that it has happened at all, has been unproductive and often antagonistic. Singer sees himself as leading a 'Copernican Revolution' against a sanctity of life ethic, while many Christians associate his work with a 'culture of death.' Charles Camosy shows that this polarized understanding of the two positions is a mistake. While their conclusions about abortion and euthanasia may differ, there is surprising overlap in Christian and Singerite arguments, and disagreements are interesting and fruitful. Furthermore, it turns out that Christians and Singerites can even make common cause, for instance in matters such as global poverty and the dignity of non-human animals. Peter Singer and Christian ethics are far closer than almost anyone has imagined, and this book is valuable to those who are interested in fresh thinking about the relationship between religious and secular ethics.

Interaction between Peter Singer and Christian ethics, to the extent that it has happened at all, has been unproductive and often antagonistic. Singer sees himself as leading a 'Copernican Revolution' against a sanctity of life ethic, while many Christians associate his work with a 'culture of death.' Charles Camosy shows that this polarized understanding of the two positions is a mistake. While their conclusions about abortion and euthanasia may differ, there is surprising overlap in Christian and Singerite arguments, and disagreements are interesting and fruitful. Furthermore, it turns out that Christians and Singerites can even make common cause, for instance in matters such as global poverty and the dignity of non-human animals. Peter Singer and Christian ethics are far closer than almost anyone has imagined, and this book is valuable to those who are interested in fresh thinking about the relationship between religious and secular ethics.

It is no secret: the body of Christ in the United States is broken. While universality-and unity amid diversity-is a fundamental characteristic of Roman Catholicism, all-too-familiar issues related to gender, sexuality, race, and authority have rent the church. Healthy debates, characteristic of a living tradition, suffer instead from an absence of genuine engagement and dialogue. But there is still much that binds American Catholics. In naming the wounds and exploring their social and religious underpinnings, Polarization in the US Catholic Church underscores how shared beliefs and aspirations can heal deep fissures and the hurts they have caused. Cutting across disciplinary and political lines, this volume brings essential commentary in the direction of reclaimed universality among American Catholics.

The abortion debate in the United States is confused. Ratings-driven media coverage highlights extreme views and creates the illusion that we are stuck in a hopeless stalemate. In this book, now in paperback (published in hardcover in March 2015) Charles Camosy argues that our polarised public discourse hides the fact that most Americans actually agree on the major issues at stake in abortion morality and law. Unpacking the complexity of the abortion issue, Camosy shows that placing oneself on either side of the typical polarisations - pro-life vs. pro-choice, liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican - only serves to further confuse the debate and limits our ability to have fruitful dialogue. Camosy then proposes a new public policy that he believes is consistent with the beliefs of the broad majority of Americans and supported by the best ideas and arguments about abortion from both secular and religious sources.

"For Love of Animals" is an honest and thoughtful look at our responsibility as Christians with respect to animals. Many Christians misunderstand both history and their own tradition in thinking about animals. They are joined by prominent secular thinkers who blame Christianity for the Western world's failure to seriously consider the moral status of animals.
This book explains how traditional Christian ideas and principles--like nonviolence, concern for the vulnerable, respect for life, stewardship of God's creation, and rejection of consumerism--require us to treat animals morally. Though this point of view is often thought of as liberal, the book cites several conservatives who are also concerned about animals. Camosy's Christian argument transcends secular politics.
The book's starting point for a Christian position on animals--from the creation story in Genesis to Jesus' eating habits in the Gospels--rests in Scripture. It then moves to explore the views of the Church Fathers, the teachings of the Catholic Church, and current discussions in both Catholic and Protestant theology. Ultimately, however, the book is concerned not with abstract ideas, but with how we should live our everyday lives. Should Christians eat meat? Is cooperation with factory farming evil? What sort of medical research on animals is justified? Camosy also asks difficult questions about hunting and pet ownership.
This is an ideal resource for those who are interested in thinking about animals from the perspective of Christian ethics and the consistent ethic of life. Discussion questions at the end of each chapter and suggestions for further reading round out the usefulness of this important work.

In Too Expensive to Treat? Charles Camosy takes readers deep into the emotionally charged and expensive world of the neonatal intensive care unit to examine the hard truth about heath care rationing in the United States. While fully affirming the human worth of even the tiniest baby, Camosy maintains that all people have equal dignity and should have an equal right to a proportionate share of community health care resources. Readers may find Camosys arguments provocative, even troubling but the conversation he draws them into is one that cannot be ignored. A substantial contribution to the literature on controlling health-care costs. . . . Camosy has written a provocative book, marrying the ordinary/extraordinary means tradition to Catholic social teaching and arguing that it is morally necessary to take costs into account in making decisions about who should receive high-tech neonatal intensive care. Since the magnitude of the problems Camosy addresses will only increase, this is a book that should be read for years to come. Daniel Sulmasy University of Chicago This book is a must-read for neonatologists and bioethicists, for religious leaders of all Christian traditions, and for policy makers. While Camosy focuses on the imperiled newborn and Medicaid, his argument could easily be expanded to imperiled cases of any age. Steven R. Leuthner Medical College of Wisconsin Camosy not only shows us how to solve a pressing social and bioethical problem. He also shows us how principles regarding human dignity, ordinary and extraordinary means, and social justice unite to form a coherent bioethical approach to health care justice that resonates far beyond the Catholic tradition. Camosys proposal will delight some and disturb others, but it deserves the closest attention of neonatologists, bioethicists, health policy experts, and anyone who hopes for a more just health care system in the United States. Gerald McKenny University of Notre Dame