For much of the second half of the twentieth century, America's courts--state and federal--have injected themselves into what many critics consider to be fundamentally moral or political disputes. By constitutionalizing these disputes, many feel that the courts have reduced the ability of Americans to engage in traditional, political modes of settling differences over issues that excite particular passion. While legal discourse is well suited to choosing decisive winners and losers, political discourse is perhaps more conducive to reasonable compromise and accommodation. In Courts and the Culture Wars Bradley C. S. Watson has brought together some of America's most distinguished names in constitutional theory and practice to consider the impact of judicial engagement in the moral, religious, and cultural realms--including such issues as school prayer, abortion, gay rights, and expressive speech.

In Edmund Burke: A Bibliography of Secondary Studies to 1982 Clara Gandy and Peter Stanlis write, "One of the large unanswered questions is how Burke's economic theory is related to his political theory, and whether they are complementary or contradictory." Canavan is the first to offer a book-length treatment of this question, and in so doing, he places the strength of his argument largely on primary sources rather than a patchwork of previous interpretations. Canavan aims to show that Burke's own emphasis was no on capitalistic laissez-fair economics, as has been assumen, but that his goals were primarily political and cultural. Namely, Burke sought the preservation and development of an aristocratic and Christian civilization supported economically by a leading class of landed property owners. This study projects a new profile of Burke which challenges C.B. Macpherson's sketch of him as a bourgeois capitalist, or, as depicted by J.B. Plumb and Frank O'Gorman, as a hired philsopher of the Whig Oligarchy. Nor does Canavan's study present the philosopher as one who would "declare war on the poor," as Gertrude Himmelfarb charged in her The Idea of Poverty. Burke emerges from Canavan's treatment as a Whiug who admired paternalistic government by the rich and virtuous whom he felt would govern as trustees for the benefit of the whole people. Burke did not support the notion that property by monopolized by any one class in society, but wanted the wealthy to empower intermediary institutions which would hold in check the control of the expansive state, whether that meant the Crown in Britain or the revolutionary state in France.

In Edmund Burke: A Bibliography of Secondary Studies to 1982 Clara Gandy and Peter Stanlis write, "One of the large unanswered questions is how Burke's economic theory is related to his political theory, and whether they are complementary or contradictory." Canavan is the first to offer a book-length treatment of this question, and in so doing, he places the strength of his argument largely on primary sources rather than a patchwork of previous interpretations. Canavan aims to show that Burke's own emphasis was no on capitalistic laissez-fair economics, as has been assumen, but that his goals were primarily political and cultural. Namely, Burke sought the preservation and development of an aristocratic and Christian civilization supported economically by a leading class of landed property owners. This study projects a new profile of Burke which challenges C.B. Macpherson's sketch of him as a bourgeois capitalist, or, as depicted by J.B. Plumb and Frank O'Gorman, as a hired philsopher of the Whig Oligarchy. Nor does Canavan's study present the philosopher as one who would "declare war on the poor," as Gertrude Himmelfarb charged in her The Idea of Poverty. Burke emerges from Canavan's treatment as a Whiug who admired paternalistic government by the rich and virtuous whom he felt would govern as trustees for the benefit of the whole people. Burke did not support the notion that property by monopolized by any one class in society, but wanted the wealthy to empower intermediary institutions which would hold in check the control of the expansive state, whether that meant the Crown in Britain or the revolutionary state in France.

For much of the second half of the twentieth century, America's courts--state and federal--have injected themselves into what many critics consider to be fundamentally moral or political disputes. By constitutionalizing these disputes, many feel that the courts have reduced the ability of Americans to engage in traditional, political modes of settling differences over issues that excite particular passion. While legal discourse is well suited to choosing decisive winners and losers, political discourse is perhaps more conducive to reasonable compromise and accommodation. In Courts and the Culture Wars Bradley C. S. Watson has brought together some of America's most distinguished names in constitutional theory and practice to consider the impact of judicial engagement in the moral, religious, and cultural realms--including such issues as school prayer, abortion, gay rights, and expressive speech.

The 'pluralist game, ' the way in which we attempt to resolve the problems arising out of our pluralism through the political and judicial processes, necessarily engages the citizens of our society. This book brings together 14 essays from a leading Catholic political theorist to address the central issue of American theological, political, and social thought: the relationship between religion, morals, law, and public policy in a pluralistic liberal society