Friday’s order may prevent the Obama administration from enforcing the contraception mandate against the Little Sisters of the Poor, but it also may have just won the administration’s case.
A 13-year-old student recently took a picture of a poster hanging at her school that listed ways in which couples can express affection, including grinding and oral sex. Some parents are outraged, and the sex ed curriculum is now under review. But should it be?
The federal poverty guidelines, which dictate eligibility of most public benefits, including food stamps, is flawed in that it does not account for variances in cost of living.
The March for Life, the yearly protest on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, is a Catholic affair, supported by the bishops and the pope. And Republicans.
What if the battalions of lawyers, pundits, and politicians have missed the easiest—and possibly best—argument against “corporate religious liberty rights” in the high-profile legal cases that challenge the contraception mandate in the Affordable Care Act?
On Monday, an anti-choice website incorrectly noted that eight abortion clinics in Pennsylvania have closed since 2012, misinformation that was picked up by credible news outlets that in some cases attributed the two closures to Act 122—another misstep.
Despite the fact that New Jersey promotes maternal methadone programs, state officials want to charge women who use methadone while pregnant with child abuse.
Rio Grande Valley residents who seek an abortion now have limited options: drive hundreds of miles; continue their pregnancy; schedule a later, more expensive procedure once they find the means to pay; or attempt to self-induce an abortion using occasionally dangerous and often ineffective means.
Last month’s CNN piece on sex trafficking in Cambodia was notable because it represented a common failure of the media to report effectively on issues like trafficking in ways that do not compound the harm to those most affected.
Forty-one years since Roe v. Wade, the question is: Will the Roberts Court do to Roe and abortion rights what it did to health-care reform and keep just enough of it intact to call it legal, while rendering it nearly impossible to obtain?