it's not merely in the American mind that the transformation has taken place but in its soul, which is much more troubling.

to see Justice Roberts et al, simply rise up out of their seats and silently walk out.

Gerson dissembles from start to finish here as usual, and displays which side of the moral divide he's really on.

True, resistance to the mainstreaming of homosexuality (which he slyly mislabels 'anti-homosexual rights') and objections to Roe v. Wade used to proceed from the same moral framework. They no longer do because America has been deceived into replacing the former Biblical framework from which all of our customs, mores, and laws proceeded, with a humanistic and relativistic framework which is malleable as the situation warrants depending upon whose control of the discussion is more dominant.

Morality has now been replaced, in most American's minds, with utilitarianism, and they no longer distinguish on the basis...

"You can't, but you can't verify the claims made by the Mormons nor much of what you find in the Bible."

Ah, "nor MUCH of what you find in the Bible". Perhaps, but we are taking about foundational claims, in other words, that claim upon which all other claims depend and which must be true and able to be verified in some way accessible to the rational mind.

"I guess they are a false cult too."

Well, they're either true or false depending upon whether the claim is true or not. How can one corroborate it if one was so inclined?

"Actually he received revelations (or the claim of the faithful) from the arch angel Gabriel which was the word of Allah and would become the Qu'ran and these revelations continued for over 20 years."

How can I, as an honest skeptic, corroborate that claim?

"if Christians were more content to live their faith and leave the rest of us alone and not use the power of the state to advance their own religious beliefs, I'd have less issues with them."

What religious belief are you now under compulsion to adhere to that you formerly were not, Akagi?

On the one hand he decries our assuming the role of an "empire" but when one of our "subjects" decides to act unilaterally, he gets upset.

Maybe it's which subject is acting unilaterally?

You're confusing me. If you wish us to withdraw and let the parties settle their differences on their own, what difference does it make to us then if Israel decides to build in East Jerusalem? Or anywhere else, for that matter?

You got that right.