<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org">
<title>Christian Bioethics - recent issues</title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org</link>
<description>Christian Bioethics - RSS feed of recent issues (covers the latest 3 issues, including the current issue) </description>
<prism:eIssn>1744-4195</prism:eIssn>
<prism:publicationName>Christian Bioethics</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>1380-3606</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/29?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/42?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/58?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/78?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/95?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/245?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/251?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/269?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/287?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/303?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/129?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/139?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/159?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/171?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/183?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/199?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/211?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/225?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Is Europe, Along with its Bioethics, Still Christian? Or Already Post-Christian? Reflections on Traditional and Post-Enlightenment Christianities and Their Bioethics]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This introduction explores the relationship between Europe and its Christianities. It analyses different diagnostic and evaluative approaches to Europe's Christian or post-Christian identity. These are grouped around the concepts of diverse traditional, and, on the other hand, post-Enlightenment Christianities. While the first revolves around a liturgical and mystical account of the church, a Christ-centred humanism, an emphasis on man's future life, noetic theology and a foundationalist claim to universal truth, the second endorses a moralization of the "Christian message," political implementation of "Christian goals," rationalism, a this-worldly humanism, and tolerance for religious diversity. Since even the concepts of "traditional" and "post-Enlightenment" Christianity turn out to be deeply ambiguous, the essay concludes with exploring the different ways in which the Christianity of the Apostolic Church, the Enlightenment (along with the "Western" Christianities it shaped), and contemporary liberalism each conceive of their respective endorsements of human freedom as either normative, that is obligatory, value-laden, or contingent, and arbitrary. In each case, a different notion of "tradition" (as well as familial and church authority) is placed either in harmony or in opposition to such freedom. As a result of this conceptual analysis, the deeply fractured identity of Europe, as exemplified by the diverse bioethical positions adopted by the authors in this issue, becomes visible.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Delkeskamp-Hayes, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cb/cbn002</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Is Europe, Along with its Bioethics, Still Christian? Or Already Post-Christian? Reflections on Traditional and Post-Enlightenment Christianities and Their Bioethics]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>28</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/29?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Christian Bioethics: Challenges in a Secularized Europe]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/29?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This article summarizes in three specific sections the key challenges faced by Christian and, particularly Orthodox, ethics in a secularized society. The first section, focusing on the task and aim of ethics, defines Orthodox ethics, which is linked with asceticism (man's attempt to keep the commandments of Christ) and aims at overcoming death and encountering the personal God. Put differently, the purpose of Orthodox ethics is the deification of human beings. The second section defines secularization and explores its consequences for the theology and pastoral work of the Church. Europe is dominated by scholasticism and moralism, whereas Orthodox theology, without rejecting it, transcends such a narrow preoccupation with our own world. Orthodoxy does not regard human beings solely from the perspective of their biological existence but assists them in going beyond mechanistic theories and the pursuit of happiness. The third section briefly describes how what can be termed "bio-theology" surpasses anthropocentric ethics with regard to the relationship between creation and grace, birth and rebirth, cloning and incarnation, transplantation and deification, and death and resurrection. The article concludes that Orthodox theology (a) does not reject the achievements of biotechnology or biomedicine; (b) assists humans in overcoming mortality by finding meaning for their existence and fullness of life, and (c) does not simply postpone death, but overcomes the fear of death and leads people to deification by grace.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cb/cbn004</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Christian Bioethics: Challenges in a Secularized Europe]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>41</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>29</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/42?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Catholic Reflections for an Updated Donum Vitae Instruction: A New Catholic Challenge in a Post-Christian Europe]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/42?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>On February 22, 1987, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published the Donum Vitae Instruction. Twenty years later, on February 22, 2007, Pope Benedict XVI asked for an update of this Instruction. According to the Donum Vitae Instruction of 1987, the principle of the holiness of life imposes respect for human persons from the very beginning of human life. In these past 20 years, new medical techniques have raised fresh ethical issues that are to be addressed by the Roman Catholic Church Magisterium. The Roman Catholic Church, in its update of the Instruction planned for 2007, will have to explain how civil law is to be regulated according to the fundamental norms of the moral law. The moral message of the new Donum Vitae (just as in the 1987 version) will be to affirm the substance of human justice: respect for human life, as expressed in the resolve not to infringe on, or to protect such life. Even in a post-Christian Europe, this theological message can be understood if it is true that Europe is marked by the principle of the absolute protection of human life.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bauzon, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cb/cbn001</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Catholic Reflections for an Updated Donum Vitae Instruction: A New Catholic Challenge in a Post-Christian Europe]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>57</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>42</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/58?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Protection of Life and Human Dignity: The German Debate between Christian Norms and Secular Expectations]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/58?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The German debate on bioethics and medical ethics turns on a change in the meaning of human dignity. Such dignity is increasingly rendered contingent upon a person's empirically assessable quality of life. In contrast to such dignity-endowed human life, a merely biological human life is taken to disqualify its bearer from such dignity, depriving his life of the protection "respect for human dignity" would otherwise guarantee. The idea of a "life not worth living" or "undignified life" evokes categories, which were developed at the beginning of the 20th century, and later informed the crimes of National Socialist medicine in Germany. Against this secular development, this article analyses the theological and church-based discussion of basic bioethical questions in Germany, especially the controversy among Protestants: once Protestant ethicists abandon an explicitly theological basis for their arguments, their conclusions come to closely resemble those of the secular participants in the debate. As a result, such Protestants relativize fundamental ethical norms. They subordinate, along with their secular environment, the protection of life to respect for autonomy. They thus prepare the ground for a revival of the risky concepts of the past.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eibach, U.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cb/cbn003</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Protection of Life and Human Dignity: The German Debate between Christian Norms and Secular Expectations]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>77</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>58</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/78?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Lost Voice: How Libertarianism and Consumerism Obliterate the Need for a Relational Ethics in the National Health Care Service]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/78?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This article analyzes the contribution Christian ethics might be able to make to the ethical debate on policy and caregiving in health and social care in the United Kingdom. The article deals particularly with the concepts of solidarity and subsidiarity which are essential in Christian social ethics and health care ethics, and which may be relevant for the ethical debate on health and social caregiving in the United Kingdom. An important argument in the article is that utilitarian and market-driven policies in the National Health Service (NHS) and the social care system have marginalized the position of the elderly and have seriously impoverished the quality of care for the elderly. The neglect of the elderly and other vulnerable groups is also the result of widespread consumerist attitudes among patients and of libertarian models of noninterference which are affirmed by a public ethos of self-sufficiency and counter-dependency. Those who need care dare not make their need known to others and ask for help, while simultaneously those who could help are so intimidated by the public affirmation of privacy and negative rights that they do not dare to offer help except if this is explicitly demanded. This distant and standoffish attitude is in an important way responsible for the fact that the voice of those in need is altogether lost to the public forum. Christian ethics puts much emphasis on responsibility and solidarity with the needy other but is not able to have much impact on the delivery of care in a secularized society and health care system like the NHS. Nonetheless, Christianity still has a powerful and respected voice, by speaking up for those who cannot speak for themselves, such as the elderly and the handicapped. Christians can find allies in the ethics of care and other relational approaches in health care ethics in order to combat libertarianism, consumerism, and utilitarianism.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ter Meulen, R. H. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cb/cbn005</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Lost Voice: How Libertarianism and Consumerism Obliterate the Need for a Relational Ethics in the National Health Care Service]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>94</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>78</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/95?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Contribution of the Protestant Church in Germany to the Pluralist Discourse in Bioethics: The Case of Stem Cell Research]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/14/1/95?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Christian contributions to the public discourse on bioethics come from individual Christians, from Christian churches, and from academic theology. All contributors must frame their arguments in such a way as to account for the pluralism of worldviews in contemporary Germany. For this purpose, they must take issue with certain hermeneutical and discourse theoretical considerations. That is to say, in order for their contributions to remain normatively authentic in a Christian and Protestant sense, these must relate to Scripture and to Protestantism's confessional documents, and in order for these contributions to remain pertinent and relevant to the facts, they must relate to biomedical, philosophical, and legal contexts. Given these hermeneutical and discourse theoretical requirements, two church statements addressing the ethical discussion concerning the use of embryonic stem cells for medical research are analyzed.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charbonnier, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cb/cbn006</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Contribution of the Protestant Church in Germany to the Pluralist Discourse in Bioethics: The Case of Stem Cell Research]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>107</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>95</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/245?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Introduction]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/245?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dikova, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701732041</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Introduction]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>250</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>245</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Introduction</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/251?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[An Orthodox View of Philanthropy and Church Diaconia]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/251?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>According to Orthodox theology, philanthropy refers to the love of God toward man, which man is called to imitate by loving his neighbor as himself. This love consists not just in emotions but requires specific acts of philanthropy toward our fellow man in need. The church, in keeping the commandments of Christ, has developed throughout her history a rich philanthropic work. The diaconia of the church has taken many forms, thus responding to historical change and to the specific human needs at different times. Concentrating on diaconia for those who are in need of long-term care, this article presents the Orthodox view of the diaconia of the church, as realized through her own philanthropic organizations as well as through her very specific contribution to the diaconia offered by state sponsored charitable institutions.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vantsos, M., Kiroudi, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701732082</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[An Orthodox View of Philanthropy and Church Diaconia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>268</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>251</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/269?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Justice and Long-Term Care: A Theological Ethical Perspective]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/269?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The relevance of justice for the current debate on long-term care is explored on the basis of demographic and economic data, especially in the U.S. and Germany. There is a justice question concerning the quality and availability of long-term care for different groups within society. Mapping the justice debate by discussing the two main opponents, John Rawls and Robert Nozick, the article identifies fundamental assumptions in both theories. An exploration of the biblical concept of the "option for the poor" and its influence on a new "ecumenical social teaching from below" leads to the conclusion that a Christian ethical account of long-term care will argue for a system that guarantees decent care to every citizen. The German model of Soziale Pflegeversicherung is presented as one possible option for putting this ethical guideline into political practice. In a final reflection, the role of religious affiliation for long-term care is discussed by looking at empirical data and by naming seven dimensions of faith-driven long-term care.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bedford-Strohm, H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701732116</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Justice and Long-Term Care: A Theological Ethical Perspective]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>285</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>269</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/287?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Recognition and Social Justice: A Roman Catholic View of Christian Bioethics of Long-Term Care and Community Service]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/287?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Contemporary Christian ethics encounters the challenge to communicate genuinely Christian normative orientations within the scientific debate in such a way as to render these orientations comprehensible, and to maintain or enhance their plausibility even for non-Christians. This essay, therefore, proceeds from a biblical motif, takes up certain themes from the Christian tradition (in particular the idea of social justice), and connects both with a compelling contemporary approach to ethics by secular moral philosophy, i.e. with Axel Honneth's reception of Hegel, as based on Hegel's theory of recognition. As a first step, elements of an ethics of recognition are developed on the basis of an anthropological recourse to the conditions of intersubjective encounters. These conditions are then brought to bear on the idea of social justice, as developed in the social-Catholic tradition, and as systematically explored in the Pastoral Letter of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Economic Justice For All (1986). Proceeding from this basis, aspects of a Christian ethics of community service with regard to long-term care can be defined.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Spiess, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701732066</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Recognition and Social Justice: A Roman Catholic View of Christian Bioethics of Long-Term Care and Community Service]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>301</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>287</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/303?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Philanthropy of the Orthodox Church: A Rumanian Case Study]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/3/303?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>On the basis of a definition of God as "love", human philanthropy is derived from Divine philanthropy, and therefore extends to all human beings. Because Divine philanthropy is most centrally expressed in Christ's incarnation and resurrection, Christ's identification with all who suffer presents the strongest motivation for human philanthropy. After a short review of the Romanian Orthodox Church's development after 1989, the author turns to his special case study, the Social-Medical Day-Care Christian Centre for older citizens. He describes the wan in which Church-based philanthropy can integrate socialmedical with Christian pastoral care, and how this work draws the local communities into assuming a shared responsibility.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan, O.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701732074</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Philanthropy of the Orthodox Church: A Rumanian Case Study]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>307</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>303</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/129?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Traditional Christian Norms and the Shaping of Public Moral Life: How Should Christians Engage in Bioethical Debate within the Public Forum?]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/129?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The TRUTH is announced to creation by the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth. Here, when the consciousness rises above "the double bound of space and time" and enters into eternity, here at this moment of annunciation, the One Who announces the Truth and the Truth Announced coincide completely. In the appearance of the Spirit of Truth, i.e., in the light of Tabor, the form and the content of the Truth are one (Florensky, 1997, p. 106).</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cherry, M. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473505</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Traditional Christian Norms and the Shaping of Public Moral Life: How Should Christians Engage in Bioethical Debate within the Public Forum?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>138</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>129</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/139?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Religious Reasons and Public Healthcare Deliberations]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/139?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This paper critically explores the path of some of the controversies over public reason and religion through four distinct steps. The first part of this article considers the engagement of John Finnis and Robert P. George with John Rawls over the nature of public reason. The second part moves to the question of religion by looking at the engagement of Nicholas Wolterstorff with Rawls, Robert Audi, and others. Here the question turns specifically to religious reasons, and their permissible use by citizens in public debate and discourse. The third part engages J&uuml;rgen Habermas's argument that while citizens must be free to make religious arguments, still, there is an obligation of translation, and a motivational constraint on lawmakers. The final section argues that even though Habermas's proposal fails, nevertheless he recognizes a key difficulty for religious citizens in contemporary liberal polities. Restoration of a full role for religiously grounded justificatory reasons in public debate is one part of an adequate solution to this problem, but a second plank must be added to the solution: recognition that religious reasons can enter into public deliberation not just as first-order justifications of particular policies, but as second-order reasons, to be considered by any polity that respects its religious citizens and, more broadly, the good of religion.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tollefsen, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473638</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Religious Reasons and Public Healthcare Deliberations]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>157</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>139</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/159?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Biothics, the Christian Citizen, and the Pluralist Game]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/159?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The ascendancy of Christian activism in bioethical policy debates has elicited a number of responses by critics of this activism. These critics typically argue that the public square ought to embrace Secular Liberalism (SL), a perspective that its proponents maintain is the most just arrangement in a pluralist society, even though SL places restraints on Christian activists that are not placed on similarly situated citizens who hold more liberal views on bioethical questions. The author critiques three arguments that are offered to defend SL: (1) the golden rule contract argument, (2) the secular reason argument, and (3) the err-on-the-side-of-liberty argument. The author concludes that each of these arguments fail to support SL.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beckwith, F. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473687</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Biothics, the Christian Citizen, and the Pluralist Game]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>170</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>159</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/171?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Rawls and Religious Community: Ethical Decision Making in the Public Square]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/171?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>While most people may initially agree that justice is fairness, as an evangelical Protestant I argue that, for many religious comprehensive doctrines, the Rawlsean model does not possess the resources necessary to sustain tolerance in moral decision making. The weakness of Rawls's model centers on the reasonable priority of convictions that arise from private comprehensive doctrines. To attain a free and pluralistic society, people need resources sufficient to provide reasons to tolerate actions that are otherwise intolerable. In addition to arguing for the deficiency of the Rawlsean political model, I sketch out a preliminary model of ambassadorship that offers religious communities, and in particular Protestant evangelicals, the necessary resources to engage the broader society tolerantly while maintaining their religious convictions. As a citizen of the church and a member of another kingdom, Christians serve as ambassadors to those who are not of the heavenly kingdom. I take this model to be more ambitious than that of a sojourner who lives in the land but is isolated as much as possible from society, while more modest than that of reconstructionists who seek to implement their own sacred law on all others.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gentry, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473661</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Rawls and Religious Community: Ethical Decision Making in the Public Square]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>181</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>171</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/183?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Publicly Accessible Intuitions: "Neutral Reasons" and Bioethics]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/183?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article examines Leon Kass's contention that a choice for physician-assisted suicide is "undignified." Although Kass is Jewish rather than Christian, he argues for positions that most Christians share, and he argues for these positions without presupposing the truth of specific religious claims. I argue that although Kass has some important intuitions, he too readily assumes that these intuitions will be shared by his audience, and that this assumption diminishes the force of his argument. An examination of the limitations of Kass's argument is helpful insofar as it illustrates the real challenge faced by religious believers who wish to defend their beliefs in the "public forum." For it illustrates that what needs to be made "accessible" is the Judeo-Christian understanding of man and his place in the world. While I do not wish to claim that this task is impossible, I do think that it is far more difficult than most realize. Like all important tasks, however, unless we wrestle with the difficulties it raises, our arguments will strike many as unconvincing.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mckay, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473695</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Publicly Accessible Intuitions: "Neutral Reasons" and Bioethics]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>197</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>183</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/199?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Role of Christian Belief in Public Policy]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/199?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>It seems intuitive to the believer that God intended through instruction in the Law to define morality, intended to lead humankind to "the right and the good." Further, God's love for humankind, exemplified by the incarnation, atonement and teachings of Jesus, and empowered by the Holy Spirit, should lead to a better world. Indeed, the Christian worldview is a coherent and valid way to look at bioethical issues in public policy and at the bedside. Yet, as this paper explores, in a pluralistic society such as the United States, it is neither possible nor desirable for Christians to try to force their views on others. Still, it is obligatory for Christians to stand up and articulate their views in the public square. We should try to persuade others using either prudential or moral arguments. While we must be willing to live with "the will of the people," at the same time, we must not be intimidated into accepting the position that our voice is not valid because it has a religious basis.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Orr, R. D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473489</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Role of Christian Belief in Public Policy]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>209</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>199</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/211?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Marriage and the Public Good]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/211?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>In this article I seek to address some misunderstandings in arguments about same sex-marriage. I do this by evaluating several views on homosexuality and marriage. My central aim is to show that a rejection of same-sex marriage does not depend upon the view that homosexual acts are immoral or disordered. Rather, one must examine sexual acts in light of public goods that are at stake. I also argue that the Christian understanding of marriage and sexuality offers more than a set of prohibitions against certain sexual acts. Rather, it offers reasonable principles by which to evaluate the relationship between sexual acts and the public good.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Giampietro, A. E.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473679</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Marriage and the Public Good]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>224</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>211</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/225?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Church and the World: Are There Theological Resources for a Common Conversation?]]></title>
<link>http://cb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/13/2/225?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Abortion is an especially salient issue for considering the general problematic of religiously based conversation in the public square. It remains deeply divisive, fully thirty-four years after Roe v. Wade. Such divisiveness cannot be interpreted as merely an expression of profound differences between "secular" and "religious" voices, because differences also emerge among Christian denominations, reflecting different sources of moral authority, different accounts of moral discernment, and different judgments about the appropriate relations between law and morality in the context of pluralism. As this paper explores, however, despite those differences, a generally identifiable "Christian" position concerning the moral status of abortion can be distinguished from secular philosophical judgments on the issue, which is important for Christian engagement with public policy debate.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lustig, B. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-01-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1080/13803600701473646</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Church and the World: Are There Theological Resources for a Common Conversation?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Journal of Christian Bioethics Inc</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>13</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>244</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>225</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Original Articles</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>