The notion of assimilation by immigrant groups remains beset by conceptual confusion. An examination of the way that assimilation developed in the American past, especially in the period after World War II, provides a way of cutting through the conceptual fog. Key features of historical assimilation are captured by the definition of the concept in neo-assimilation theory. However, debate over the present-day role of mainstream assimilation has been renewed by the advent of segmented assimilation. Both theories can point to evidence about the second generations issuing from contemporary immigrant groups to support their claims. A mixed picture is also found in the fundamental economic and demographic trends that are prognostic about assimilation.
In a day when marriage as an institution is coming progressively under fire and counter-culture groups are attempting to change social mores, there is an ever-increasing need for a clear understanding of marriage. This article seeks to determine whether marriage is a social arrangement, a legal contract or a religious rite. Three things which are believed to be interrelated and constitute the primary ingredients of marriage are posited: (a) a commitment on the part of two people to live together in a unique and abiding relationship; (b) sexual union; and (c) the need for children as a natural consequence of this union.
WEN I mentioned the topic of my essay to a man well-versed in these matters, he suggested that I respond to the question of the relation between bioethics and the Constitution as Justice Antonin Scalia might. As Supreme Court watchers know, Scalia is famous for his scathing dissents in which he chastises his fellow judges for sounding off on any and all subjects without any constitutional warrant for doing so. Scalia's complaint is that judges regularly issue opinions untethered from the text of the Constitution, despite their clear obligation to remain tied to the document. One of my favorite of Scalia's tongue-lashings comes from Hodgson v. Minnesota, an abortion case from 1990, in which Scalia declared:
