Dworkin let me down.

How, then, can we defend a religious attitude if we cannot rely on a god? In the first lecture I offer a godless argument that moral and ethical values are objectively real: They do not depend on god, but neither are they just subjective or relative to cultures. They are objective and universal. 

The same with Balkin. I thought they were better than this.

All that's "objectively real" is enchantment: Do you love your wife, husband, your children, your parents and your dog? Do you treat friends differently than you treat strangers?

We operate on faith, and politics (all social interaction) is exchange among faiths. Democracy is the one form of government where an awareness of absurdity can actually strengthen the process.

The play's the thing: John Mortimer and Joe Jamail.