Heaven opens its doors this day for a soul in flight from its diminished body, a life cut off from its fullness years ago and cut short today because she could not ask otherwise and those assigned to guard her in her weakness grew weary of her unnecessary presence.
We cannot celebrate her passing, for although Terri’s spirit is eternally alive without tubes or tethers and--no longer an object of pity or revulsion--in the embrace of God, we mourn for those who wanted more time with their damaged kin and for a nation that would not rise above legal arrogance to give life another day. We mourn in shame.
Requiem aeternam dona eis Domine
31 Mart 2005 Perşembe
30 Mart 2005 Çarşamba
Old Man on A Feeding Tube: Extending Schiavo Ethics to the Pope
On the wire this morning comes the troubling news that Pope John Paul II is now being nourished through a feeding tube. Why in the world would we use the precious resources of the Church to artificially maintain an elderly prelate who has outlived his usefulness?
My goodness, the aging bishop of Rome couldn’t even speak a blessing over the Romans on Easter. What good is he? Not just is he having trouble breathing and eating normally, which greatly restricts his effectiveness as Catholic leader, but his body is wracked with Parkinson’s Disease. And that isn’t going to be going away any time soon.
Let’s use some logic here. It’s time for a new Pope and there are quite a number in men in red prepared to step in. If there’s anyone who is ready to meet his Maker, it’s got to be this wonderful Pope who has served so long, so well. It’s practically a moral imperative for us to unplug him.
(jk)
Yes, that’s where the culture of death will take us!
My goodness, the aging bishop of Rome couldn’t even speak a blessing over the Romans on Easter. What good is he? Not just is he having trouble breathing and eating normally, which greatly restricts his effectiveness as Catholic leader, but his body is wracked with Parkinson’s Disease. And that isn’t going to be going away any time soon.
Let’s use some logic here. It’s time for a new Pope and there are quite a number in men in red prepared to step in. If there’s anyone who is ready to meet his Maker, it’s got to be this wonderful Pope who has served so long, so well. It’s practically a moral imperative for us to unplug him.
(jk)
Yes, that’s where the culture of death will take us!
--James Jewell
The Religious Right and The Reasonable People
Most contemporary references to the religious right are an attempt to tarnish today’s Christian conservatives with the unsavory image of those who awkwardly returned fundamentalism to political life 20 years ago. It became a pejorative term some time ago, and is used to discount the arguments of the newly powerful evangelical activists.
Unfortunately, when media are looking for conservative Christian voices, they often look not to the experts in a given field who are Christian conservatives, but to the tried and true voices of the right who will speak on anything (whether or not they have speak with an authority on the topic). The messages aren't that different, just the messengers and methodology.
The old voices of the religious right—Falwell, Robertson, and others—are joining the new voices of evangelicalism in the fight for Terri’s life. They are joined by people of all stripes who recognize the profound evil in starving a handicapped woman to death. Jesse Jackson is passionate on the subject. As Matt mentioned below, Ralph Nader of all people is aligned on the side of life.
The moral bankruptcy of the right-to-murder campaign cannot be hidden by the tired tactic of besmirching those lobbying for life with old labels like “the religious right.”
Jeff Jarvis ended his Easter post trashing people of faith who are passionate about saving Terri Schiavo’s life by separating them from himself and others who on Easter morning “go to church -- huge numbers of them who may not be devout in media terms and, in fact, go only once or twice a year. These are the reasonably religious, not the zealots, not the theocrats, just Americans.
Let’s see. Religious people who attended houses of worship a couple of times a year and aren’t passionate about human life. Neither hot nor cold. Jesus had a few things to say about them (Rev. 3:16).
Unfortunately, when media are looking for conservative Christian voices, they often look not to the experts in a given field who are Christian conservatives, but to the tried and true voices of the right who will speak on anything (whether or not they have speak with an authority on the topic). The messages aren't that different, just the messengers and methodology.
The old voices of the religious right—Falwell, Robertson, and others—are joining the new voices of evangelicalism in the fight for Terri’s life. They are joined by people of all stripes who recognize the profound evil in starving a handicapped woman to death. Jesse Jackson is passionate on the subject. As Matt mentioned below, Ralph Nader of all people is aligned on the side of life.
The moral bankruptcy of the right-to-murder campaign cannot be hidden by the tired tactic of besmirching those lobbying for life with old labels like “the religious right.”
Jeff Jarvis ended his Easter post trashing people of faith who are passionate about saving Terri Schiavo’s life by separating them from himself and others who on Easter morning “go to church -- huge numbers of them who may not be devout in media terms and, in fact, go only once or twice a year. These are the reasonably religious, not the zealots, not the theocrats, just Americans.
Let’s see. Religious people who attended houses of worship a couple of times a year and aren’t passionate about human life. Neither hot nor cold. Jesus had a few things to say about them (Rev. 3:16).
--James Jewell
29 Mart 2005 Salı
An Argument for Bible Memorization
Just when we think the courts can’t get any more absurd, along comes this case from the Colorado Supreme Court.
“In a sharply divided ruling (3-2), Colorado's highest court on Monday upheld a lower court's decision throwing out the sentence of a man who was given the death penalty after jurors consulted the Bible in reaching a verdict. The Bible, the court said, constituted an improper outside influence and a reliance on what the court called a ‘higher authority.’”
In the decision on Monday, the dissenting judges said the majority had confused the internal codes of right and wrong that juries are expected to possess in such weighty moral matters with the outside influences that are always to be avoided, like newspaper articles or television programs about the case. The jurors consulted Bibles, the minority said, not to look for facts or alternative legal interpretations, but for wisdom.
"The biblical passages the jurors discussed constituted either a part of the jurors' moral and religious precepts or their general knowledge, and thus were relevant to their court-sanctioned moral assessment," the minority wrote.
Would it matter to these three Colorado judges if the jurors had the Bible verses memorized, rather than consulting the written text?
Good fodder for the U.S. Supreme Court.
After the last couple of weeks maybe I’ll change my vote on whether to use the nuclear option to make judicial appointments filibuster proof. There are just too many judges outside the mainstream of American justice and out of touch with ancient wisdom.
“In a sharply divided ruling (3-2), Colorado's highest court on Monday upheld a lower court's decision throwing out the sentence of a man who was given the death penalty after jurors consulted the Bible in reaching a verdict. The Bible, the court said, constituted an improper outside influence and a reliance on what the court called a ‘higher authority.’”
In the decision on Monday, the dissenting judges said the majority had confused the internal codes of right and wrong that juries are expected to possess in such weighty moral matters with the outside influences that are always to be avoided, like newspaper articles or television programs about the case. The jurors consulted Bibles, the minority said, not to look for facts or alternative legal interpretations, but for wisdom.
"The biblical passages the jurors discussed constituted either a part of the jurors' moral and religious precepts or their general knowledge, and thus were relevant to their court-sanctioned moral assessment," the minority wrote.
Would it matter to these three Colorado judges if the jurors had the Bible verses memorized, rather than consulting the written text?
Good fodder for the U.S. Supreme Court.
After the last couple of weeks maybe I’ll change my vote on whether to use the nuclear option to make judicial appointments filibuster proof. There are just too many judges outside the mainstream of American justice and out of touch with ancient wisdom.
--James Jewell
Michael Schiavo Guility of Bigamy; The Court Ignores Marriage
Terri Schiavo moves ever so close to death. The only thing we don’t know about this right-to-murder case is the truth. We hear the hyperbolic screeches of Randall Terry and Michael Savage, we cringe at the calculation of Michael Schiavo, who may very well be an evil man, and we almost have to look away from the wishful thinking of Terri’s grieving family.
I believe the President and the Governor—and even the Congress—have done what they can under the law. It has failed. But to expect them to engage in civil disobedience and do for Terri by force what the courts have not down by law is to wish for a breakdown of constitutional rule that would be far worse than the tragic result we are about to endure.
The original and fundamental error made by the Florida court was to ignore the fact that marriage is a civil and spiritual relationship defined by law, by many faiths, and by 4,000 years of human history. There are reasons that it is solemn, sacred, and given rights and responsibilities. Two people in a marriage are expected to have special consideration for each other, their mutual interests are intertwined, and their common experiences are expected to create a future desire to provide and protect each other.
The marriage between Michael and Terri Schiavo has been over for some time. Perhaps not when Michael began seeing other women, but certainly when he established a common law marriage with another woman and started a family.
I should make it clear that I do not blame Michael Schiavo for moving forward with his life and settling down with another woman. That is understandable.
In most cases, there is no reason to formally divorce a spouse in this condition. But how could a judge grant the hangman’s power to a man who has in body and in spirit gone through a de facto divorce?
In Utah, by the way, Michael Schiavo would be charged with bigamy. And in Florida, he could be charged with Openly Living in Adultery. (h/t): A Soft Answer.
When the Florida court ignored the responsibilities of marriage, it seems now, Terri’s fate was sealed.
I believe the President and the Governor—and even the Congress—have done what they can under the law. It has failed. But to expect them to engage in civil disobedience and do for Terri by force what the courts have not down by law is to wish for a breakdown of constitutional rule that would be far worse than the tragic result we are about to endure.
The original and fundamental error made by the Florida court was to ignore the fact that marriage is a civil and spiritual relationship defined by law, by many faiths, and by 4,000 years of human history. There are reasons that it is solemn, sacred, and given rights and responsibilities. Two people in a marriage are expected to have special consideration for each other, their mutual interests are intertwined, and their common experiences are expected to create a future desire to provide and protect each other.
The marriage between Michael and Terri Schiavo has been over for some time. Perhaps not when Michael began seeing other women, but certainly when he established a common law marriage with another woman and started a family.
I should make it clear that I do not blame Michael Schiavo for moving forward with his life and settling down with another woman. That is understandable.
In most cases, there is no reason to formally divorce a spouse in this condition. But how could a judge grant the hangman’s power to a man who has in body and in spirit gone through a de facto divorce?
In Utah, by the way, Michael Schiavo would be charged with bigamy. And in Florida, he could be charged with Openly Living in Adultery. (h/t): A Soft Answer.
When the Florida court ignored the responsibilities of marriage, it seems now, Terri’s fate was sealed.
--James Jewell
Black and Asian Women Earning More Than White Women
I’m going to recommend that my wife file a lawsuit, or stage a protest, or write a scathing article about the terrible inequity she and others like her are suffering.
Last week, the Census Bureau released data that showed that black and Asian women with bachelor's degrees earn slightly more than similarly educated white women. A white woman with a bachelor's degree typically earned nearly $37,800 in 2003, compared with $41,100 for a college-educated black woman and nearly $43,700 for a college-educated Asian woman.
Hispanic women took home slightly less, at $37,600 a year.
You can practically hear the hand wringing by liberal groups that can’t quite explain how this has happened.
Notions that black women are struggling financially as much other groups are should not be dismissed, said Barbara Gault, research director of the Institute for Women's Policy Research.
We’ve reached equity in this area, and exceeded it. The advocacy groups will need to whine about something else.
Of course white men with four-year degrees still make more than anyone else. So sue me.
Last week, the Census Bureau released data that showed that black and Asian women with bachelor's degrees earn slightly more than similarly educated white women. A white woman with a bachelor's degree typically earned nearly $37,800 in 2003, compared with $41,100 for a college-educated black woman and nearly $43,700 for a college-educated Asian woman.
Hispanic women took home slightly less, at $37,600 a year.
You can practically hear the hand wringing by liberal groups that can’t quite explain how this has happened.
Notions that black women are struggling financially as much other groups are should not be dismissed, said Barbara Gault, research director of the Institute for Women's Policy Research.
We’ve reached equity in this area, and exceeded it. The advocacy groups will need to whine about something else.
Of course white men with four-year degrees still make more than anyone else. So sue me.
--James Jewell
27 Mart 2005 Pazar
I Know That My Redeemer Lives
“I’m guilty.”
“Lord Jesus, you are innocent.”
“Remember me.”
These are the simple words of a sinner who faced his own guilt, recognized a holy God, and asked for help. They are the words of the repentant thief on the cross next to Jesus. The appeal of Easter for all of us is that in the only passage where an individual is actually promised a place in heaven, Jesus responds: “Today, you will be with me in paradise.” This promise is valid only because the man on the middle cross rose from the dead and defeated death. Jesus died on Friday and death died on Sunday.
I’ve spent many an Easter weekend over the last 20 years in prison. No, not as an inmate, but as part of a Christian ministry, accompanying Chuck Colson. We journeyed into the tombs of our society on the weekend each year that holds great meaning to those men and women behind bars who have come to know the One who promised paradise to the criminal who called on him.
Because society has issued sentences of condemnation to those in prison, their sin is publicly declared. With that help, many inmates genuinely see their need for a redeemer. It’s something many of us on the outside have a harder time admitting. As we complete another Easter weekend, it’s a recognition that can break chains far stronger than prison bars.
“Lord Jesus, you are innocent.”
“Remember me.”
These are the simple words of a sinner who faced his own guilt, recognized a holy God, and asked for help. They are the words of the repentant thief on the cross next to Jesus. The appeal of Easter for all of us is that in the only passage where an individual is actually promised a place in heaven, Jesus responds: “Today, you will be with me in paradise.” This promise is valid only because the man on the middle cross rose from the dead and defeated death. Jesus died on Friday and death died on Sunday.
I’ve spent many an Easter weekend over the last 20 years in prison. No, not as an inmate, but as part of a Christian ministry, accompanying Chuck Colson. We journeyed into the tombs of our society on the weekend each year that holds great meaning to those men and women behind bars who have come to know the One who promised paradise to the criminal who called on him.
Because society has issued sentences of condemnation to those in prison, their sin is publicly declared. With that help, many inmates genuinely see their need for a redeemer. It’s something many of us on the outside have a harder time admitting. As we complete another Easter weekend, it’s a recognition that can break chains far stronger than prison bars.
--James Jewell
25 Mart 2005 Cuma
How Can I Help Terri Schiavo?
We received a plaintiff email from Sarah in Tuscon asking: “How do I protest for Terri Schiavo in my area?” I know individuals throughout the nation feel powerless as every effort to save Terri’s life is turned aside. Honestly, the best thing you can do today is pray that God will intervene in the affairs of man and deliver Terri from evil. Continue to rattle the sabers of truth: write and call media and your elected representatives, telling them that you do not want Terri to be starved to death.
But regardless of whether Terri is spared, the work has just begun. Here are a few suggestions on what you should do in honor of Terri and all those who cannot protect their own lives:
1. Call for and support conservative candidates for judicial appointments.
2. Work for a return to a balance of power through a reduction in the strength of the judiciary. Mark Levin’s new book Men in Black has a number of good ideas on this.
3. Support legislation in your state that would require a living will to remove life support and a preference for life if one is not found.
4. Support politicians who worked to save Terri Schiavo, particularly if there actions reflect a consistent ethic of life.
But regardless of whether Terri is spared, the work has just begun. Here are a few suggestions on what you should do in honor of Terri and all those who cannot protect their own lives:
1. Call for and support conservative candidates for judicial appointments.
2. Work for a return to a balance of power through a reduction in the strength of the judiciary. Mark Levin’s new book Men in Black has a number of good ideas on this.
3. Support legislation in your state that would require a living will to remove life support and a preference for life if one is not found.
4. Support politicians who worked to save Terri Schiavo, particularly if there actions reflect a consistent ethic of life.
--James Jewell
Seeking Parental Consent for Homosexual Clubs
This item here in Georgia: A proposal being considered by the Georgia Board of Education would require high school students to obtain parental permission before joining homosexual-affirming clubs at school. State Superintendent Kathy Cox is asking the Georgia Board of Education to adopt a policy that would require all students to obtain parental permission before joining an extracurricular club.
A supportive state senator said: “We just felt that this is an issue that the parents need to be fully informed about. If they're going to have to give permission for their student to take an aspirin in school, then I feel like they ought to be asked permission for their students to join a club such as this."
A supportive state senator said: “We just felt that this is an issue that the parents need to be fully informed about. If they're going to have to give permission for their student to take an aspirin in school, then I feel like they ought to be asked permission for their students to join a club such as this."
--James Jewell
Jeb Bush Rising; Randall Terry Sinking
Evidently the authenticity of Jeb Bush’s fight for Terri Schiavo is raising his stock in Florida and throughout the country. Although there is criticism of politicians who appear to be using the crisis for their political gain, The New York Times reports today:
"The Florida governor's emergence as the most prominent politician still fighting, despite a string of court and legislative defeats, to have a feeding tube reinserted in Ms. Schiavo was very much in keeping with someone who has repeatedly declared a deep religious faith.
Several associates noted that he had been devoutly religious longer than President Bush, and even critics said his efforts - prodding the Florida Legislature and the courts and defying much of the electorate - were rooted in a deep-seated opposition to abortion and euthanasia rather than in political positioning.
Yet inevitably, the events of recent days have fed the mystique of Mr. Bush as a reluctant inheritor of perhaps America's most famous dynasty since the Adams family two centuries ago."
This in contrast to the rantings of Randall Terry about Jeb “blinking,” and not doing enough. I find the Schindlers to be wonderfully sincere and incredibly sympathetic characters, but they made a terrible decision naming Terry as their spokesperson. He has been a disaster for the pro-life movement throughout the years, and is the wrong voice for this case and any other when we need measured reason and effective discourse.
"The Florida governor's emergence as the most prominent politician still fighting, despite a string of court and legislative defeats, to have a feeding tube reinserted in Ms. Schiavo was very much in keeping with someone who has repeatedly declared a deep religious faith.
Several associates noted that he had been devoutly religious longer than President Bush, and even critics said his efforts - prodding the Florida Legislature and the courts and defying much of the electorate - were rooted in a deep-seated opposition to abortion and euthanasia rather than in political positioning.
Yet inevitably, the events of recent days have fed the mystique of Mr. Bush as a reluctant inheritor of perhaps America's most famous dynasty since the Adams family two centuries ago."
This in contrast to the rantings of Randall Terry about Jeb “blinking,” and not doing enough. I find the Schindlers to be wonderfully sincere and incredibly sympathetic characters, but they made a terrible decision naming Terry as their spokesperson. He has been a disaster for the pro-life movement throughout the years, and is the wrong voice for this case and any other when we need measured reason and effective discourse.
--James Jewell
Sharpton Criticizes Rap Violence
Good for Al Sharpton. He’s not one of our favorite politicians or reverends, but he deserves credit for taking on violence in the hip hop culture and the radio stations that support it.
Sharpton asked the Federal Communications Commission yesterday to punish artists and radio stations connected with violent acts.
After meeting with FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and two other commissioners, Sharpton said artists connected to such acts should be denied airplay on radio and television for 90 days, he told reporters. He also urged the agency to fine and review the licenses of radio stations "that encourage a pattern of this, including allowing employees to do on-the-air inciting of violence." (Source)
It will take individuals such as Sharpton to bring change in this area. It’s leadership that should be noticed and applauded.
Sharpton asked the Federal Communications Commission yesterday to punish artists and radio stations connected with violent acts.
After meeting with FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and two other commissioners, Sharpton said artists connected to such acts should be denied airplay on radio and television for 90 days, he told reporters. He also urged the agency to fine and review the licenses of radio stations "that encourage a pattern of this, including allowing employees to do on-the-air inciting of violence." (Source)
It will take individuals such as Sharpton to bring change in this area. It’s leadership that should be noticed and applauded.
--James Jewell
The Greatest Threat to Marriage
When I said in a post on Evangelical First Things in Public Life that homosexual unions were not the greatest threat to marriage, I was called “soft” on the issue of same-sex marriages. This made me laugh out loud, because I’m not and because it was probably written by someone has never been married or hasn’t had a serious martial problem (yet).
The greatest threat to the institution of marriage is bad marriages and the decisions and choices that make them bad.
One of my longtime friends, Nancy C. Anderson, is dispensing advice to people in troubled marriages in her book Avoiding the “Greener Grass” Syndrome How to Grow Affair-Proof Hedges Around Your Marriage and at crosswalk.com.
She writes in a recent column:
“If you're struggling in your relationship and feel like you've grown apart from your spouse, today can be the day of new beginnings. I know how lonely, desperate, and exhausted you may feel, because I've felt that way. I was in a marriage full of emptiness. Ron and I were both selfish, angry, and critical; but we aren't anymore. Well . . . I'm still a little selfish, but mostly our lives are full of light and love -- and yours can be too. We admitted our faults, ask for forgiveness, changed our behavior and decided to love each other. Our feelings eventually caught up with our actions and we slowly grew a lovely "green grass" marriage in own backyard”
Joe at Evangelical Outpost has a good post on the dangers to marriage. He writes:
"Social conservatives spend an inordinate amount of hand-wringing over the threat to traditional marriage posed by the legal recognition of same-sex relationships. Gay marriage is, of course, a legitimate concern. But it would take an army of homosexual rights activists several decades to do as much damage to the sacred institution as heterosexuals have done by tolerating no-fault divorce and the repeal of common law marriage. The looming threat pales in comparison to the present danger of destructive marriage laws which have, for at least one young woman, literally become a matter of life and death."
The greatest threat to the institution of marriage is bad marriages and the decisions and choices that make them bad.
One of my longtime friends, Nancy C. Anderson, is dispensing advice to people in troubled marriages in her book Avoiding the “Greener Grass” Syndrome How to Grow Affair-Proof Hedges Around Your Marriage and at crosswalk.com.
She writes in a recent column:
“If you're struggling in your relationship and feel like you've grown apart from your spouse, today can be the day of new beginnings. I know how lonely, desperate, and exhausted you may feel, because I've felt that way. I was in a marriage full of emptiness. Ron and I were both selfish, angry, and critical; but we aren't anymore. Well . . . I'm still a little selfish, but mostly our lives are full of light and love -- and yours can be too. We admitted our faults, ask for forgiveness, changed our behavior and decided to love each other. Our feelings eventually caught up with our actions and we slowly grew a lovely "green grass" marriage in own backyard”
Joe at Evangelical Outpost has a good post on the dangers to marriage. He writes:
"Social conservatives spend an inordinate amount of hand-wringing over the threat to traditional marriage posed by the legal recognition of same-sex relationships. Gay marriage is, of course, a legitimate concern. But it would take an army of homosexual rights activists several decades to do as much damage to the sacred institution as heterosexuals have done by tolerating no-fault divorce and the repeal of common law marriage. The looming threat pales in comparison to the present danger of destructive marriage laws which have, for at least one young woman, literally become a matter of life and death."
--James Jewell
24 Mart 2005 Perşembe
Congressional Action On Behalf of Another Daughter: The Elizabeth Morgan Case
It was amazing political high drama when the lights of the Capitol were on past midnight Sunday for the Congress to pass a bill and the President returned to Washington to sign it at 2 a.m., allowing the federal courts to consider the Schiavo case.
It was extraordinary for the Congress of the United States to turn its attention to one individual and to act with dispatch to right what it sees as a wrong in a case replete with hot emotion and an endangered daughter.
Extraordinary, yes; but not unprecedented. I know because I was involved in just such an action in 1989: the Elizabeth Morgan case.
I was working at the time as chief of staff for Chuck Colson at Prison Fellowship Ministries. Our staff working at the District of Columbia jail had met a woman there who stood out in a number of ways. Dr. Elizabeth Morgan was a tall, white, affluent plastic surgeon from northwest DC in a jail full of almost entirely poor black women from east of the river.
She was already a heroine in the jail. She has been there for nearly two years for contempt of court because she refused to allow her six-year-old daughter to go on court-ordered overnight visits to her ex-husband. She accused her husband of sexual abuse of the child, hidden the child, and went to jail rather than tell the court where the child was.
The imprisoned women, the large majority of whom had been abused (you find this in most women’s prisons in the country), loved Morgan for her courage in protecting her daughter from abuse.
Judge Dixon of the District court could not be persuaded that Morgan’s ex-husband, Virginia oral surgeon Eric Foretich, had been abusive. He would not budge, he cited Morgan for contempt, sent her to jail—and left her there.
When Morgan and this case came to our attention, we were amazed by her fortitude and by length of time an unconvicted individual had spent in prison. When we studied the evidence, it, and the witness of Morgan’s action, persuaded us that there had been sexual abuse.
Colson wrote an article calling for Morgan’s release, for which he was condemned and praised. Interestingly, it was our natural allies, the conservative Christians, who were outraged, and our usual adversaries, the liberals and women’s rights activists, who were supportive.
(Both Morgan and Foretich were professed Christians, but he was of the more conservative variety and a member of a prominent northern Virginia evangelical church).
We began lobbying our conservative Christian brethren. I went to visit with James Dobson and presented our large file of evidence. He agreed to have Colson on the Focus on the Family radio program. Our campaign picked up steam.
At the same time, we talked with our local Virginia congressman, Frank Wolf, about the case, as well as a few Senators. I remember one strategic lunch in the Senate Dining Room with a Senator from Tennessee, whose influence was necessary to create and move a piece of legislation to free Dr. Morgan.
Within a couple of months, our efforts were successful. The U.S. Congress passed a bill specifically for the release of Dr. Elizabeth Morgan. She was freed from prison after serving the longest detention for civil contempt in American history--25 months.
In February 1990, the daughter was discovered living in New Zealand with her maternal grandparents. A New Zealand court gave Morgan sole custody, but the visitation requirement by the U.S. court remained in effect, meaning that if Morgan returned to America with her daughter she would have stillto allow her ex-husband to see their daughter. That wasn’t going to happen. Morgan remained in New Zealand with her daughter.
In 2003, a federal appeals court ruled that the law passed by Congress to help the mother was unconstitutional because it applied to one person. By that time, the daughter was 21 and safe from the harm that a mother spent two years in jail to protect her from.In a previous shining moment, repeated last weekend in an effort to save the life of another endangered daughter, Congress saw an individual’s rights as more important than the rights of a state.
In the case of Terry Schiavo, Congressional heroics were not enough to move a stubborn judiciary. Sixteen years ago, with a different set of circumstances but a similar motivation, it worked.
It was extraordinary for the Congress of the United States to turn its attention to one individual and to act with dispatch to right what it sees as a wrong in a case replete with hot emotion and an endangered daughter.
Extraordinary, yes; but not unprecedented. I know because I was involved in just such an action in 1989: the Elizabeth Morgan case.
I was working at the time as chief of staff for Chuck Colson at Prison Fellowship Ministries. Our staff working at the District of Columbia jail had met a woman there who stood out in a number of ways. Dr. Elizabeth Morgan was a tall, white, affluent plastic surgeon from northwest DC in a jail full of almost entirely poor black women from east of the river.
She was already a heroine in the jail. She has been there for nearly two years for contempt of court because she refused to allow her six-year-old daughter to go on court-ordered overnight visits to her ex-husband. She accused her husband of sexual abuse of the child, hidden the child, and went to jail rather than tell the court where the child was.
The imprisoned women, the large majority of whom had been abused (you find this in most women’s prisons in the country), loved Morgan for her courage in protecting her daughter from abuse.
Judge Dixon of the District court could not be persuaded that Morgan’s ex-husband, Virginia oral surgeon Eric Foretich, had been abusive. He would not budge, he cited Morgan for contempt, sent her to jail—and left her there.
When Morgan and this case came to our attention, we were amazed by her fortitude and by length of time an unconvicted individual had spent in prison. When we studied the evidence, it, and the witness of Morgan’s action, persuaded us that there had been sexual abuse.
Colson wrote an article calling for Morgan’s release, for which he was condemned and praised. Interestingly, it was our natural allies, the conservative Christians, who were outraged, and our usual adversaries, the liberals and women’s rights activists, who were supportive.
(Both Morgan and Foretich were professed Christians, but he was of the more conservative variety and a member of a prominent northern Virginia evangelical church).
We began lobbying our conservative Christian brethren. I went to visit with James Dobson and presented our large file of evidence. He agreed to have Colson on the Focus on the Family radio program. Our campaign picked up steam.
At the same time, we talked with our local Virginia congressman, Frank Wolf, about the case, as well as a few Senators. I remember one strategic lunch in the Senate Dining Room with a Senator from Tennessee, whose influence was necessary to create and move a piece of legislation to free Dr. Morgan.
Within a couple of months, our efforts were successful. The U.S. Congress passed a bill specifically for the release of Dr. Elizabeth Morgan. She was freed from prison after serving the longest detention for civil contempt in American history--25 months.
In February 1990, the daughter was discovered living in New Zealand with her maternal grandparents. A New Zealand court gave Morgan sole custody, but the visitation requirement by the U.S. court remained in effect, meaning that if Morgan returned to America with her daughter she would have stillto allow her ex-husband to see their daughter. That wasn’t going to happen. Morgan remained in New Zealand with her daughter.
In 2003, a federal appeals court ruled that the law passed by Congress to help the mother was unconstitutional because it applied to one person. By that time, the daughter was 21 and safe from the harm that a mother spent two years in jail to protect her from.In a previous shining moment, repeated last weekend in an effort to save the life of another endangered daughter, Congress saw an individual’s rights as more important than the rights of a state.
In the case of Terry Schiavo, Congressional heroics were not enough to move a stubborn judiciary. Sixteen years ago, with a different set of circumstances but a similar motivation, it worked.
--James Jewell
23 Mart 2005 Çarşamba
Moral Bankruptcy and the Failure of the Family Movement
There aren’t too many people in America who are unaware of aggressive marketing by credit card companies. Count the envelopes arriving each week selling new cards and pushing attractive new deals. The effort to entice new customers is not limited to those with good credit. Individuals and families struggling to make ends meet are primary targets. You don’t have to have a job; in fact you don’t even have to be out of college to be courted by the credit card marketers.
The availability of easy credit at a high cost has contributed markedly to the bankruptcy crisis in America. The marketing by the banking industry, the irresponsibility of their disbursal of credit, their usury, and their exorbitant fees and constant penalties is obscene.
For eight years the banking industry has lobbied Congress to have bankruptcy rights curbed. Now, they are celebrating success after pushing through the Senate legislation that will make it much more difficult for individuals to file for bankruptcy. All parties agree that the bill is virtually assured House passage and the President’s signature.
Although it doesn’t appear that the banking lobby has simply purchased votes (see this NRO article), it has been successful in returning the stigma, the guilty whispers, and the image of the unsavory bankrupt fool. The purveyors of obscene credit have accomplished this while successfully taking on the victim’s cloak. As a result, hundreds of thousands of families will not achieve federal protection from their creditors.
At issue: Whether these families are themselves victims of the credit card companies, medical misfortune, and other calamities or financial predators with no one to blame but themselves.
I’ve talked to people on both sides of the issue in preparing a short article for the next edition of Christianity Today. The bankruptcy debate illustrates the clash between competing Christian values: holding individuals responsible for their actions versus granting them a fresh start.
Most alarming in my research is that the Christian groups that make it their business to be a voice for the evangelical community in Washington—particularly on issues that effect the family—appear disinterested or incapable of action on issues other than the sanctity of life or sexual preference.
Groups such as Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, and Focus on the Family rose to the occasion to on the Schumer amendment to the bankruptcy bill and successfully defeated this effort to punish abortion protesters (perhaps a few hundred?)
But with that accomplished, it was virtually impossible to get reactions from these groups on the massive bankruptcy bill, which will impact hundreds of thousands of a families each year. [I couldn’t get a substantive comment either way from these organizations].
One group, perhaps the leading Christian financial group in the nation (that would not speak on the record), was opposed to the bill because, it said, it considered bankruptcy to be a bad choice for Christian families. (That’s like being opposed to pregnancy crisis centers because you are against teenage pregnancy).
The heightened rhetoric on both sides masks the truth of who is benefiting from bankruptcy protection. What’s clear is that the enormous promotional effort of the banking industry has demonized those who file for bankruptcy. And the Christian family lobby was absent from the debate on 2005 legislation that may have more impact on the American family than any other.
The availability of easy credit at a high cost has contributed markedly to the bankruptcy crisis in America. The marketing by the banking industry, the irresponsibility of their disbursal of credit, their usury, and their exorbitant fees and constant penalties is obscene.
For eight years the banking industry has lobbied Congress to have bankruptcy rights curbed. Now, they are celebrating success after pushing through the Senate legislation that will make it much more difficult for individuals to file for bankruptcy. All parties agree that the bill is virtually assured House passage and the President’s signature.
Although it doesn’t appear that the banking lobby has simply purchased votes (see this NRO article), it has been successful in returning the stigma, the guilty whispers, and the image of the unsavory bankrupt fool. The purveyors of obscene credit have accomplished this while successfully taking on the victim’s cloak. As a result, hundreds of thousands of families will not achieve federal protection from their creditors.
At issue: Whether these families are themselves victims of the credit card companies, medical misfortune, and other calamities or financial predators with no one to blame but themselves.
I’ve talked to people on both sides of the issue in preparing a short article for the next edition of Christianity Today. The bankruptcy debate illustrates the clash between competing Christian values: holding individuals responsible for their actions versus granting them a fresh start.
Most alarming in my research is that the Christian groups that make it their business to be a voice for the evangelical community in Washington—particularly on issues that effect the family—appear disinterested or incapable of action on issues other than the sanctity of life or sexual preference.
Groups such as Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, and Focus on the Family rose to the occasion to on the Schumer amendment to the bankruptcy bill and successfully defeated this effort to punish abortion protesters (perhaps a few hundred?)
But with that accomplished, it was virtually impossible to get reactions from these groups on the massive bankruptcy bill, which will impact hundreds of thousands of a families each year. [I couldn’t get a substantive comment either way from these organizations].
One group, perhaps the leading Christian financial group in the nation (that would not speak on the record), was opposed to the bill because, it said, it considered bankruptcy to be a bad choice for Christian families. (That’s like being opposed to pregnancy crisis centers because you are against teenage pregnancy).
The heightened rhetoric on both sides masks the truth of who is benefiting from bankruptcy protection. What’s clear is that the enormous promotional effort of the banking industry has demonized those who file for bankruptcy. And the Christian family lobby was absent from the debate on 2005 legislation that may have more impact on the American family than any other.
--James Jewell
19 Mart 2005 Cumartesi
Schiavo Drama: Florida Justice in a Persistent Vegetative State
Business and family affairs converge this weekend near Tampa, Florida, where I’m listening and watching local and national coverage of the Terri Schiavo case. Here are some impressions and thoughts:
--Pinellas County Circuit Judge George W. Greer has chosen to disregard a Congressional subpoena for Terri Schiavo and ordered the feeding tube removed. What power, Congress? Greer has decided that the Congressional motion is trumped by his own court. How is this not contempt of Congress? Couldn’t federal marshals enforce the order that there be no tampering with a federal witness? Or perhaps the marshals could apprehend the state judge.
--Why are the liberals and Democrats against allowing this horribly damaged life being allowed to continue? How does the culture of death align with their political agenda?
--Activists have gathered at the hospice where Terri lives to express their views as the vigil becomes a death watch, and the legal and legislative wrangling becomes more desperate.
--The President issued a statement acknowledging the complexity of the case, but urging that error be made on the side of life.
--The New York Times editorializes: “We can only lament the Republicans' theatrical effort to expand their so-called pro-life agenda to include intervening in a case already studied and litigated exhaustively under Florida law. Congress's rash assumption of judicial power and trampling on established state and federal constitutional precedents in "right to die" cases is nothing short of breathtaking.”
--The Washington Post editorializes: “With Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube scheduled to be removed today, Congress sprang into action to pass legislation granting the federal courts the power to review the state court judgments that would let her die. (The Florida legislature is, for the second time, also acting to force her to continue living.)” (Italics mine)
More language of the culture of death.
--Many of us have had informal discussions with our spouses about not being kept alive if we’re incapacitated terribly, being kept alive on life support, or in a vegetative state. I suspect that’s the kind of discussion Terri and Michael Schiavo had. That’s clearly not good enough. It’s time to do a living will.
--The news the last few days, both here in Florida and nationally, has been dominated by news of two tragic individuals—Terri Schiavo and 9-year-old Jessica Landsford, the victim of a twisted sexual predator who confessed to stealing the little girl from her home and murdering her.
--Tampa radio host Schmidt reflects on the irony that Republican conservatives are going against the grain of their ideology of states rights in their federalizing of the Schiavo case.
--Atlanta-based syndicated radio guy Neal Boortz, who is on a station in the Tampa market, rides that point hard and is pretty ugly in his criticism of the Republicans and the pro-life activists trying to keep Terri alive. This strident libertarianism is rankling and in this case seems anti-individual and anti-freedom, rather than on the side of liberty.
--Interesting that the television stations now have, in addition to the gape-mouthed footage of Terri, a new set of photos from before her heart attack and brain damage. She was a beautiful young woman then, and it seems to garner more sympathy to have this more glamorous view. What quality of life and physical beauty do we require in order to care for those who can’t care for themselves?
There is sure to be more legal and legislative action both here in Florida and in Washington in the few days left before Terri would starve to death if nothing is done. Clearly justice is in a persistent vegetative state here in Florida, where judges were the pawns of Al Gore in the 2000 election, the allies of Fidel Castro in the Elian Gonzales travesty, and now the agents of death for the severely impaired.
--Pinellas County Circuit Judge George W. Greer has chosen to disregard a Congressional subpoena for Terri Schiavo and ordered the feeding tube removed. What power, Congress? Greer has decided that the Congressional motion is trumped by his own court. How is this not contempt of Congress? Couldn’t federal marshals enforce the order that there be no tampering with a federal witness? Or perhaps the marshals could apprehend the state judge.
--Why are the liberals and Democrats against allowing this horribly damaged life being allowed to continue? How does the culture of death align with their political agenda?
--Activists have gathered at the hospice where Terri lives to express their views as the vigil becomes a death watch, and the legal and legislative wrangling becomes more desperate.
--The President issued a statement acknowledging the complexity of the case, but urging that error be made on the side of life.
--The New York Times editorializes: “We can only lament the Republicans' theatrical effort to expand their so-called pro-life agenda to include intervening in a case already studied and litigated exhaustively under Florida law. Congress's rash assumption of judicial power and trampling on established state and federal constitutional precedents in "right to die" cases is nothing short of breathtaking.”
--The Washington Post editorializes: “With Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube scheduled to be removed today, Congress sprang into action to pass legislation granting the federal courts the power to review the state court judgments that would let her die. (The Florida legislature is, for the second time, also acting to force her to continue living.)” (Italics mine)
More language of the culture of death.
--Many of us have had informal discussions with our spouses about not being kept alive if we’re incapacitated terribly, being kept alive on life support, or in a vegetative state. I suspect that’s the kind of discussion Terri and Michael Schiavo had. That’s clearly not good enough. It’s time to do a living will.
--The news the last few days, both here in Florida and nationally, has been dominated by news of two tragic individuals—Terri Schiavo and 9-year-old Jessica Landsford, the victim of a twisted sexual predator who confessed to stealing the little girl from her home and murdering her.
--Tampa radio host Schmidt reflects on the irony that Republican conservatives are going against the grain of their ideology of states rights in their federalizing of the Schiavo case.
--Atlanta-based syndicated radio guy Neal Boortz, who is on a station in the Tampa market, rides that point hard and is pretty ugly in his criticism of the Republicans and the pro-life activists trying to keep Terri alive. This strident libertarianism is rankling and in this case seems anti-individual and anti-freedom, rather than on the side of liberty.
--Interesting that the television stations now have, in addition to the gape-mouthed footage of Terri, a new set of photos from before her heart attack and brain damage. She was a beautiful young woman then, and it seems to garner more sympathy to have this more glamorous view. What quality of life and physical beauty do we require in order to care for those who can’t care for themselves?
There is sure to be more legal and legislative action both here in Florida and in Washington in the few days left before Terri would starve to death if nothing is done. Clearly justice is in a persistent vegetative state here in Florida, where judges were the pawns of Al Gore in the 2000 election, the allies of Fidel Castro in the Elian Gonzales travesty, and now the agents of death for the severely impaired.
--James Jewell
18 Mart 2005 Cuma
Deeper Issues of the Heart: Center for Christian Statesmanship
We spent the early part of this week in Washington, D.C., learning about one of the most effective Christian activities in the Nation’s Capitol. It has nothing to do with legislation, homeland security, or judicial activism.
Members of Congress and their staff can regularly be found stepping away from their work to meet in small group Bible studies being led by robust believers who are part of an organization called the Center for Christian Statesmanship.
The Center conducts more Bible studies on Capitol Hill than anyone else.
In the shadow of the Capitol dome, these studies focus on spiritual development, not public policy. The hardened partisans that dominate life inside the Beltway can’t accept that any group would consider matters of the soul as more important than matters of the legislative chamber. As a result, skepticism about the Center’s motives endures despite nearly ten years of devotional faithfulness.
The ministries of the Center, which is affiliated with D. James Kennedy’s Coral Ridge Ministries, are described at www.statesman.org.
During a week of Congressional nonsense on social security, bankruptcy, and baseball’s steroid abuse, its good to know that there’s solid work being done on the deeper issues of the heart.
Members of Congress and their staff can regularly be found stepping away from their work to meet in small group Bible studies being led by robust believers who are part of an organization called the Center for Christian Statesmanship.
The Center conducts more Bible studies on Capitol Hill than anyone else.
In the shadow of the Capitol dome, these studies focus on spiritual development, not public policy. The hardened partisans that dominate life inside the Beltway can’t accept that any group would consider matters of the soul as more important than matters of the legislative chamber. As a result, skepticism about the Center’s motives endures despite nearly ten years of devotional faithfulness.
The ministries of the Center, which is affiliated with D. James Kennedy’s Coral Ridge Ministries, are described at www.statesman.org.
During a week of Congressional nonsense on social security, bankruptcy, and baseball’s steroid abuse, its good to know that there’s solid work being done on the deeper issues of the heart.
--James Jewell
11 Mart 2005 Cuma
Trade Has Been the Trojan Horse for the Gospel in China
The discussion that my blogger-in-law Doug at Considerettes has with Bill Bennett on Homespun Bloggers Radio program #6 about his concerns that engaging China in the world economy will keep us from holding them accountable for their human rights record reminds me of my secret project to keep China open to trade.
Several years ago, when Congress voted each year on whether to maintain China’s Most Favored Nation trade status, I took on a public relations project that served the cross purposes of Christians ministering in China and the U.S. business community. Hired by individuals whose identity remains secret to this day (I’ll reveal them when they die), we worked to target key congressman with the message that keeping China open to trade also kept open the channel through which the Gospel was being delivered. Business was—-and is—-a Trojan Horse for the Gospel in China.
We created the Association of Christian Ministries in China, which was comprised of a group of U.S. missionary-sending organizations working in China. Many of these organizations had to remain anonymous. But the ACMC was real and the organizations wanted trade to remain robust and China to remain a Most Favored Nation.
With so many anonymous partners, this campaign drove the media crazy and infuriated other Christian leaders who were opposed to MFN status for China.
Today, we need to keep the pressure on China’s human rights performance. But we can best do that as we engage them in business. However, we have to step through these open doors and seek more freedoms for the Chinese people. Otherwise, we’re just stuck with all the cheap Chinese products in our stores, with no impact on the faith and freedom in China.
Several years ago, when Congress voted each year on whether to maintain China’s Most Favored Nation trade status, I took on a public relations project that served the cross purposes of Christians ministering in China and the U.S. business community. Hired by individuals whose identity remains secret to this day (I’ll reveal them when they die), we worked to target key congressman with the message that keeping China open to trade also kept open the channel through which the Gospel was being delivered. Business was—-and is—-a Trojan Horse for the Gospel in China.
We created the Association of Christian Ministries in China, which was comprised of a group of U.S. missionary-sending organizations working in China. Many of these organizations had to remain anonymous. But the ACMC was real and the organizations wanted trade to remain robust and China to remain a Most Favored Nation.
With so many anonymous partners, this campaign drove the media crazy and infuriated other Christian leaders who were opposed to MFN status for China.
Today, we need to keep the pressure on China’s human rights performance. But we can best do that as we engage them in business. However, we have to step through these open doors and seek more freedoms for the Chinese people. Otherwise, we’re just stuck with all the cheap Chinese products in our stores, with no impact on the faith and freedom in China.
--James Jewell
Like a Laser Beam: Townes Wins Templeton Prize for Religion
Scientist Charles Townes, the Nobel laureate whose inventions include the maser and laser and who has spent decades as a leading advocate for the convergence of science and religion, has won the 2005 Templeton Prize.
Awarded by the Templeton Foundation, “the Prize is intended to help people see the infinity of the Universal Spirit still creating the galaxies and all living things and the variety of ways in which the Creator is revealing himself to in which the Creator is revealing himself to different people. We hope all religions may become more dynamic and inspirational.”
Sir John Templeton, for many years a Presbyterian is now, well, an Everythingian. But the award goes to some interesting people, including in past years Mother Teresa, Alexandr Solzenitsyn, Billy Graham, and Chuck Colson.
Religion News Service reports on this year’s award:
Townes, 89, secured his place in the pantheon of great 20th-century scientists through his investigations into the properties of microwaves which resulted first in the maser, a device which amplifies electromagnetic waves, and later his co-invention of the laser, which amplifies and directs light waves into parallel direct beams. His research, for which he shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1964, opened the door for an astonishing array of inventions and discoveries now in common use throughout the world in medicine, telecommunications, electronics, computers, and other areas.
It was the 1966 publication of his seminal article, "The Convergence of Science and Religion" in the IBM journal THINK, however, that established Townes as a unique voice - especially among scientists - that sought commonality between the two disciplines. Long before the concept of a relationship between scientific and theological inquiry became an accepted arena of investigation, his nonconformist viewpoint jumpstarted a movement that until then few had considered and even fewer comprehended. So rare was such a viewpoint at the time that Townes admitted in the paper that his position would be considered by many in both camps to be "extreme."
Nonetheless, he proposed, "their differences are largely superficial,and...the two become almost indistinguishable if we look at the real nature of each."
The Templeton Prize for Progress Toward Research or Discoveries aboutSpiritual Realities was founded in 1972 by pioneering global investor and philanthropist Sir John Templeton. Given each year to a living person to encourage and honor those who advance knowledge in spiritual matters and valued at 795,000 pounds sterling, the Templeton Prize is the world's best known religion prize and the largest annual monetary prize given to an individual. The prize's monetary value is in keeping with Sir John's stipulation that it always be worth more than the Nobel Prizes to underscore his belief that research and advances in spiritual discoveries can bequantifiably more significant than those recognized by the Nobels.
Awarded by the Templeton Foundation, “the Prize is intended to help people see the infinity of the Universal Spirit still creating the galaxies and all living things and the variety of ways in which the Creator is revealing himself to in which the Creator is revealing himself to different people. We hope all religions may become more dynamic and inspirational.”
Sir John Templeton, for many years a Presbyterian is now, well, an Everythingian. But the award goes to some interesting people, including in past years Mother Teresa, Alexandr Solzenitsyn, Billy Graham, and Chuck Colson.
Religion News Service reports on this year’s award:
Townes, 89, secured his place in the pantheon of great 20th-century scientists through his investigations into the properties of microwaves which resulted first in the maser, a device which amplifies electromagnetic waves, and later his co-invention of the laser, which amplifies and directs light waves into parallel direct beams. His research, for which he shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1964, opened the door for an astonishing array of inventions and discoveries now in common use throughout the world in medicine, telecommunications, electronics, computers, and other areas.
It was the 1966 publication of his seminal article, "The Convergence of Science and Religion" in the IBM journal THINK, however, that established Townes as a unique voice - especially among scientists - that sought commonality between the two disciplines. Long before the concept of a relationship between scientific and theological inquiry became an accepted arena of investigation, his nonconformist viewpoint jumpstarted a movement that until then few had considered and even fewer comprehended. So rare was such a viewpoint at the time that Townes admitted in the paper that his position would be considered by many in both camps to be "extreme."
Nonetheless, he proposed, "their differences are largely superficial,and...the two become almost indistinguishable if we look at the real nature of each."
The Templeton Prize for Progress Toward Research or Discoveries aboutSpiritual Realities was founded in 1972 by pioneering global investor and philanthropist Sir John Templeton. Given each year to a living person to encourage and honor those who advance knowledge in spiritual matters and valued at 795,000 pounds sterling, the Templeton Prize is the world's best known religion prize and the largest annual monetary prize given to an individual. The prize's monetary value is in keeping with Sir John's stipulation that it always be worth more than the Nobel Prizes to underscore his belief that research and advances in spiritual discoveries can bequantifiably more significant than those recognized by the Nobels.
--James Jewell
10 Mart 2005 Perşembe
Since the MSM Can’t Beat the Evangelicals, It is Refocusing Its Spotlight on Their Greens and Blues
It’s taken a few months for the mainstream media to figure out just how to deal with the extreme makeover that seems to have left evangelicals muscle-bound and primed for battle.
But now there is an emerging MSM strategy for neutralizing the evangelical impact on American politics. While not abandoning the stratégie de guerre of featuring old-line fundamentalists and evangelical firebrands in an unflattering and embarrassing light, there’s a new plan.
Find the evangelicals that are espousing liberal positions and position them in a radiant glow.
How else do you explain the media fascination with Jim Wallis, a barnacled vessel of 70’s evangelical liberalism? Wallis is everywhere and his book God’s Politics is the new holy grail of the MSM.
Now today, The New York Times is painting the Christians green.
“A core group of influential evangelical leaders has put its considerable political power behind a cause that has barely registered on the evangelical agenda, fighting global warming,” the Times gushes.
The Washington Post leads a similar article with a quote from a Washington-area pastor:
Such "creation care" should be at the heart of evangelical life, along with condemning abortion, protecting family and loving Jesus. He uses the term "creation care" because, he says, it does not annoy conservative Christians for whom the word "environmentalism" connotes liberals, secularists and Democrats.
I am in favor of expanding public understanding of the concerns of evangelicals beyond the hot-button issues of abortion and same-sex marriage. Some of Wallis’ cautions are worth considering and I agree that care of God’s creation is a valid Christian concern.
But isn’t it interesting that the most prominent and positive glow surrounding 2005 evangelicals features issues the MSM know and love. As evangelicals reach into the liberal pockets and pick up issues of legitimate concern to them, it is those who lean left that are getting the spotlight.
Since the MSM doesn’t like the entire painting on the evangelical canvas, it will shine its spotlight on the greens and blues.
But now there is an emerging MSM strategy for neutralizing the evangelical impact on American politics. While not abandoning the stratégie de guerre of featuring old-line fundamentalists and evangelical firebrands in an unflattering and embarrassing light, there’s a new plan.
Find the evangelicals that are espousing liberal positions and position them in a radiant glow.
How else do you explain the media fascination with Jim Wallis, a barnacled vessel of 70’s evangelical liberalism? Wallis is everywhere and his book God’s Politics is the new holy grail of the MSM.
Now today, The New York Times is painting the Christians green.
“A core group of influential evangelical leaders has put its considerable political power behind a cause that has barely registered on the evangelical agenda, fighting global warming,” the Times gushes.
The Washington Post leads a similar article with a quote from a Washington-area pastor:
Such "creation care" should be at the heart of evangelical life, along with condemning abortion, protecting family and loving Jesus. He uses the term "creation care" because, he says, it does not annoy conservative Christians for whom the word "environmentalism" connotes liberals, secularists and Democrats.
I am in favor of expanding public understanding of the concerns of evangelicals beyond the hot-button issues of abortion and same-sex marriage. Some of Wallis’ cautions are worth considering and I agree that care of God’s creation is a valid Christian concern.
But isn’t it interesting that the most prominent and positive glow surrounding 2005 evangelicals features issues the MSM know and love. As evangelicals reach into the liberal pockets and pick up issues of legitimate concern to them, it is those who lean left that are getting the spotlight.
Since the MSM doesn’t like the entire painting on the evangelical canvas, it will shine its spotlight on the greens and blues.
--James Jewell
9 Mart 2005 Çarşamba
Your Turn: How to Persuade Bill Maher that Jesus is Not an Imaginary Friend
OK, I’ve said enough. And this might be old news to many people. But after yesterday’s post I’m more interested in what Maher has said.
Just read this and let’s come up with a cogent evangelism strategy for Bill Maher. I think his comments are extremely harmful, not to me, but to seekers.
Just read this and let’s come up with a cogent evangelism strategy for Bill Maher. I think his comments are extremely harmful, not to me, but to seekers.
--James Jewell
Internet Is Growing Source of Political News; Citing the Blog Elite
A new Pew Center study found that the use of the Internet to get information during the 2004 campaign increased six-fold--to 18%--from 1996. TV rose to 78% and newspapers declined to 39%.
The author of the study, Lee Rainie, said:
Blogs "are having a modest level of impact on the voter side and probably a more dramatic impact on the institutional side. Blogs are still a realm where very, very active and pretty elite, both technologically oriented people and politically oriented people go."
The author of the study, Lee Rainie, said:
Blogs "are having a modest level of impact on the voter side and probably a more dramatic impact on the institutional side. Blogs are still a realm where very, very active and pretty elite, both technologically oriented people and politically oriented people go."
--James Jewell
8 Mart 2005 Salı
Bill Maher is an Idiot
Bill Maher is an idiot and is on his way to hell.
There, that feels good. I wanted to see what it felt like to say exactly what’s on my mind, with no sense of social grace.
Now, on to the story. Maher, the former host of "Politically Incorrect," said on MSNBC in late February that Christians and others who are religious suffer from a neurological disorder that "stops people from thinking."
Maher said:
"We are a nation that is unenlightened because of religion. I do believe that. I think that religion stops people from thinking. I think it justifies crazies. I think flying planes into a building was a faith-based initiative. I think religion is a neurological disorder. If you look at it logically, it's something that was drilled into your head when you were a small child. It certainly was drilled into mine at that age. And you really can't be responsible when you are a kid for what adults put into your head."
More Maher quotes:
"When you look at beliefs in such things as, do you go to heaven, is there a devil, we have more in common with Turkey and Iran and Syria than we do with European nations and Canada and nations that, yes, I would consider more enlightened than us."
"When people say to me, 'You hate America,' I don't hate America. I love America. I am just embarrassed that it has been taken over by people like evangelicals, by people who do not believe in science and rationality. It is the 21st century. And I will tell you, my friend. The future does not belong to the evangelicals. The future does not belong to religion."
That’s all outrageous and melodramatic, Mr. Maher. You can make fun of people and deride beliefs different than your own. Very funny.
But can we talk about that future thing? I don’t believe you’ve made the right Wager.
There, that feels good. I wanted to see what it felt like to say exactly what’s on my mind, with no sense of social grace.
Now, on to the story. Maher, the former host of "Politically Incorrect," said on MSNBC in late February that Christians and others who are religious suffer from a neurological disorder that "stops people from thinking."
Maher said:
"We are a nation that is unenlightened because of religion. I do believe that. I think that religion stops people from thinking. I think it justifies crazies. I think flying planes into a building was a faith-based initiative. I think religion is a neurological disorder. If you look at it logically, it's something that was drilled into your head when you were a small child. It certainly was drilled into mine at that age. And you really can't be responsible when you are a kid for what adults put into your head."
More Maher quotes:
"When you look at beliefs in such things as, do you go to heaven, is there a devil, we have more in common with Turkey and Iran and Syria than we do with European nations and Canada and nations that, yes, I would consider more enlightened than us."
"When people say to me, 'You hate America,' I don't hate America. I love America. I am just embarrassed that it has been taken over by people like evangelicals, by people who do not believe in science and rationality. It is the 21st century. And I will tell you, my friend. The future does not belong to the evangelicals. The future does not belong to religion."
That’s all outrageous and melodramatic, Mr. Maher. You can make fun of people and deride beliefs different than your own. Very funny.
But can we talk about that future thing? I don’t believe you’ve made the right Wager.
--James Jewell
Is this a good idea? A school for the bullied and harassed.
Rather than dealing with peer and faculty harassment in Milwaukee high schools, school officials in Milwaukee will move victims to a school for the harassed.
The Alliance School, a charter high school that will focus on students who feel discriminated against or bullied, will open in August.
Report from the Milwaukee Sentinel:
“That might be a Goth student, a painfully shy student or a gay one. All three have enrolled in the school, which plans to open in August. The school will be the first of its kind in the state, and possibly the nation, its founders say.
Last spring, the Milwaukee School Board approved the concept, and school officials are looking for a building. A charter school is publicly funded, but has more autonomy and flexibility than most traditional schools.
'I saw a lot of students who were being bullied and no one was doing anything about it,' said Tina Owen, a teacher at Milwaukee's Washington High School who will leave her job to become the lead teacher at Alliance. Some students who look and act different from the mainstream are 'really tormented,' she said. 'I've even seen teachers be really hard on them.'"
No mention of the harassed Christian students. In that case, I predict your parents will have to pay for isolation in a Christian school, or home school.
This all seems so wrong. Remember when the bullies got sent to detention hall. Now the bullied are shipped off to mass ostracism.
The Alliance School, a charter high school that will focus on students who feel discriminated against or bullied, will open in August.
Report from the Milwaukee Sentinel:
“That might be a Goth student, a painfully shy student or a gay one. All three have enrolled in the school, which plans to open in August. The school will be the first of its kind in the state, and possibly the nation, its founders say.
Last spring, the Milwaukee School Board approved the concept, and school officials are looking for a building. A charter school is publicly funded, but has more autonomy and flexibility than most traditional schools.
'I saw a lot of students who were being bullied and no one was doing anything about it,' said Tina Owen, a teacher at Milwaukee's Washington High School who will leave her job to become the lead teacher at Alliance. Some students who look and act different from the mainstream are 'really tormented,' she said. 'I've even seen teachers be really hard on them.'"
No mention of the harassed Christian students. In that case, I predict your parents will have to pay for isolation in a Christian school, or home school.
This all seems so wrong. Remember when the bullies got sent to detention hall. Now the bullied are shipped off to mass ostracism.
--James Jewell
“O” is not for Oscar: Catholic Bishops Give Million Dollar Baby Its Worst Rating
The film critics of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops gave "Million Dollar Baby" an "O" -- morally offensive -- rating and warned that its "guilt-wracked, but ultimately permissive" take on euthanasia "will leave Catholic viewers emotionally against the ropes."
(See Matt's review of the movie at at SCO .)
The Bishops' critics said:
"We praised it on the artistic level and, in many ways, it is a fine film," said Harry Forbes, director of the USCCB Office for Film and Broadcasting. "But we also felt duty-bound to give it the worst rating we can give, in terms of moral content. ... In the end, we did not believe it was propaganda for the euthanasia cause, although we know some people did."
The office's review said: "The pain and devastation of those involved is achingly evident. However, in spite of all the soul-searching that precedes it, the deed itself is presented as an act of reluctant heroism. ... Our sympathies and humane inclinations may argue in favor of such misguided compassion, but our Catholic faith prohibits us from getting around the fact that, in this case, the best-intended ends cannot justify the chosen means: the taking of a life."
Catholic ethicist Thomas Hibbs went even further, calling "Million Dollar Baby" a trip into a "nihilistic hell" in which Eastwood meditates on life in a chaotic, amoral and ultimately hopeless universe. At the movie's heart is the ultimate question: "What if God does not exist?"
(See Matt's review of the movie at at SCO .)
The Bishops' critics said:
"We praised it on the artistic level and, in many ways, it is a fine film," said Harry Forbes, director of the USCCB Office for Film and Broadcasting. "But we also felt duty-bound to give it the worst rating we can give, in terms of moral content. ... In the end, we did not believe it was propaganda for the euthanasia cause, although we know some people did."
The office's review said: "The pain and devastation of those involved is achingly evident. However, in spite of all the soul-searching that precedes it, the deed itself is presented as an act of reluctant heroism. ... Our sympathies and humane inclinations may argue in favor of such misguided compassion, but our Catholic faith prohibits us from getting around the fact that, in this case, the best-intended ends cannot justify the chosen means: the taking of a life."
Catholic ethicist Thomas Hibbs went even further, calling "Million Dollar Baby" a trip into a "nihilistic hell" in which Eastwood meditates on life in a chaotic, amoral and ultimately hopeless universe. At the movie's heart is the ultimate question: "What if God does not exist?"
--James Jewell
7 Mart 2005 Pazartesi
Noticing Conservative Black Clergy
There are more signs that the Republicans will be in trouble if they move to a moderate candidate on social issues in 2008. An article over the weekend on black churches leaders explores the faction of African-American clergy that aligns with Republican positions on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage.
If Republicans make addition inroads with black voters, it will most likely be among blacks troubled by declining moral values, not those who rethink economic policy (although there is some movement there, as well).
“At the heart of the debate [among black] church leaders is whether to stay focused primarily on issues like job creation, education, affirmative action, prison reform and health care, which have drawn blacks closer to the Democratic Party, or whether to put more emphasis on issues of personal morality, like opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, which would place them deeper in the Republican camp.”
If Republicans make addition inroads with black voters, it will most likely be among blacks troubled by declining moral values, not those who rethink economic policy (although there is some movement there, as well).
“At the heart of the debate [among black] church leaders is whether to stay focused primarily on issues like job creation, education, affirmative action, prison reform and health care, which have drawn blacks closer to the Democratic Party, or whether to put more emphasis on issues of personal morality, like opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, which would place them deeper in the Republican camp.”
--James Jewell
The Decline of Atheism
Atheism is in decline, UPI Religious Affairs Editor Uwe Semon-Netto reported last week. (h/t: Considerettes).
This is not a brilliant piece of research, as Joshua at ITA points out, but a report of the opinions of various social and religious observers.
Interesting viewpoints, however, particularly about Europe's move away from godlessness. We haven't heard anyone citing those kinds of trends in Europe.
The article says:
“Two developments are plaguing atheism these days. One is that it appears to be losing its scientific underpinnings. The other is the historical experience of hundreds of millions of people worldwide that atheists are in no position to claim the moral high ground.”
Interesting thoughts:
Munich theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg: "Atheism as a theoretical position is in decline worldwide.”
Oxford’s Alister McGrath: [Atheism's] "future seems increasingly to lie in the private beliefs of individuals rather than in the great public domain it once regarded as its habitat.”
Turkish philosopher Harun Yahya: "Atheism, which people have tried to for hundreds of years as 'the ways of reason and science,' is proving to be mere irrationality and ignorance."
John Updike: "Among the repulsions of atheism for me has beenis drastic uninterestingness as an intellectual position," appears to become common currency throughout much of the West.
Semon-Netto writes:
“A few years ago, European scientists sniggered when studies in the United States -- for example, at Harvard and Duke universities -- showed a correlation between faith, prayer and recovery from illness. Now 1,200 studies at research centers around the world have come to similar conclusions, according to "Psychologie Heute," a German journal, citing, for example, the marked improvement of multiple sclerosis patients in Germany's Ruhr District do to "spiritual resources."
The Challenge for Christianity
The Rev. Paul M. Zulehner, dean of Vienna University's divinity school: "True atheists in Europe have become an infinitesimally small group. There are not enough of them to be used for sociological research."
The only exceptions to this rule, Zulehner said, are the former East Germany and the Czech Republic, where, as the saying goes, de-Christianization has been the only proven success of these regions' former communist rulers.”
Zulehner cautions, however, that in the rest of Europe re-Christianization is by no means occurring. For although in every major European city except Paris spirituality is booming, according to Zulehner, this only proves the emergence of a diffuse belief system, Pannenberg said, but not the revitalization of traditional Christian religious faith.
Zulehner, a Catholic, sees Christianity's greatest opportunity when its message addresses two seemingly irreconcilable quests of contemporary humanity - the quest for freedom and truth.
"Christianity alone affirms that truth and God's dependability are inseparable properties to which freedom is linked."
This is not a brilliant piece of research, as Joshua at ITA points out, but a report of the opinions of various social and religious observers.
Interesting viewpoints, however, particularly about Europe's move away from godlessness. We haven't heard anyone citing those kinds of trends in Europe.
The article says:
“Two developments are plaguing atheism these days. One is that it appears to be losing its scientific underpinnings. The other is the historical experience of hundreds of millions of people worldwide that atheists are in no position to claim the moral high ground.”
Interesting thoughts:
Munich theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg: "Atheism as a theoretical position is in decline worldwide.”
Oxford’s Alister McGrath: [Atheism's] "future seems increasingly to lie in the private beliefs of individuals rather than in the great public domain it once regarded as its habitat.”
Turkish philosopher Harun Yahya: "Atheism, which people have tried to for hundreds of years as 'the ways of reason and science,' is proving to be mere irrationality and ignorance."
John Updike: "Among the repulsions of atheism for me has beenis drastic uninterestingness as an intellectual position," appears to become common currency throughout much of the West.
Semon-Netto writes:
“A few years ago, European scientists sniggered when studies in the United States -- for example, at Harvard and Duke universities -- showed a correlation between faith, prayer and recovery from illness. Now 1,200 studies at research centers around the world have come to similar conclusions, according to "Psychologie Heute," a German journal, citing, for example, the marked improvement of multiple sclerosis patients in Germany's Ruhr District do to "spiritual resources."
The Challenge for Christianity
The Rev. Paul M. Zulehner, dean of Vienna University's divinity school: "True atheists in Europe have become an infinitesimally small group. There are not enough of them to be used for sociological research."
The only exceptions to this rule, Zulehner said, are the former East Germany and the Czech Republic, where, as the saying goes, de-Christianization has been the only proven success of these regions' former communist rulers.”
Zulehner cautions, however, that in the rest of Europe re-Christianization is by no means occurring. For although in every major European city except Paris spirituality is booming, according to Zulehner, this only proves the emergence of a diffuse belief system, Pannenberg said, but not the revitalization of traditional Christian religious faith.
Zulehner, a Catholic, sees Christianity's greatest opportunity when its message addresses two seemingly irreconcilable quests of contemporary humanity - the quest for freedom and truth.
"Christianity alone affirms that truth and God's dependability are inseparable properties to which freedom is linked."
--James Jewell
6 Mart 2005 Pazar
Colson on Martha Stewart and the Purpose of Prison
Terrific NY Times op-ed article today by Chuck Colson on Martha Stewart and the purpose of prison. Colson writes:
"I was pleased to learn of one of Ms. Stewart's first statements upon her release from prison: "I will never forget the friends that I met here." This is the same promise I made 30 years ago. I hope that Ms. Stewart, who is a remarkable influence on women of all walks of life, uses her talents to reach out to the 100,000-plus women who are still behind bars. If Martha Stewart does this, I am certain she will find the same paradoxical happy ending to her prison journey that I have."
(Disclosure: I spent 12 years as Chuck Colson's chief of staff and communications VP)
"I was pleased to learn of one of Ms. Stewart's first statements upon her release from prison: "I will never forget the friends that I met here." This is the same promise I made 30 years ago. I hope that Ms. Stewart, who is a remarkable influence on women of all walks of life, uses her talents to reach out to the 100,000-plus women who are still behind bars. If Martha Stewart does this, I am certain she will find the same paradoxical happy ending to her prison journey that I have."
(Disclosure: I spent 12 years as Chuck Colson's chief of staff and communications VP)
5 Mart 2005 Cumartesi
CJR on the Threats to Journalists’ Privilege
These are perilous days for journalists’ privilege. So says Columbia Journalism Review. Journalists and media rights advocates are nervous about the Plame case becoming a test case for media privilege, according to a long article by Douglas McCollam in CJR.
McColllam writes:
“As a general rule courts believe they have the right to “hear every man’s evidence,” and privileges against testifying are not favored in the law. Over time only a few such exemptions have been endorsed, including the attorney-client privilege, the doctor-patient privilege, the priest-penitent privilege, the spousal privilege, and, most recently, the therapist privilege. The Constitution also forbids compelling people to testify against themselves.
[The defendants claim that] “reporter’s privilege should now be added to that list, but fashioning a reporter’s privilege presents special challenges.”
But it is becoming more and more difficult to determine who is a journalist, particularly with bloggers now providing an additional flank.
The article goes on:
“All the other recognized privileges involve inherently private information given to members of accredited professions. Journalism, by comparison, trades in public information and is less a profession than an activity in which anyone can engage. As the courts in both Branzburg and Plame have asked, Who qualifies as a “journalist” for purposes of the privilege?”
If you are interested in the Plame case or the issue of journalist privilege, this is a good read, understanding that it is written with the bias of a media trade publication.
McColllam writes:
“As a general rule courts believe they have the right to “hear every man’s evidence,” and privileges against testifying are not favored in the law. Over time only a few such exemptions have been endorsed, including the attorney-client privilege, the doctor-patient privilege, the priest-penitent privilege, the spousal privilege, and, most recently, the therapist privilege. The Constitution also forbids compelling people to testify against themselves.
[The defendants claim that] “reporter’s privilege should now be added to that list, but fashioning a reporter’s privilege presents special challenges.”
But it is becoming more and more difficult to determine who is a journalist, particularly with bloggers now providing an additional flank.
The article goes on:
“All the other recognized privileges involve inherently private information given to members of accredited professions. Journalism, by comparison, trades in public information and is less a profession than an activity in which anyone can engage. As the courts in both Branzburg and Plame have asked, Who qualifies as a “journalist” for purposes of the privilege?”
If you are interested in the Plame case or the issue of journalist privilege, this is a good read, understanding that it is written with the bias of a media trade publication.
--James Jewell
4 Mart 2005 Cuma
Cruel and Unusual Decisions on the Death Penalty
Just when you thought it was safe to oppose to the death penalty, along comes a scoundrel like the BTK (bind, toture, and kill) murderer in Kansas, for whom any kind of execution seems too humane.
I wrote briefly about developing a consistent ethic of life as a mark of the Christian statesman, and I do believe its ability to save lives must be the biblical standard in state use of capital punishment.
But what is the Constitutional standard? The court wrestled with this as it relates to children under 18, wading into the perilous waters of the Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments.
The simplifiers of sound-bite media have derided the court this week for citing national and international consensus. It’s easy to see this as a continuation of the High Court’s decades-long trend of legislating from the bench. But how do we determine the definition of subjective terms such as “cruel” and “unusual?” Do we use the definitions of the 18th Century, when the Constitution was crafted? Or some other milestone along the way? Or shall we revert biblical times (Old Testament or New?).
What is cruel and unusual punishment? The court has now decided that the execution of the mentally retarded and those under 18 is cruel and/or unusual.
This column by Stanford professor Robert Weisberg is a reasonable examination of the issue. Here’s an excerpt:
The Eighth Amendment prohibits "cruel and unusual punishments," but for much of its history the United States has allowed the death penalty. In 1958, the court ruled that "evolving standards of decency" should define what constitutes "cruel and unusual," and since then it has been forced to confront the legality of capital punishment in various types of cases. Could the death penalty be imposed for nonfatal crimes? When the defendant did not kill intentionally or at least in a manner exhibiting "extreme indifference to human life"?
In answering these kinds of questions (in both of these cases, the response was no), the court committed itself to a challenging set of tasks. First, it would examine the patterns of state laws or court decisions to determine by a rough empiricism whether the death penalty in a particular category has become cruel by virtue of being literally unusual. Of course, this approach raises the perfectly reasonable question of how the scope of the Bill of Rights, which was designed to limit the powers of legislative majorities, could depend in part on the decisions of those very majorities.
Next, the court would consult various other sources for evidence of some sort of moral consensus. In doing so, the court would refer to philosophical or moral principles or political attitudes outside the realm of law altogether - and even to international expressions of moral value. This strategy provokes the (again perfectly reasonable) complaint that unelected jurists are now acting like pollsters, assessing the public's moral values. Or, worse, they are becoming arbiters of moral value themselves.
There do have to be cultural benchmarks that are consulted in determining the tangible implications of subjective terms. As such, as alarming as it has been made to sound in recent days, the Republic will survive the Court’s decision to take a reading of modern society.
I wrote briefly about developing a consistent ethic of life as a mark of the Christian statesman, and I do believe its ability to save lives must be the biblical standard in state use of capital punishment.
But what is the Constitutional standard? The court wrestled with this as it relates to children under 18, wading into the perilous waters of the Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments.
The simplifiers of sound-bite media have derided the court this week for citing national and international consensus. It’s easy to see this as a continuation of the High Court’s decades-long trend of legislating from the bench. But how do we determine the definition of subjective terms such as “cruel” and “unusual?” Do we use the definitions of the 18th Century, when the Constitution was crafted? Or some other milestone along the way? Or shall we revert biblical times (Old Testament or New?).
What is cruel and unusual punishment? The court has now decided that the execution of the mentally retarded and those under 18 is cruel and/or unusual.
This column by Stanford professor Robert Weisberg is a reasonable examination of the issue. Here’s an excerpt:
The Eighth Amendment prohibits "cruel and unusual punishments," but for much of its history the United States has allowed the death penalty. In 1958, the court ruled that "evolving standards of decency" should define what constitutes "cruel and unusual," and since then it has been forced to confront the legality of capital punishment in various types of cases. Could the death penalty be imposed for nonfatal crimes? When the defendant did not kill intentionally or at least in a manner exhibiting "extreme indifference to human life"?
In answering these kinds of questions (in both of these cases, the response was no), the court committed itself to a challenging set of tasks. First, it would examine the patterns of state laws or court decisions to determine by a rough empiricism whether the death penalty in a particular category has become cruel by virtue of being literally unusual. Of course, this approach raises the perfectly reasonable question of how the scope of the Bill of Rights, which was designed to limit the powers of legislative majorities, could depend in part on the decisions of those very majorities.
Next, the court would consult various other sources for evidence of some sort of moral consensus. In doing so, the court would refer to philosophical or moral principles or political attitudes outside the realm of law altogether - and even to international expressions of moral value. This strategy provokes the (again perfectly reasonable) complaint that unelected jurists are now acting like pollsters, assessing the public's moral values. Or, worse, they are becoming arbiters of moral value themselves.
There do have to be cultural benchmarks that are consulted in determining the tangible implications of subjective terms. As such, as alarming as it has been made to sound in recent days, the Republic will survive the Court’s decision to take a reading of modern society.
--James Jewell
Toward the Fair Tax: Greenspan Endorses Move to Consumption Tax
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan weighed in on tax reform yesterday, endorsing a move toward a consumption tax, while cautioning against rapid, wholesale change.
"Many economists believe that a consumption tax would be best from the perspective of promoting economic growth - particularly if one were designing a system from scratch - because a consumption tax is likely to favor saving and capital formation," Mr. Greenspan said.
That should provide a boost to the Fair Tax bill introduced and championed by Georgia Congressman John Linder, a member of the House Ways and Means Committee. Congressman Linder (R-GA), reintroduced his personal consumption tax proposal, H.R. 25, also known as the “FairTax.” on the first day of the 109th Congress.
There are several Republican lawmakers who recognize that tax reform and social security reform need to be considered together. A total tax overhaul will take enormous political effort, but Linder sees good momentum in Congress. It’s time to get behind this commonsensical tax bill that lives up to its name—“fair tax.”
"Many economists believe that a consumption tax would be best from the perspective of promoting economic growth - particularly if one were designing a system from scratch - because a consumption tax is likely to favor saving and capital formation," Mr. Greenspan said.
That should provide a boost to the Fair Tax bill introduced and championed by Georgia Congressman John Linder, a member of the House Ways and Means Committee. Congressman Linder (R-GA), reintroduced his personal consumption tax proposal, H.R. 25, also known as the “FairTax.” on the first day of the 109th Congress.
There are several Republican lawmakers who recognize that tax reform and social security reform need to be considered together. A total tax overhaul will take enormous political effort, but Linder sees good momentum in Congress. It’s time to get behind this commonsensical tax bill that lives up to its name—“fair tax.”
--James Jewell
3 Mart 2005 Perşembe
The Ten Commandments Folly
Given the history and religious composition of the nation, it is a travesty that tax dollars have to be spent to combat opposition to the display of the Ten Commandments in public buildings and on public grounds.
We hear so much about the people of other faiths being offended by the Ten Commandments. The Christians and Jews are fine with it. So who is opposed: the Muslims, Hindus, or the Buddhists? Or it is just the atheists?
Which of the commandments is of such great concern to the people of other faiths? Is the Murderers Lobby hard at work? Do a lot of folks want to covet on the Sabbath? Where would our politicians be without false witness?
Of course, posting the Ten Commandments at the Courthouse does very little to stop unsavory action. People going to court have already broken the law. Seriously, it has very little practical impact. However, and this is a big however, when the government acknowledges these moral foundations of civilization, it helps parents teach the Ten Commandments at home. That’s where it really matters.
We’re learning this week of religious symbols all over the Capital. Among the statues of lawgiver are many religious figures:
Here are the relief portraits above the gallery in the House chamber:
George Mason, Robert Joseph Pothier, Jean Baptiste Colbert, Edward I, Alfonso X, Gregory IX, Saint Louis, Justinian I, Tribonian, Lycurgus, Hammurabi, Moses, Solon, Papinian, Gaius, Maimonides, Suleiman, Innocent III, Simon de Montfort, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, Napoleon I, and Thomas Jefferson.
There are 18 figures of lawgivers on the walls of the Supreme Court chamber:
Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius, Augustus, Napoleon, John Marshall, William Blackstone, Hugo Grotius, Louis IX, King John, Charlemagne, Muhammad, and Justinian.
We hear so much about the people of other faiths being offended by the Ten Commandments. The Christians and Jews are fine with it. So who is opposed: the Muslims, Hindus, or the Buddhists? Or it is just the atheists?
Which of the commandments is of such great concern to the people of other faiths? Is the Murderers Lobby hard at work? Do a lot of folks want to covet on the Sabbath? Where would our politicians be without false witness?
Of course, posting the Ten Commandments at the Courthouse does very little to stop unsavory action. People going to court have already broken the law. Seriously, it has very little practical impact. However, and this is a big however, when the government acknowledges these moral foundations of civilization, it helps parents teach the Ten Commandments at home. That’s where it really matters.
We’re learning this week of religious symbols all over the Capital. Among the statues of lawgiver are many religious figures:
Here are the relief portraits above the gallery in the House chamber:
George Mason, Robert Joseph Pothier, Jean Baptiste Colbert, Edward I, Alfonso X, Gregory IX, Saint Louis, Justinian I, Tribonian, Lycurgus, Hammurabi, Moses, Solon, Papinian, Gaius, Maimonides, Suleiman, Innocent III, Simon de Montfort, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, Napoleon I, and Thomas Jefferson.
There are 18 figures of lawgivers on the walls of the Supreme Court chamber:
Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius, Augustus, Napoleon, John Marshall, William Blackstone, Hugo Grotius, Louis IX, King John, Charlemagne, Muhammad, and Justinian.
--James Jewell
Over-sexed Sports Heroes and the Fall of Icarus
We need a few good sports heroes to step forward and present a wholesome and selfless side of sport.
Someone assure us that there are sportsmen who don’t sleep with a different woman in every town. Someone assure us that there are top performers who perform without being pumped up on steroids. Someone assure us that he would play for less money because he loves the game so much and he doesn’t need any more money. Someone assure us that he loves his city so much that he wouldn’t think of going somewhere else to make a few more million dollars.
Someone tell me why I should aspire for my son to grow up to be like you.
I’m thinking about professional sports this morning because Kobe Bryant has settled with his accuser. He was not convicted of a criminal offense and he and his victim or partner won’t have to go through the disclosures of a civil trial. They both feared that because their lives are so slimy and they know it.
Kobe is, of course, as guilty as the day is long. Although he is probably not guilty of rape, the guilt that’s on his head (which, by the way, is known in the Bryant home court) is that of adding to the tarnish of modern sport that has so obscured the beauty and celebration of professional athletics that fans can hardly see the through it.
Jose Canseco says nearly everyone in baseball is doing steroids and, without restraint, doing the bimbos who hang around professional athletes. Jose says he remembers only a few married teammates who didn’t cheat on their wives on the road.
Canseco’s actions throughout the years are despicable and his credibility is questionable, but is anyone coming forward with a different picture?
Baseball recently adopted a tougher steroid-testing program after the sport came under increased scrutiny about the drugs. But I want to hear the stories of athletes who say they are happy for the testing but are even happier that they know that their performances are drug free and legitimate.
Show me the heroes. I don’t care about their money.
In the meantime, many will look beyond the debacle that has become modern professional sports. As the lives of egocentric, drugged up, and sexually indulgent professional athletes come crashing down, we will go on with our own lives, a bit curious, but otherwise disinterested.
Humbug Journal wrote about Jason Giambi’s fall from grace, citing a painting by Pieter Bruegel the Elder, called "Landscape with the Fall of Icarus."
In the painting, which you can see here, Icarus is barely visible, splashing down in the lower right corner. W.H. Auden wrote of it:
In Breughel's Icarus, for instance: how everything turns away
Quite leisurely from the disaster; the ploughman may
Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry,
But for him it was not an important failure; the sun shone
As it had to on the white legs disappearing into the green
Water; and the expensive delicate ship that must have seen
Something amazing, a boy falling out of the sky, had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on.
Bryant, Bonds, Giambi—professional athletics—unrestrained by the call of character and good taste will, like Icarus, fall. But it will be nothing but a little-noticed splash in a large, busy landscape.
Show us heroes. We may notice.
Someone assure us that there are sportsmen who don’t sleep with a different woman in every town. Someone assure us that there are top performers who perform without being pumped up on steroids. Someone assure us that he would play for less money because he loves the game so much and he doesn’t need any more money. Someone assure us that he loves his city so much that he wouldn’t think of going somewhere else to make a few more million dollars.
Someone tell me why I should aspire for my son to grow up to be like you.
I’m thinking about professional sports this morning because Kobe Bryant has settled with his accuser. He was not convicted of a criminal offense and he and his victim or partner won’t have to go through the disclosures of a civil trial. They both feared that because their lives are so slimy and they know it.
Kobe is, of course, as guilty as the day is long. Although he is probably not guilty of rape, the guilt that’s on his head (which, by the way, is known in the Bryant home court) is that of adding to the tarnish of modern sport that has so obscured the beauty and celebration of professional athletics that fans can hardly see the through it.
Jose Canseco says nearly everyone in baseball is doing steroids and, without restraint, doing the bimbos who hang around professional athletes. Jose says he remembers only a few married teammates who didn’t cheat on their wives on the road.
Canseco’s actions throughout the years are despicable and his credibility is questionable, but is anyone coming forward with a different picture?
Baseball recently adopted a tougher steroid-testing program after the sport came under increased scrutiny about the drugs. But I want to hear the stories of athletes who say they are happy for the testing but are even happier that they know that their performances are drug free and legitimate.
Show me the heroes. I don’t care about their money.
In the meantime, many will look beyond the debacle that has become modern professional sports. As the lives of egocentric, drugged up, and sexually indulgent professional athletes come crashing down, we will go on with our own lives, a bit curious, but otherwise disinterested.
Humbug Journal wrote about Jason Giambi’s fall from grace, citing a painting by Pieter Bruegel the Elder, called "Landscape with the Fall of Icarus."
In the painting, which you can see here, Icarus is barely visible, splashing down in the lower right corner. W.H. Auden wrote of it:
In Breughel's Icarus, for instance: how everything turns away
Quite leisurely from the disaster; the ploughman may
Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry,
But for him it was not an important failure; the sun shone
As it had to on the white legs disappearing into the green
Water; and the expensive delicate ship that must have seen
Something amazing, a boy falling out of the sky, had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on.
Bryant, Bonds, Giambi—professional athletics—unrestrained by the call of character and good taste will, like Icarus, fall. But it will be nothing but a little-noticed splash in a large, busy landscape.
Show us heroes. We may notice.
--James Jewell
2 Mart 2005 Çarşamba
The Ferment of Freedom
The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world. America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our Nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time.
President George W. Bush, Second Inaugural Address
The progression of freedom is not inevitable, but given a modicum of support and protection, freedom possesses an inexorable contagion. How quickly we are seeing that 2005 will be known as the Year of Freedom. The keynote for change was sounded in President Bush’s Second Inaugural Address, seen as historically inspirational by some and wildly unrealistic by others. What is evident is that the clarion call of the President, and a foreign policy based on strength and initiative against terror on the blood-soaked soil of the terrorists, has struck a match in international kindling soaked with the combustible sweat of human oppression.
Around the world, the churning and tonic of freedom’s ferment are making daily headlines:
Afghanistan: The striking image of woman in Afghanistan, formerly shrouded and humiliating, striding confidently to a voting booth.
Iraq: Despite toxic threats, the people of Iraq flipping the purple finger of democracy and turning the tide of Middle Easterni history.
Libya: The formerly brazen Quaddafi of Libya standing down on nuclear weapons when being a member of the world community looked better than being on the serious end of a cruise missile.
Ukraine: The Orange Revolution refusing to succumb to the bullies of Ukraine and their Russian sponsors and making their voices heard in new elections.
Palestinians: After electing a leader who recognized the value of peace, the Palestinans see more hope beyond the shadow of Arafat, and the Palestinian Authority shows increasing confidence in working against their own terrorists.
Egypt: The possibility that Egypt will see the first truly contested national election in its 5,000 year history.
Former Soviet Republics: Opposition parties in Moldova, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan cloaking themselves in orange, hoping to "do a Ukraine" and remove unpopular governments in parliamentary elections.
Russia: Putin looking chastened after a meeting in which Bush clearly confronted him on the slipping of democratic freedoms in Russia.
Saudi Arabia: Women are granted suffrage in local elections for the first time. A small step, but in the right direction.
Lebanon: Lebanese citizen-protest leads to downfall of pro-Syria government, breaking 29 years of Syrian domination, Lebanon's pro-Damascus.
Recognizing that the road to freedom is never a straight line and it will continue to be strewn with the bodies of heroes, many are celebrating freedom’s ferment:
From FrontPageMag (h/t: The American Mind):
From Hosni Mubarak’s opening up Egyptian elections for the first time, to Syria’s strong efforts to accommodate American demands for withdrawal from Lebanon and for cooperation in Iraq, the Middle East is changing in ways unforeseen even last fall.
Lebanon’s Druze Patriarch Walid Jumblatt pinpointed the genesis of this metamorphosis in the pages of The Washington Post: It's strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.
In other words, a sea-change is taking place in the Arab world: democracy is becoming reality for the first time in history – and all this progress came about because of the determination of President George W. Bush and over the most vicious objections of the American Left.
Roger L. Simon weighs in:
In the last three years, Afghanistan and Iraq have gone more or less democratic, Libya has stood down on nuclear weapons, Ukraine has gone democratic, the Palestinian Authority and even Egypt are making democratic noises and now a near-fascist pro-Syrian regime has resigned in Lebanon. Will all of this work out perfectly? Of course not. Nothing in history moves in a straight line. But this is a rather remarkable achievement of epoch proportions and is clearly the result of a strong US foreign policy.
Mark Steyn writes in The Telegraph:
Consider just the past couple of days' news: not the ever more desperate depravity of the floundering "insurgency", but the real popular Arab resistance the car-bombers and the head-hackers are flailing against: the Saudi foreign minister, who by remarkable coincidence goes by the name of Prince Saud, told Newsweek that women would be voting in the next Saudi election.
"That is going to be good for the election," he said, "because I think women are more sensible voters than men."
Meanwhile in Damascus, Boy Assad, having badly overplayed his hand in Lebanon and after months of denying that he was harbouring any refugee Saddamites, suddenly discovered that - wouldja believe it? - Saddam's brother and 29 other bigshot Baghdad Baathists were holed up in north-eastern Syria, and promptly handed them over to the Iraqi government.
And, for perhaps the most remarkable development, consider this report from Mohammed Ballas of Associated Press: "Palestinians expressed anger on Saturday at an overnight suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that killed four Israelis and threatened a fragile truce, a departure from former times when they welcomed attacks on their Israeli foes."
No disrespect to Associated Press, but I was disinclined to take their word for it. However, Charles Johnson, whose Little Green Footballs website has done an invaluable job these past three years presenting the ugly truth about Palestinian death-cultism, reported that he went hunting around the internet for the usual photographs of deliriously happy Gazans dancing in the street and handing out sweets to celebrate the latest addition to the pile of Jew corpses - and, to his surprise, couldn't find any.
Why is all this happening? Answer: January 30
NickieGoomba puts tongue firmly in cheek and suggests a Michael Moore reaction:
Michael Moore insisted that a "Plague of Democracy" was upon us and could spell the end of progressive politics. Waving a breadstick to emphasize his points, he said:
"Look at Ukraine, look at Iraq, look at Afghanistan, look at Egypt, look at the Palestinians, look at Lebanon. That idiot, George Bush Jr., is establishing countless non-union democracies. I'm talking low wages, non-OSHA workplaces, elected govenment officials without Liberal Arts degrees...it is madness. And have you noticed a lack of diversity in the new so-called democracies? All I see are Arabs and Muslims. It looks like Martin Luther King died for nothing. Stop being sheep. Bush is ruining the whole world. This Democracy crap is a disease and we have to nip it in the bud..."
Remarkably, amazingly, even the Gray Lady is struck by the advancement of freedom:
This has so far been a year of heartening surprises - each one remarkable in itself, and taken together truly astonishing. The Bush administration is entitled to claim a healthy share of the credit for many of these advances. It boldly proclaimed the cause of Middle East democracy at a time when few in the West thought it had any realistic chance. And for all the negative consequences that flowed from the American invasion of Iraq, there could have been no democratic elections there this January if Saddam Hussein had still been in power. Washington's challenge now lies in finding ways to nurture and encourage these still fragile trends without smothering them in a triumphalist embrace.
Also, in my posting of this at Stones Cry Out, see a related cartoon by Chris Muir)
President George W. Bush, Second Inaugural Address
The progression of freedom is not inevitable, but given a modicum of support and protection, freedom possesses an inexorable contagion. How quickly we are seeing that 2005 will be known as the Year of Freedom. The keynote for change was sounded in President Bush’s Second Inaugural Address, seen as historically inspirational by some and wildly unrealistic by others. What is evident is that the clarion call of the President, and a foreign policy based on strength and initiative against terror on the blood-soaked soil of the terrorists, has struck a match in international kindling soaked with the combustible sweat of human oppression.
Around the world, the churning and tonic of freedom’s ferment are making daily headlines:
Afghanistan: The striking image of woman in Afghanistan, formerly shrouded and humiliating, striding confidently to a voting booth.
Iraq: Despite toxic threats, the people of Iraq flipping the purple finger of democracy and turning the tide of Middle Easterni history.
Libya: The formerly brazen Quaddafi of Libya standing down on nuclear weapons when being a member of the world community looked better than being on the serious end of a cruise missile.
Ukraine: The Orange Revolution refusing to succumb to the bullies of Ukraine and their Russian sponsors and making their voices heard in new elections.
Palestinians: After electing a leader who recognized the value of peace, the Palestinans see more hope beyond the shadow of Arafat, and the Palestinian Authority shows increasing confidence in working against their own terrorists.
Egypt: The possibility that Egypt will see the first truly contested national election in its 5,000 year history.
Former Soviet Republics: Opposition parties in Moldova, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan cloaking themselves in orange, hoping to "do a Ukraine" and remove unpopular governments in parliamentary elections.
Russia: Putin looking chastened after a meeting in which Bush clearly confronted him on the slipping of democratic freedoms in Russia.
Saudi Arabia: Women are granted suffrage in local elections for the first time. A small step, but in the right direction.
Lebanon: Lebanese citizen-protest leads to downfall of pro-Syria government, breaking 29 years of Syrian domination, Lebanon's pro-Damascus.
Recognizing that the road to freedom is never a straight line and it will continue to be strewn with the bodies of heroes, many are celebrating freedom’s ferment:
From FrontPageMag (h/t: The American Mind):
From Hosni Mubarak’s opening up Egyptian elections for the first time, to Syria’s strong efforts to accommodate American demands for withdrawal from Lebanon and for cooperation in Iraq, the Middle East is changing in ways unforeseen even last fall.
Lebanon’s Druze Patriarch Walid Jumblatt pinpointed the genesis of this metamorphosis in the pages of The Washington Post: It's strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.
In other words, a sea-change is taking place in the Arab world: democracy is becoming reality for the first time in history – and all this progress came about because of the determination of President George W. Bush and over the most vicious objections of the American Left.
Roger L. Simon weighs in:
In the last three years, Afghanistan and Iraq have gone more or less democratic, Libya has stood down on nuclear weapons, Ukraine has gone democratic, the Palestinian Authority and even Egypt are making democratic noises and now a near-fascist pro-Syrian regime has resigned in Lebanon. Will all of this work out perfectly? Of course not. Nothing in history moves in a straight line. But this is a rather remarkable achievement of epoch proportions and is clearly the result of a strong US foreign policy.
Mark Steyn writes in The Telegraph:
Consider just the past couple of days' news: not the ever more desperate depravity of the floundering "insurgency", but the real popular Arab resistance the car-bombers and the head-hackers are flailing against: the Saudi foreign minister, who by remarkable coincidence goes by the name of Prince Saud, told Newsweek that women would be voting in the next Saudi election.
"That is going to be good for the election," he said, "because I think women are more sensible voters than men."
Meanwhile in Damascus, Boy Assad, having badly overplayed his hand in Lebanon and after months of denying that he was harbouring any refugee Saddamites, suddenly discovered that - wouldja believe it? - Saddam's brother and 29 other bigshot Baghdad Baathists were holed up in north-eastern Syria, and promptly handed them over to the Iraqi government.
And, for perhaps the most remarkable development, consider this report from Mohammed Ballas of Associated Press: "Palestinians expressed anger on Saturday at an overnight suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that killed four Israelis and threatened a fragile truce, a departure from former times when they welcomed attacks on their Israeli foes."
No disrespect to Associated Press, but I was disinclined to take their word for it. However, Charles Johnson, whose Little Green Footballs website has done an invaluable job these past three years presenting the ugly truth about Palestinian death-cultism, reported that he went hunting around the internet for the usual photographs of deliriously happy Gazans dancing in the street and handing out sweets to celebrate the latest addition to the pile of Jew corpses - and, to his surprise, couldn't find any.
Why is all this happening? Answer: January 30
NickieGoomba puts tongue firmly in cheek and suggests a Michael Moore reaction:
Michael Moore insisted that a "Plague of Democracy" was upon us and could spell the end of progressive politics. Waving a breadstick to emphasize his points, he said:
"Look at Ukraine, look at Iraq, look at Afghanistan, look at Egypt, look at the Palestinians, look at Lebanon. That idiot, George Bush Jr., is establishing countless non-union democracies. I'm talking low wages, non-OSHA workplaces, elected govenment officials without Liberal Arts degrees...it is madness. And have you noticed a lack of diversity in the new so-called democracies? All I see are Arabs and Muslims. It looks like Martin Luther King died for nothing. Stop being sheep. Bush is ruining the whole world. This Democracy crap is a disease and we have to nip it in the bud..."
Remarkably, amazingly, even the Gray Lady is struck by the advancement of freedom:
This has so far been a year of heartening surprises - each one remarkable in itself, and taken together truly astonishing. The Bush administration is entitled to claim a healthy share of the credit for many of these advances. It boldly proclaimed the cause of Middle East democracy at a time when few in the West thought it had any realistic chance. And for all the negative consequences that flowed from the American invasion of Iraq, there could have been no democratic elections there this January if Saddam Hussein had still been in power. Washington's challenge now lies in finding ways to nurture and encourage these still fragile trends without smothering them in a triumphalist embrace.
Also, in my posting of this at Stones Cry Out, see a related cartoon by Chris Muir)
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)