Archive for March, 2006

Thanksgiving In Our Heritage

Giving thanks is a long standing practice in America and Canada. It was preceded by the harvest-home celebration in England. Even that was preceded by the ancient Jewish Feast of Tabernacles.

The first Thanksgiving in America was religious in nature and didn’t involve feasting. December 4, 1619, a group of 38 British settlers at Berkeley Plantation on the James River engaged in a day of giving thanks, prayer, and worship.

Nearly a year later the Plymouth colony settled on these shores. Their first winter in Massachusetts was devastating. Nearly half of their number suffered and died in the harsh weather. The summer of 1621 resulted in bumper crops.

That fall Governor Bradford declared a day of feasting and giving thanks to God for His blessings on the colony. The day lasted three days. About 90 Wampanoag Indians added five deer to the menu of corn, wheat, barley, peas, clams, eel and other fish, leeks and plums. This practice was followed the next several years.

The other New England colonies followed the practice. During the Revolutionary War eight special days of thanksgiving followed significant developments in the war. President George Washington, in 1789, declared November 26, a day of giving thanks to the All Mighty. In 1839, New York became the first northern state to have an official state Thanksgiving. Other Northern states followed immediately. In 1855, Virginia was the first Southern state to have such a day.

Encouraged by the persistent Sarah Josepha Hale, President Abraham Lincoln proclaimed the last Thursday in November 1863, “a day of thanksgiving and praise to the beneficent Father.” For the next 75 years each president proclaimed the last Thursday of November as Thanksgiving.

In 1941 Congress formerly established the fourth Thursday of November as the official national Thanksgiving Day.

Now what?
Thanks are expressed by someone, to someone, about something. Let’s each be one to express thanks. There is much for which to be thankful.

Some schools teach the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Native Americans for their help. Not so. It was to All Mighty God. When you pause to give thanks be more mindful of the One to whom you are speaking than of the thing about which we are giving thanks.

Do yourself a favor. Make a list of things for which you are thankful. Even those among us who have significant difficulties there are many things for which to express thanks.

Captain Kangaroo taught generations the two magic words of please and thank you. A lot of folks have forgotten them. Rarely are they heard. Not only are they rarely heard by people but by the God of all blessings. Make giving thanks a life style. As you do you will become increasingly aware of the many things for which you have cause to be thankful. This is a matchless way of training yourself to be a more positive person.

Don’t forget to give thanks to the God of every good and perfect gift. He inhabits the praise of His people. Make your life His habitat.

Taxing The Wealthy

Economics 101 includes a basic principle many never learned. It relates to one of the only two certain things in life: taxes. In every society those in authority want them and no one else does. In Ireland recently I learned why old castles had so few windows. There was a tax on daylight. It was based on how much light was allowed in a house. Wait until Washington hears of that one.

In America the subject of taxing, tax breaks, and deductions rages. One theory is tax cuts favor the rich. I should hope so. Why? Because that benefits everyone else. That is the purpose. It is to allow entrepreneurs to have more money so they can invest it in products and services. That provides jobs and jobs put money in the pockets of those less wealthy.

The investments by entrepreneurs is a way of putting money into the pockets of others. In doing so it alleviates the government having to put money in their pockets.
Elemental observation number two. Higher taxes do not keep the rich from being rich. They know how to protect their wealth. Some persons who are the strongest advocates for increased taxes are very wealthy. They have made and sheltered theirs.
Conversely higher taxes keep some people from getting wealth. Higher taxes discourage adventurous investors from creating jobs that generate taxes and salaries for employees. This results in unemployment.

Tax cuts allow money to circulate more freely among the people rather than through government. An example of this was the recent tax break related to the purchase a heavy equipment. 60% was allowed on new equipment and 30% on used equipment. This allowed one local contractor to purchase 40 pieces of heavy equipment. This meant jobs were provided for the people selling the equipment, making the equipment, and those wage earners personally purchased items they needed and paid taxes. Without that tax break none of that would have happened. Those people would have been unemployed. That local scenario was played out countless times across America.

Lamentably some wealthy persons have selfishly spoiled this cycle. Critics of tax breaks use them as the norm. Like all systems it is dependent upon honest people to make it work.

There are numerous horror stories of government agencies misusing tax funds. Waste in government is a well documented reality. That doesn’t mean taxes in general should be abolished.

Lowering tax rates encourages investments within the country. Higher tax rates sends investors looking for foreign markets with a more favorable tax rate. It robs America of jobs. Fewer jobs mean more unemployed people looking to the government for money they could have otherwise earned in a job the government taxed out of existence to get the money to give them.

It is true that wealthy entrepreneurs make money. They also take the risk of possibly losing it.

The principle involves an old Biblical axiom: “Give and it shall be given unto you.”

Super Granny – Defender Of Justice

true story reported on the news in the USA

An elderly Florida lady did her shopping, and upon returning to her car, she found four males in the act of leaving with her vehicle. She dropped her shopping bags and drew her handgun, proceeding to scream at the top of her voice “I have a gun, and I know how to use it! Get out of the car!”

The four men didn’t wait for a second invitation. They got out and ran like mad. The lady, somewhat shaken, then proceeded to load her shopping bags into the back of the car and get into the driver’s seat. She was so shaken that she could not get her key into the ignition. She tried and tried, and then it dawned on her why.

A few minutes later she found her own car parked four or five spaces farther down. She loaded her bags into the car and then drove to the police station. The sergeant to whom she told the story doubled over on the floor with laughter.

He pointed to the other end of the counter, where four pale men were reporting a car jacking by a mad, elderly woman described as white, less than five feet tall, glasses, curly white hair, and carrying a large handgun.

Stem Cell Research: The Ethical Dilemma

There is a perilous vast uncharted sea that might be crossed. Beyond the horizon it is believed there might be the land of Utopia. Several vessels are poised to try to make the voyage. It is unknown if any can cross but known if one can cross several identifiable ones can also.

Based on that scenario why insist that all the cargo be placed in one vessel? This question is compounded by the fact that one vessel was made for a higher known mission.

Now the elements. The sea is stem cell research. The vessel is the human embryo. Other vessels are alternative sources of pluripotent stem cells. That is, human cells that may develop many types of body parts. Utopia is a cure for human being suffering from Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, juvenile diabetes, spinal cord injuries or many other ailments.
It is not known for sure human embryos will prove to be a source to reverse these heartbreaking human conditions. The possibility of reversing such grievous conditions is inviting. Even if they can there is a moral issue involved.

Morals? All of us are moralist to some degree. Samuel Johnson, 18th Century literary giant, said “we are perpetually moralist.” Certain moral determinations are unavoidable. This is one. Regardless of which side of this issue you might be on you are a moralist. The issue pushes the envelope of bioethics.

Other vessels for the potential crossing are available. Dr. Edmund Pellegrino, the John Carroll professor of medicine and medical ethics at The Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University Medical Center, notes studies published in leading journals including Science, Nature, and Hepatology found that stem cells can be obtained from such sources as fetal tissue over eight weeks old, human placenta, umbilical cords, and adult bone marrow. These cells would still have the all-important pluripotentiality of embryonic stem cells to produce any cells desired, including heart, lung, and brain cells. He questions, “Why make or destroy embryos to obtain stem cells when we don’t have to?” Paraphrased, “Why use this vessel at all?” If it can reach Utopia so can others.

President Bush in addressing the issue echoed this fact saying, “You should also know that stem cells can be derived from sources other than embryos …. Many patients suffering a range of diseases are already being helped with treatments developed from adult stem cells.”

The President further noted that as a result of private research 60 genetically diverse lines already exist with the ability to reproduce themselves indefinitely, creating ongoing opportunities for research. He has proposed using federal funds for research using these existing lines. That opens a vast world of potential.

If the ethical sea, made perilous by ethical and moral hazards, is to be crossed to Utopia it need not be crossed in this one vessel, embryonic stem cells, only. Actually, at all. If crossed, a moral crossing is possible.

SOURCES: http://aolsvc.health.webmd.aol.com/content/pages/9/1691_50914.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-2.html

Stem Cell Experiments

STEM CELL EXPERIMENTS
A short time ago President Bush was faced with a difficult decision. The issue evolved around embryonic stem cell experiments. What ever his decision it was certain to be opposed by a large block who disapproved of it. The potential benefits of such experiments were said to be many. Lives could potentially be saved and the quality of life for others improved. Those assets are not to be minimized. It was thought his decision would influence our culture physically and morally for years to come. Many who conceded it to be morally wrong argued the benefits were so great it was worth the compromise. Those who said there should be no moral compromise were thought to be lacking compassion and insensitive to the benefits.

If it were wrong is it OK to do wrong in order to get the opportunity to do right? There is a moral question confronted by every individual in every age. A certain segment of our society doesn’t like to be told anything is simply wrong.

It is grievous when proponents of moral compromise in order to achieve a good physical advantage later find there was a morally right way. Patience often allows for a win-win condition to be discovered. That is, there is found a moral way to achieve the same physical good. In making his decision that seemed to be what President Bush was delaying in hopes would happen. Well, there seems to be good news.

On January 23, 2002 “NEW SCIENTIST” published an article entitled “Ultimate Stem Cell Discovered.” Catherine Verfaillie at the University of Minnesota — who is an advocate of embryonic stem cell experiments – is reported to have discovered stem cells in adults that can turn into muscle, cartilage, bone, liver, nerve, or brain cells. The cells called “multipotent adult progenitor cells,” or MAPCs, can do everything embryonic stem cells can do.

The research indicates that MAPCs can form every tissue type in the body and can be grown in culture indefinitely without signs of aging. In addition, MAPCs don’t form cancerous masses when injected into adults, a major problem with embryonic stem cells.

Bottom line: This being true there is no longer a need to clone human beings or harvest stem cells from human embryos for genetic research. Future cures for cancer, leukemia, or diabetes can be pursued without the moral controversy surrounding these practices. If these studies are correct as reported the debate is changed. We would be able to be morally right and physically advantaged.

There is sage wisdom is stated two ways.

“Do not evil that good may come.”

“Never do wrong in order to get a chance to do right.”

As with the decision by President Bush there are persons who come down on both sides of those statements. However, they sure keep a moral compass on true north.