The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/1162521
C-10 Wednesday, September 4, 2019 The Press-Dispatch OPINION Submit Letters to the Editor: Letters must be signed and received by noon on Mondays. Email: editor@pressdispatch.net or bring in a hard copy: 820 E. Poplar Street, Petersburg My Point of View by Dr. H. K. Fenol, Jr., M.D. Mysterious ailments Minority View by Walter E. Williams Social Security Matters by by Russell Gloor Beginning of US slavery Income taxes on social security benefits Continued on page 11 Continued on page 11 Continued on page 11 Continued on page 11 Continued on page 11 The New York Times has begun a major initiative, the "1619 Proj- ect," to observe the 400th anniver- sary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe Amer- ican history so that slavery and the contributions of black Amer- icans explain who we are as a na- tion. Nikole Hannah-Jones, staff writer for The New York Times Magazine wrote the lead article, "America Wasn't a Democracy, Un- til Black Americans Made It One." She writes, "Without the idealistic, strenuous and patriotic efforts of black Americans, our democracy today would most likely look very different — it might not be a de- mocracy at all." There are several challenges one can make about Hannah-Jones' article, but I'm going to focus on the article's most serious error, namely that the nation's founders intended for us to be a democra- cy. That error is shared by too ma- ny Americans. The word democ- racy appears nowhere in the two most fundamental founding docu- ments of our nation — the Declara- tion of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. Instead of a democ- racy, the Constitution's Article IV, Section 4, declares, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government." Think about it and ask yourself whether our Pledge of Allegiance says to "the democra- cy for which it stands" or to "the republic for which it stands." Is Ju- lia Ward Howe's popu- lar Civil War song titled "The Bat- tle Hymn of the Democracy" or "The Battle Hymn of the Repub- lic"? The founders had utter con- tempt for democracy. James Mad- ison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, wrote in Feder- alist Paper No. 10, that in a pure democracy "there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnox- ious individual." At the 1787 Con- stitutional Convention, delegate Edmund Randolph said, "that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the tur- bulence and follies of democracy." John Adams said: "Remember, de- mocracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democ- racy yet that did not commit suicide." U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the dif- ference is like that be- tween order and chaos." The U.S. Constitution is replete with anti-majority rule, undemo- cratic provisions. One provision, heavily criticized, is the Electoral College. In their wisdom, the fram- ers gave us the Electoral College so that in presidential elections, heavily populated states could not run roughshod over sparsely pop- ulated states. In order to amend the Constitution, it requires a two- thirds vote of both Houses, or two- thirds of state legislatures, to pro- pose an amendment, and requires three-fourths of state legislatures for ratification. Part of the rea- Dear Rusty: I understand that after I reach full retirement age, I no longer have a limit on how much I earn. I retired one year early (65), and am now 76, but I am still being taxed on a portion of my SS benefits. I am not work- ing and making extra money. How- ever, my wife is still working, and I get two small annuities per month. But when I file income tax I am told we made enough for me to be taxed on a portion of my Social Se- curity benefit. I even checked to see if filing married but separate returns would help and it was not as good as joint returns. So may- be you can explain this to me— Signed: Taxpaying Senior Dear Taxpaying Senior: I'm afraid you're speaking of two dif- ferent things. You are correct that once you reach your full retire- ment age there is no longer a lim- it on how much you can earn from working before your monthly So- cial Security benefit is reduced. But that is something totally dif- ferent from paying income tax on your Social Security benefits. Social Security's "earnings limit" looks only at your earnings from employment (or self-employment) to decide if they should take back some of your benefits before you reach your full re- tirement age. However, whether or not your Social Security benefits are taxable income is determined by your "combined income," which includes your adjusted gross in- come as reported to the IRS, plus any non-taxable interest you may have had, plus 50 percent of your total Social Security benefits for the tax year. This is often referred to as your "modified adjusted gross income" or "MAGI" and it's how the IRS determines if, or how much, of your Social Security ben- efit is taxable income. As a couple filing your income taxes as "mar- ried – filing jointly" if your MAGI is over $ 32,000 then up to 50 percent of your annual Social Security benefit amount is taxable, and if your MAGI is over $44,000 then up to 85 percent of your Social Security income be- comes taxable. Note that the combined income levels are different, and lower, when you file your taxes individually. The "earnings limit" is a rule im- posed by Social Security to recov- er some benefits paid if the limit is exceeded due to your earnings from working. Taxation of Social Security benefits is done by the IRS (not Social Security) and it's the IRS who determines if your So- cial Security benefits will add to Pursuit of the Cure by Star Parker Points to Ponder by Rev. Ford Bond Our changing values should worry us Christendom is an empty faith Once in a while, like once a day, I would feel a nostalgia about the work I had dedicated my entire ed- ucation and career into. That prob- ably totaled a span of 53 years for both aspects. Since changing directions about three years ago, I would run through my mind the highlights of my younger and then mid-life and then the older years of my jour- ney of providing care. So what I have been doing is to review things that had puzzled me, things that I needed to look deeper into, and things that other health providers ran into. I just do it for fun. Yeah. Really. One of the things that never left me was a statement one of my as- tute colleagues told me, "When you solve a medical mystery, work like a detective. Sometimes you will get stumped, so seek the wis- dom of others since nobody knows everything in the art and science of medicine. Be resourceful and re- lentless in the pursuit of perfection if there is such a thing, and learn the art of good communications. For those who you will encoun- ter seeking care are searching for answers, know they are afraid, they are hopeful, they are frustrat- ed and they are trusting you will make good and sound decisions." Unfortunately no matter how hard you try, the world is not perfect and there will be limitations in the answers to questions, there will be imperfec- tions, and there can be upset and anger when those seeking help cannot get the results they expect. One of the amazing things that had hap- pened in the last several years is the ability of many and almost ev- eryone to look into the University of Google and search for answers to simple and difficult health care questions. I think in many ways it is good that these resources are available, because now health care provid- ers have to really be in step and ahead of the game. One thing though that still sets them apart is a very long journey of educa- tion, plus experience plus tough training plus tough board certifi- cations both written and orals. I'm so glad for these hurdles, because I don't want anyone putting me to sleep or cutting on me or giving me treatments and medications unless they know their stuff and are well trained. • • • Once in while, I view some interesting programs from one of the providers of on- line movies and docu- mentaries. One inter- esting documentary I came across was about a physician who wrote articles on medical mysteries. The name of her pro- gram is Diagnosis. This lady doc- tor would communicate and inter- view patients with very strange maladies that seemingly no diag- nosis could be concluded. So she would write this case on a widely circulated newspaper in New York. People from many parts of the world would come across this strange story and they would send in their thoughts and opin- ions about what this strange ill- ness could be. Responses came from many people working in the health care field, some came from different kinds of professions or work, some lay people shared knowledge they came across be- The late historian and political philosopher Harry V. Jaffa noted the significance that the preamble to our Constitution concludes with the words "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Pos- terity." This is how the drafters of our Constitution saw its purpose. Jaffa continues, saying, "a bless- ing is what is good in the eyes of God. It is a good whose possession ... belongs properly only to those who deserve it." In light of this, let's consider a just-released Wall Street Journal/ NBC News poll that appeared un- der the headline "Americans Have Shifted Dramatically on What Val- ues Matter Most." "Patriotism, religion and having children rate lower among young- er generations than they did two decades ago," the headline con- tinues. Of all surveyed, 61 percent "cit- ed patriotism as very important to them, down 9 percentage points from 1998, while 50 percent citied religion, down 12 points. Some 43 percent placed a high value on hav- ing children, down 16 points from 1998." Among those ages 18 -38, 42 per- cent cited patriotism as "very im- portant"; less than one-third cit- ed having children; and 30 per- cent cited "religion, belief in God." The founders of the country saw the nation's existence, its faith and its posterity as a package deal. It all went together. Now we have a young genera- tion, our future, that dismisses the importance of all the elements of that package. What might this tell us about where we're headed? The operative questions are: Does the country have a future, a posterity, without children? And will there be children if there is no marriage and family? And will there be marriage and family if there is no religion and God? Recent statistics provide pret- ty gloomy answers to these ques- tions. The Centers for Disease Con- trol and Prevention reported the lowest birth rate in 32 years last year. It was the fourth consecu- tive year with a decline in the U.S. birth rate. And the fertility rate, the num- ber of births per 1,000 adult wom- en, has been dropping every year and is well below the replacement rate — the fertility rate needed to keep the population from shrink- ing. Regarding marriage, over the last half-century, the percentage of U.S. adults who are married has dropped 31 percent. According to the Pew Research Center, in 1960, 72 percent of adults in the U.S. were married. By 2016, this was down to 50 percent. The decline in the percentage of Americans saying religion is "very important" in their life is identical to the decline in the percentage of married Americans. In 1960, 70 percent said religion was "very important," and by 2018, this was down to 50 percent, a 20 percent decline. Although Americans continue to feel free — 87 percent, accord- ing to Gallup, are satisfied that they can freely live as they choose — a minority now sees this liberty as a blessing, in the sense that Harry Jaffa explains the word in our Con- stitution. That is, "what is good in the eyes of God." As the sense of the importance of faith and religion diminishes, the values and behaviors that go with them — marriage and chil- dren — also diminish. There are important practical implications on our posterity. Fewer children means an aging population. More retirees per ev- eryone working means more pres- sure on the payroll tax, each dol- lar of which must be distributed to more and more retirees. The population over the age of 55 accounts for more than half our health care expenditures. As the percentage of the population over 55 increases, our health care ex- penditure burden will increase proportionately. I want to challenge your faith. By that, I am not challenging the legitimacy of the gospel, but how you view the faith in your daily life. As Paul admonished the church at Corinth, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves." The Church acknowledges that it exists alongside and within a nation. This means it must guard against becoming entangled with the political/social structure as part of the expression of faith. Through the history of the Church, there have been times when the church became enter- twined within an era and the po- litical/social aspects of life. Chris- tianity became Christendom and behaved more like an "ism" or a cult than an organized effort to ex- press faith in God. The faithful have always yearned for genuine Christianity and rejected its substitute, Chris- tendom, which is a political and cultural driven Church. Christianity is a way of life. The faithful yields to the love for God who guides His disciples in their thoughts, words, and deeds. Christianity is not an "ism." When and where it becomes an "ism," the hierarchy imposes upon the members principles, dogmas, rules, and approved activities. Life among those who embrace Chris- tendom live by rules and boxes to be checked off and must adhere to the demands of society or to the political to be acknowledged as a "good" Christian. This is occurring within West- ern Christianity as social justice warriors demand that the church embrace its causes, such as po- litical correctness and "Cultural Marxism." Christendom demands that "good" Christians embrace its Po- litically Correct positions on is- sues to which social justice war- riors attach significance. The question arises among the faithful, "How can we distinguish Christianity from Christendom? " The faithful could list undesirable features, but this would be simi- lar to how Christendom operates. However, deciding if you are em- bracing Christianity or Christen- dom can be simplified by exam- ining how close your profession of faith mirrors the foundational teachings of the historical church. Modern Christendom has little use for the Bible because the Bi- ble is politically incorrect. The Bi- ble calls all human behavior and motives into question. None is ex- empt! Christendom pays lip ser- vice to its overall importance, but it dismisses it as "the Rock" of eter- nal life. The Bible is the foundational document of Christianity. With- in its pages, mankind finds itself a created being, accountable to God. The Bible affirms the exis- tence of God, and He is omnipres- ence, omnipotent, and omnibenev- olent. That means man is not the measure of all things, and not the "supreme" being. The scriptures emphatically teach that there is evil. In addition, truth, beauty, justice, and piety are objective features of life! Morality is not a subjective experience re- siding within the individual or de- fined by culture. This fact is unacceptable from the standpoint of Christendom because it is working to pull hu- manity away from the foundation of Christian ethics and remake it into a subjective Cultural Marxist world. In other words, biblical Chris- tianity as practiced by the saints threatens Christendom's agenda to transform Christian civilization into a humanistic paradise free of all inhibitions. Christendom demands inclu- siveness, yet the God of the Bible is exclusive when it comes to grant- ing eternal life. This concept is in- tolerable to Christendom. Therefore, Jesus must be recre- ated or reinterpreted as a nonjudg- mental, passive, live-and-let-live, and unconditionally accepting the liberal hipster who was crucified for preaching universal love.