The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/1196046
B-4 Wednesday, December 25, 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 There are a couple of stories I'd like to share. The first one which was actually recorded by The Lon- don News published January 9, 1914 tells a story of an event on the Christmas Eve of 1914. The First World War was raging in Europe. For some amazing rea- son, fighting in the battlefields of W WI stopped and one soldier's ex- quisite voice made history. A Ger- man officer Walter Kirchhoff who was a tenor with the Berlin opera sang Silent Night in German, and then in English on that clear cold Christmas night. His voice apparently carried very far. The shooting had stopped and in that silence the British sol- diers knew the song and sang back. The song had a deep impact on many of the soldiers. The day af- ter this event, many soldiers wrote back to their homes and said, "You won't believe this, it was like a wak- ing dream." They rec- ognized that on both ends of the rifle, they were the same." • • • The second story which I came across in a reputable magazine was about two groups of soldiers, one group were Americans and anoth- er group were Germans. On Christmas Eve during W WII somewhere in Europe, they were in a large farm with a house in the middle of the field. They appar- ently entered the house at about the same time. The la- dy owner of the place was of course taken by surprise and wel- comed both groups. She pleaded for the soldiers to leave their arms outside of her house and told them she was going to pre- pare a big meal for ev- eryone. So as the story goes, both sides took their seats, ate a meal togeth- er, and then sang Silent Night in their respective languages. A fter the meal and exchanging greet- ings, the soldiers went about their Points to Ponder By Rev. Ford Bond 'A Charlie Brown Christmas' revisited My Point of View By Dr. H. K. Fenol, Jr., M.D. Silent night, Holy night Minority View By Walter E. Williams Corrupting our social norms Continued on page 5 Continued on page 5 Here are several questions for biologists and medical profession- als: If a person is found to have X Y chromosomes (heterogametic sex), does a designation as female on his birth certificate, driver's li- cense or Social Security card over- ride the chromosomal evidence? Similarly, if a person is found to have X X chromosomes (homoga- metic) does a designation as male on her birth certificate, driver's li- cense or Social Security card over- ride the chromosomal evidence? If you were a medical profession- al, would you consider it malprac- tice for an obstetrics/gynecolo- gy medical specialist, not to order routine Pap smears to screen for cervical cancer for a patient who identifies as a female but has X Y chromosomes? If you were a judge, would you sentence a criminal, who identi- fies as a female but has X Y chro- mosomes, to a women's prison? A judge just might do so. Judge Wil- liam Pryor of the U.S. Court of Ap- peals for the Eleventh Circuit fo- cused on a Florida school district ruling that a transgender "boy," a person with X X chromosomes, could not be barred from the boys' restroom. Pryor suggested stu- dents shouldn't be separated by gender at all. Fear may explain why biologists in academia do not speak out to say that one's sex is not optional. Since the LGBTQ community is a politi- cal force on many col- lege campuses, biol- ogists probably fear retaliation from di- versity-blinded admin- istrators. It's not just academics and judg- es who now see sex as optional. Federal, state and local govern- ments are ignoring bi- ology and permitting people to make their sex optional on one's birth certificate, passport, Social Security card and driver's license. In New York City, inten- tional or repeated refusal to use an individual's preferred name, pro- noun or title is a violation of the New York City Human Rights Law. If I said that my preferred title was "Your Majesty," I wonder wheth- er the New York City Commission on Human Rights would prosecute people who repeatedly refused to use my preferred title. One transgender LGBTQ ac- tivist filed a total of 16 complaints against female estheticians, with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal after they re- fused to wax his male genitals. He sought financial restitution to- taling at least $ 32,500. One wom- an was forced to close her shop. Fortunately, the LGBTQ activist's case was thrown out by the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, and he was instructed to pay $2,000 each to three of the women he attacked. The LGBTQ activist is not giving up. He is now threat- ening to sue gynecol- ogists who will not ac- cept him as a patient. In 2012, an evan- gelical Christian bak- er in Colorado was threatened with jail time for re- fusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage ceremo- ny. When Christian bakery owner Jack Phillips won a landmark (7- 2 decision) U.S. Supreme Court case in June 2018 over his refus- al to make a wedding cake for a gay couple based on his religious convictions, he thought his legal battles with the state of Colorado were over. But now Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lake- wood, Colorado, 24 days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in his fa- vor, faces a new court fight. This fight involves a lawyer who asked him to bake a cake to celebrate the anniversary of her gender transi- tion. There are probably many bakery shops in and around Lake- wood, Colorado, that would be hap- py to bake a cake for homosexu- Pursuit of the Cure By Star Parker Trump's important step against anti-Semitism Soak the rich with taxes and everyone will get clobbered President Donald Trump has signed an important and timely executive order clarifying that pro- hibited activities covered by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 include anti-Semitism. Title VI prohibits discrimina- tion based on race, color or nation- al origin in any program or activity where federal funds are provided. Thus, a primary target here is our colleges and universities. According to the Anti-Defama- tion League, in 2017, acts of anti- Semitism had increased 57% na- tionwide over 2016, increased 89 % on college campuses and increased 94% at K-12 schools. We should be as concerned in America about anti-Semitism as we are about racism. But this initiative is getting criticism in some circles. One allegation is that it will sti- fle free speech on college campus- es, intimidating those who want to criticize Israel. But this confuses the cure with the disease. Free speech is being stifled now on politicized campuses across the nation. I have spoken at hundreds of uni- versities over the last 20 years. It has never been more difficult for me to speak to students and share my views as a Christian conserva- tive pro-life black woman without being harassed, sometimes vio- lently. I've had engagements can- celed because of political pressure on campus. Other conservative speakers have similar experiences. The re- cently released documentary "No Safe Spaces" focuses on the politi- cization of our university campuses and the intimidation of free speech. Too often the same happens to those who go to universities to speak on behalf of Israel. Those who disagree are not interested in civil and enlightened exchange of views. They simply want to shut down, sometimes with violence, those with whom they disagree. They want to shut out supporters of the state of Israel. According to the nonpartisan Freedom House that issues annu- al reports on the state of freedom around the world, of 21 countries and territories in the Middle East and North A frica, only two are ranked "free": Israel and Tunisia. And Israel is the most free. Where are all the protests about the other 19 countries and terri- tories in the region, populated by some 400 million people who are not free? If anti-Semitism does not explain why the freest country in the Mid- dle East, the only Jewish country in the world, is the only one draw- ing protests and hostility, what is the explanation? Another line of misguided criti- cism of this executive order is the claim that it defines Judaism as a nationality. Anyone who buys this bogus line, first peddled by The New York Times, should read the or- der and see that it is not true. Anti-Semitism is an ancient scourge, which has produced a new strain in our time with the emergence of the state of Israel. Jewish students at universities may be subject to harassment and discrimination because of the hostile environment to Isra- el on campuses. It is this problem that this new executive order ad- dresses. It does not define, or re- define, Judaism as a nationality. The whole point of the civil rights movement, which culmi- nated in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, was the protection of the freedom and dignity of every American. The evil of all discrimination, be it anti-Semitism or racism, is depriving individuals of their hu- manity by pretending that they can be defined by what they look like or where they come from. This points to the sad irony of the identity politics that has gripped and swept the nation and our university campuses. It does exactly what the civil rights move- ment tried to eliminate: defines The fourth Sunday of Advent celebrates "love." In English, the word "love" is an abstract noun. This means we only see the ef- fects of love. We can't hold it in our hands; it doesn't take up space. We can't touch love with our senses. This is one reason why God sent His Son to dwell among His cre- ation. Jesus Christ is the exact im- age of God's love for us. The ab- stract of the love of God now be- came the concrete: man could now touch, smell, hear, and see God's "love." One of the most loved Christ- mas Specials that has its essence of God's love is A Charlie Brown Christmas, which premiered on CBS Television on December 8, 1965. There have been a lot of T V Christmas specials since then, but none captures the essence of the story in such simplicity that even a child can grasp; Charles Schultz was approached by Coca-Cola and CBS Television to use his characters for a Christ- mas special. He agreed but insisted that the program have the religious mean- ing that he had experienced grow- ing up in the Midwest [Minneso- ta]. The network executives and sponsor did not like the idea, but the pop- ularity of the Peanut strip gave Schultz the leverage to make the special center upon Christ in Christmas. A Charlie Brown Christmas is about a hapless young boy, Charlie Brown, who is trying to find the true meaning of Christmas in a material world. He accepts the position of direc- tor of the school play about Christ- mas and becomes frustrated when his attempt to restore the spirit of Christmas with a pitiful little fir Christmas tree fails. In his frus- tration, Charlie Brown exclaims: "Isn't there anyone who knows what Christmas is all about? " Did I mention A Charlie Brown Christmas has become a classic? This is noteworthy because CBS in 1965 didn't like the show before it was broadcast and was inundat- ed with calls, letters, and ratings. Charlie Brown saw the story of Christmas in a little Christmas tree that needed love. However, the underlying tension is how will Charlie Brown convey the meaning of Christ- mas to his friends? Charlie Brown's friend Linus comes to rescue after he [Char- lie Brown] exclaims in frustration during a break in rehearsal of a school play, "Isn't there anyone who knows what Christmas is all about? " Linus steps forward and says, "Sure, Charlie Brown, I can tell you what Christmas is all about." He asks for lights, and takes cen- ter stage and recites the Christ- mas Story from Luke's Gospel: "And there were in the same coun- try shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glo- ry of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord. Continued on page 5 Heritage Viewpoint By Stephen Moore Continued on page 5 Continued on page 5 Not that long ago there was a broad political consensus that a fair and efficient tax system has a broad tax base and low tax rates. The grand bargain was no special interest loopholes and low tax rates to boost the econ- omy and jobs. As recently as the 1980s, Democrats and Republi- cans joined together to pass a tax reform that lowered income tax rates to 28 percent, while elimi- nating deductions and carve outs. Nearly every Senate Democrat, including Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, Joe Biden, Bill Bradley, and How- ard Metzenbaum, voted for this new system. The tax reform worked. Econ- omist Dale Jorgenson, then the chairman of the Harvard econom- ics department, estimated that the net present value of the 1986 Tax Reform Act was well above $1 trillion to the economy because of lower tax rate penalties across the board. Politicians and the Amer- ican voters had experienced the wreckage to the economy in the 1970s when tax rates stood as high as 70 percent. The result was one of the worst decades for real middle class in- comes since the Great Depres- sion, skyrocketing unemploy- ment, and a stock market that lost more than 60 percent of its value after inflation from 1968 to 1982. Working class Americans saw their retirement savings liq- uidated right before their eyes. High tax rates were not the only economic malady of that malaise decade, but they played a big part. There was another practical reason for chopping tax rates down, as the rich found all sorts of clever and legal ways around pay- ing those high tax rates. When the highest tax rate was between 70 percent and 90 percent, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans paid less than 20 percent of the income tax burden. Today, with a tax rate of 37 percent, the rich pay almost 40 percent of the income tax burden. High tax rates failed to soak the rich because they shel- tered their income from taxes. A fter both the Kennedy and Reagan tax cuts, reported tax- able income by those in the high- est income tax bracket almost doubled in less than a decade. All of this recorded history has been lost among current liberal politi- cians and academics. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and ma- ny others are longing for a return to the era of punitive tax rates on the rich as a way to reduce income inequality. Economist Emmanu- el Saez of the University of Cali- fornia argues we should go back to 70 percent tax rates since they worked so well the last time we imposed them. In the 1950s and 1960s, when tax rates were as high as 90 per- cent, the economy was most- ly prosperous. But the rich nev- er paid those tax rates. Effective tax rates were actually much low- er. This was also an era before the birth of the $2 trillion modern wel- fare and regulatory state and the taxes to pay for it. Medicare, Med- icaid, and the payroll taxes to pay for them did not even exist back then in those glory days. When President Kennedy cut the tax rate from 90 percent to 70 percent, the economy soared during the 1960s. Growth rates zoomed to 6 percent. When Pres- ident Reagan chopped rates from 70 percent to 50 percent to 28 percent, the economy saw anoth- er burst of prosperity that former Wall Street Journal editor Rob- ert Bartley dubbed the "seven fat years." The business tax cuts under President Trump have contribut- ed to the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years and the biggest middle income gains in at least two decades. High tax rates did