The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/934377
The Press-Dispatch Wednesday, Januar y 31, 2018 C-9 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 Lent is near, which means the faithful need to embrace a Lent- en discipline which will afflict the body and foster discipleship and an appreciation of the cross. What is the importance of the Cross to the faithful? The cross is the most recognized religious symbol worldwide. It had a central role in the ministry of Jesus and was the instrument of His death. The cross is identified in the Gospels as the manner of how Je- sus was put to death. The Romans used crucifixion to execute slaves and non-Romans convicted of se- rious crimes throughout the Em- pire. Part of the ritual of crucifix- ion was for the condemned to car- ry his own cross (or crossbeam), which is stated by Jesus and His disciples. To be crucified was a social dis- grace in the eyes of Western civili- zation several centuries before and after the death of Jesus. The cross generally used by the Romans is known as the St. Antho- ny's cross, shaped like the letter "T", unlike the traditionally Lat- in cross used by the church. From the dawn of civilization, the cross in its many forms has been used both as a re- ligious symbol and as an ornament. Various cross artifacts dating long before the Chris- tian era have been found in almost every part of the ancient world. Types of crosses have been found in Europe, Asia, China, In- dia, Syria, Persia, and Egypt dat- ing from the Stone Age to Chris- tian times. For example in Egypt, crosses were used as religious symbols. The Egyptian cross is called the ankh (pronounced 'ahnk'). The character stood for the word which means life. Egyptian use of the cross has been depicted in their gods carrying it by the loop or car- rying one in each hand crossed over their breast. The Nazi emblem of a swastika is a type of cross. If you unfold the bends, it be- comes a cross. Howev- er, the swastika pre- dates National Social- ism by at least 4 mil- lenniums and can be found on ancient stat- ues of the Buddha. There is debate over what type of cross Je- sus was crucified up- on. The English word used for Cross is translated from the Greek word stauros, which means "up- right stake." The English word crucified is from the Greek verb stauroo, which means "to fasten to a stake or pole." Greek scholar W.E. Vine writes: "both the noun stauros and the verb stauroo are originally to be distinguish from the religious form of a two-beamed 'cross.' The shape of the latter had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as Minority View by Walter E. Williams The Weekly by Alden Heuring We don't need bad law Points to Ponder by Rev. Ford Bond The Cross and Lent: Part I Taming the tuition tiger Heritage Viewpoint by Edwin J. Feulner You can't put a price on educa- tion, the saying goes, but if you did, it would be very high. And the cost falls on everyone. Indeed, our economy is ham- pered by a two-pronged higher education problem: Collectively, Americans have racked up some $1.4 trillion in outstanding stu- dent loan debt. At the same time, that debt has been amassed by those who drop out before earn- ing a degree and by those earn- ing degrees with limited utility in the market. Yet, despite growing evidence that generous federal subsidies have driven tuition increases, policymakers continue to subsi- dize increases in college costs, instead of tackling the drivers of student debt. Easy access to fed- eral student aid has enabled col- leges to raise tuition profligate- ly over the past several decades. When combined with generous loan forgiveness policies, which must be paid for by taxpayers, the result has been a three-fold increase in the cost of college since the mid-1980s. Economist Richard Vedder found that, had tuition and fees at colleges and univer- sities grown at a rate similar to the growth prior to 1978 — be- fore there was sig- nificant federal sub- sidization of tuition — college costs at state universities would be closer to just $5,000 today. The Higher Edu- cation Act (HEA), first passed in 1965, is the trough at which universities feed. The HEA authorizes multiple federal student loan programs, as well as the federal Pell Grant Program and the federal work study pro- gram. The HEA isn't a safety net of last resort for students who can- not afford college; it is a luxuri- ous hammock in which students can repose, accessing subsi- dized student loans with few if any credit checks or examination of their ability to repay. The fed- eral government originates and services 90 percent of all student loans, crowding out the pri- vate lending market and placing taxpay- ers on the hook for student loan defaults and loan forgiveness policies. This vicious lend- ing-and-spending cy- cle serves no one well — save university ad- ministrators. The federal gov- ernment makes loans available to anyone, universities raise tu- ition fully aware of the ease with which the federal government provides the loans — and stu- dents borrow more and more to finance college. The best way we could begin lowering college costs would be to dramatically curtail federal A frightening prayer Modern technology Continued on page 10 Continued on page 10 Continued on page 10 Continued on page 10 Make the FBI great again Lucid Moments by Bart Stinson Andrew McCarthy is the Bronx native who prosecuted "the blind sheik" Omar Abdel-Rahman and eleven other Islamic extremists in federal court in 1995. He won ter- rorism convictions against them for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and for their conspira- cy to bomb the Lincoln and Hol- land tunnels, George Washington Bridge, the U.N. and a federal of- fice building. The evidence that McCarthy saw during that prosecution con- vinced him that some of his fel- low federal officials weren't seri- ous about preventing Islamic ter- rorism against Americans. Abdel-Rahman, a close friend of Osama bin Laden, applied to en- ter the U.S. seven times between 1987 and 1990. Our government re- viewed all seven applications and only refused one of them. The State Department blamed the CIA, and the CIA blamed the system. Abdel-Rahman entered the U.S. on a tourist visa in July 1990 although he was on the State De- partment's terrorist watch list. The State Department revoked his tourist visa that November, but he didn't leave, and a New Jersey of- fice of the Immigration & Natural- ization Service issued him an im- migrant visa ("green card") the following April. When the blind Imam re-entered America after travel- ing abroad, U.S. offi- cials recognized he was on the terrorist list, and moved to re- voke his immigrant vi- sa. But they let him go free, because he had a right to contest the revocation at a future hearing. He never did so, and the government accordingly revoked his visa. Then he applied for political asy- lum. In the meantime, his co-con- spirators bombed the World Trade Center. His application for refugee status was denied later in 1993, but he never left the country, and we never honored Egypt's request to extradite him. Abdel-Rahman traveled and preached widely in the U.S. and Canada. He taught in three New York-area mosques that Ameri- cans are "descendants of apes and pigs" (which, come to think of it, is consistent with the secular hu- manist curriculum in our public schools) "who have been feeding from the dining tables of Zionists, Communists and colonialists." He called on his followers to at- tack the American transportation sys- tem: "tear it apart, de- stroy their economy, eliminate their inter- ests, sink their ships, shoot down their planes, kill them on the sea, air or land." He issued a fatwa that it would be lawful to rob banks and kill Jews in America. In their spare time, his follow- ers assassinated Rabbi Meir Kah- ane, founder of the Jewish Defense League. They bombed U.S. embas- sies in Tanzania and Kenya. Even- tually they committed the massa- cre of defenseless pyramid tourists at Luxor. It was grievous dereliction of du- ty for our government officials to admit this hateful, murderous cre- tin and his followers to the U.S. and to fail to expel them. But the State Department and CIA apparently were never held to account for the consequences. More recently, senior FBI offi- cials have tried to tap-dance away from accountability for grievous My Point of View by Dr. H. K. Fenol, Jr., M.D. President Donald Trump said, "We are going to take a strong look at our country's libel laws so that when somebody says some- thing that is false and defamato- ry about someone, that person will have meaningful recourse in our courts." The president was respond- ing to statements made in Michael Wolff's new book, "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House." Our nation does not need stron- ger laws against libel. To the con- trary, libel and slander laws should be repealed. Let's say exactly what libel and slander are. The legal pro- fession defines libel as a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation. Slander is making a false spoken statement that is damaging to a person's rep- utation. There's a question about repu- tation that never crosses even the sharpest legal minds. Does one's reputation belong to him? In other words, if one's reputation is what others think about him, whose prop- erty are other people's thoughts? The thoughts I have in my mind about others, and hence their rep- utations, belong to me. One major benefit from decrim- inalizing libel and slander would be that it would reduce the value of gossip. It would reduce the value of false statements made by others. Here's a Gallup Poll survey ques- tion: "In general, how much trust and confidence do you have in the mass media – such as newspapers, T V and radio – when it comes to reporting the news fully, accurate- ly and fairly – a great deal, a fair amount, not very much or none at all? " In 1976, 72 percent of Ameri- cans trusted the media, and today the percentage has fallen to 32. The mainstream media are so bi- ased and dishonest that more and more Americans are using alterna- tive news sources, which have be- come increasingly available elec- tronically. While we're talking about bad laws dealing with libel and slander, let's raise some questions about oth- er laws involving speech – namely, blackmail laws. The legal profes- sion defines blackmail as occur- ring when someone demands mon- ey from a person in return for not re- vealing compromising or injurious information. I believe that people should not be prosecuted for black- mail. Let's examine it with the fol- lowing scenario. It's 5 o'clock in the morning. You see me leaving a mo- tel with a sweet young thing who's obviously not Mrs. Williams. You say to me, "Professor Williams, the First Amendment to the U.S. Con- stitution guarantees me the right to broadcast to the entire world your conduct that I observed." I believe that most would agree that you have that right. You then proposition me, "If you pay me $10,000, I will not exercise my right to tell the world about your behavior." Now the ball is in my court. I have a right to turn down your proposi- tion and let you tell the world about my infidelity and live with the con- sequences of that decision. Or I can pay you the $10,000 for your silence and live with the consequences of that decision. In other words, black- mail fits into the category of peace- able, noncoercive voluntary ex- change, just like most other trans- actions. If I'm seen voluntarily giv- ing up $10,000, the only conclusion a third party could reach is that I must have viewed myself as being better off as a result. That's just like an instance when you see me volun- tarily give up money for some other good or service – be it food, cloth- ing, housing or transportation. You come to the same conclusion. What constitutes a crime can be divided into two classes – mala in se and mala prohibita. Homicide and robbery are inherently wrong (mala in se). They involve the initiation of force against another. By contrast, blackmail (mala prohibita) offenses are considered criminal not because they violate the property or person of another but because society seeks to regulate such behavior. By the way, married people would tend to find blackmail in their interest. Ex- tra eyes on their spouse's behavior, in pursuit of money, would help to en- sure greater marital fidelity. Those who would like to dig deeper into blackmail can go to http://tinyurl.com/ybvxzaan. Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason Uni- versity. "My parish is composed of peo- ple like me." Isn't that a frightening thought? There's a prayer used in sever- al churches (including mine) that looks pretty simple and happy- go-lucky on the surface, but hon- estly, it reveals a lot of unpleasant truths about people. The Steward- ship Prayer, composed by some- one or other a long time ago, goes like this... My parish is composed of people like me I help make it what it is It will be friendly if I am It will be holy if I am Its pews will be filled if I help fill them It will do great work if I work It will be prayerful if I pray It will make generous gifts to ma- ny causes if I am a generous giver It will bring others into its wor- ship if I invite and bring them It will be a parish of loyalty and love, of fearlessness and faith, of compassion, charity and mercy If I, who make it what it is, am filled with these same things. Therefore with the help of God, I now dedicate myself to the task of being all the things that I want my parish to be. I'll say it again—isn't that fright- ening? Let's be frank with our- selves for a moment. I'm not friend- ly, holy, hard-working, prayerful, generous—certainly, at least, not as much as I'd like to be. Are you? Well, good for you. But when I consider what this simple prayer implies, it gets me shakin' in my boots. I could go on about what a terrible person I am, but I think you get the picture. The second thing this prayer forces me to con- sider is that I can't assume "some- one else will take care of that." You could call this the mea culpa principle: if I don't like the world around me, I have only myself to blame. The world will be friendli- er to the extent that I am friendly. The world will be more generous to the extent that I am generous. It's easy to think of myself as a drop in the bucket, or to rest in the conceit that nothing I do mat- ters. The reality is that everything I do matters. Everything everyone does matters! Even if I'm a terri- ble person, every time I overcome that terribleness to do something good, those little goods add up. And that goes for you, too. We've all been given our own unique gifts, and if we give them to oth- ers freely instead of hiding them under our favorite blankie as we sit on our butts at home, they blossom and multiply. So, uh... Let's all go do that this week! See you then! Modern technology has changed our lives. It never fails to amaze me how our lives have been great- ly affected with the advances in our world of tech science and electron- ics. They have produced many su- per-big pluses. But they unfortu- nately have also produced misera- ble negatives. To enumerate them will take forever. Let me give some examples. It never fails to amaze me how so easy it is now to communicate. We have capabilities of doing phone calls and text messaging, getting results in seconds. We do e-mails, instagrams, facebook, tweets, faxes, etc, and get instant results about almost anything. There are hardly any more excuses available to say to one another," I could not get a hold of you," or, "you have not responded yet."