The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/970623
B-8 Wednesday, April 18, 2018 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 In a recent private interview, Pope Francis was quoted as say- ing that there is no hell. The head- line read "Pope Declares No Hell? " The firestone began. The paper La Repubblica, pub- lished a private conversation be- tween Pope Francis and his atheist friend, journalist Eugenio Scalfari. In the discussion, Francis was asked by Scalfari,: "What about bad souls? Where are they pun- ished? " Francis replied, "Bad souls are not punished; those who do not re- pent and cannot therefore be for- given disappear. There is no hell, there is the disappearance of sin- ful souls." The Vatican has commenced damage control by stating this was a private discussion, and insinuat- ed that since Scalfari is elderly, he may have misinterpreted the con- versation. Hell as a concept that has been rejected by secular man and some Christians as a fairytale and super- stition. Not so fast. All religions from animism to Christianity have a concept of hell. An- cient philosophy ad- heres to the concept of hell as a reciprocal to goodness; if there are rewards and bliss, then the reciprocal is hell and punishment. Hell as a concept for judgment of the soul has been with man- kind since the beginning of exis- tence. In the Christian faith, Hell is a final destination for the un-re- pented wicked people. For this reason alone, what Pope Francis stated to his friend is so remarkable, seeing that Francis is the head of the Catholic Church and as such speaks for the church. The church from its beginnings [as does the Old Testament] has never taught the annihilation of the wicked. The soul of mankind is a creation and gift of God and is eternal and will not be destroyed. Columnist Pat Buchanan, a staunch traditional Catholic, took to pen and defended the traditional church teaching about the ex- istence of hell, and questioned the Pope's leadership. Buchanan in his March 30th column went right to the heart of what this means if there is no hell, "What did Christ die on the cross to save us from? If Francis made such a statement, it would be rank heresy. Had the pope been speaking ex cathedra, as the Vic- ar of Christ on earth, he would be contradicting 2,000 years of Cath- olic doctrine, rooted in the teach- ings of Christ himself. He would be calling into question papal infalli- bility, as defined in 1870 by the Vat- ican Council of Pius IX. Questions would arise as to whether Francis is a true pope." Thus the firestorm among the Minority View by Walter E. Williams Black political power means nothing Points to Ponder by Rev. Ford Bond Pope Francis incites controversy Census and immigration: Ask the question Heritage Viewpoint by Edwin J. Feulner In a saner age, adding a question about an individual's citizenship status to the decennial U.S. Cen- sus would be the most unremark- able thing in the world. The only understandable reaction might be, "What took you so long? " But no. We live in a hyper-parti- san, politically correct era, so the Trump administration's decision to add the citizenship question has been met with howls of shock and horror. A coalition of Democratic cities and states is suing the ad- ministration, claiming the deci- sion violates federal law. "Galling," pronounced The New York Times in an editorial titled "The Trump Administration Sab- otages the Census." Along with many other critics, the Times in- sists that the question will lead to a vast undercounting of the immi- grant population. Such a prospect alarms oppo- nents such as the editors at The Washington Post, who at least ad- mit their concern is more about po- litical power: "Whether by design or incompetence, the Trump ad- ministration is threatening to rig the count against Democrats." Or maybe — just maybe — the admin- istration is trying to get a better handle on how many non-cit- izens we have in our country. Sure, you can't expect 100 per- cent accuracy, but as the administra- tion noted, the ques- tion can be answered anonymously. So why not ask? Besides, there is nothing new about adding a citizenship ques- tion to the U.S. Census. Indeed, the first one was asked almost 200 years ago, in the 1820 Census, af- ter being proposed by our third president, Thomas Jefferson. "The question was included in censuses, continuously and with- out controversy, from 1890 -1950, a period which encompassed the years of highest immigration and the highest percentage of foreign- born citizens in American history," notes author Mike Gonzalez. "It was asked on the long-form cen- sus until 2000 and continues to be asked today on the American Community Survey." In fact, the citizen- ship question to be included on the 2020 Census is the same one already asked yearly on the Ameri- can Community Sur- vey. But no. It wasn't un- til the Trump administration — which is so roundly despised by the left that none of its proposals are actually considered on its mer- its — decided to put the question on the Census itself that it became a problem. How big a problem? According to House Minority Leader Nan- cy Pelosi, California Democrat, it would "inject fear and distrust in- to vulnerable communities, and cause traditionally undercounted communities to be even further underrepresented, financially ex- Feeding an city at sea Continued on page 9 Continued on page 9 Continued on page 9 Continued on page 9 Continued on page 10 Daniel Webster on taxation Lucid Moments by Bart Stinson There was good news and bad news, the tax preparation lady told me. The government owed me two thousand bucks, but I wasn't get- ting any of it. I still have a hard time finding the good news anywhere in that situation. I suppose it was good that I didn't owe the government any money. And that they never got around to prosecuting me before I got around to filing. I let five years go by, dur- ing a period of my life spent on boats, in camps and on friends' couches. I had bushels of unopened mail. I was a major procrastinator. I wasn't aware of the conse- quence that they would keep your money if you waited too long to file for it. But I was aware of the re- quirement to file taxes. Sometimes I filed the form for a four-month ex- tension, but never followed through in August. So I was without excuse. But why is the government enti- tled to my money in the first place? I worked awfully hard for most of it, especially those dollars from far-flung jobs that required me to sacrifice ordinary family life. My wife worked hard back home, on graveyard shifts, on weekends and holidays. We missed a lot of swim meets and P TA meetings. The short answer is that the federal government can tax our income because Progres- sives passed the 16th Amendment to the Constitution in 1913. It's amazing to consid- er that my grandpar- ents were born in an America that had no federal income tax. Congress passed a resolution for the Con- stitutional amendment in 1909 and submitted it to the states for rati- fication. Alabama was the first to ratify, followed by Kentucky, then South Carolina. Indiana ratified it in 1911. Connecticut, Virginia, Utah and Rhode Island rejected it. Florida and Pennsylvania nev- er voted on it. When Delaware legislators rati- fied in February 1913, crossing the three-fourths threshold, the 16th Amendment became part of the Constitution, and the Revenue Act of 1913 quickly followed. We have a federal income tax, then, because we wanted it. We in- sisted on it. It was sold as a tax on the rich, but of course it metastasized as all taxes do. What is the imposition of an in- voluntary tax, after all, but confiscation? Once you get accus- tomed to taking other people's belongings, it rarely occurs to you that anybody with any- thing might deserve to be left alone. Anonymous supporters of the federal income tax have written in Wikipedia that it "allows for the federal government to keep an ar- my, build roads and bridges, en- force laws and carry out other im- portant duties." We had an army and a two-ocean navy before the income tax. Even four decades af- ter ratification of the 16th Amend- ment, gasoline taxes funded the massive expansion of the interstate highway system, not income taxes. My Point of View by Dr. H. K. Fenol, Jr., M.D. It's often thought to be beyond question that black political pow- er is necessary for economic pow- er and enhanced socio-economic welfare. That's an idea that lends itself to testing and analysis. Between 1970 and 2012, the number of black elected officials rose from fewer than 1,500 to more than 10,000. Plus, a black man was elected to the presidency twice. Ja- son Riley, a fellow at the Manhat- tan Institute, tells how this surge in political power has had little beneficial impact on the black community. In a PragerU video, "Blacks in Power Don't Empower Blacks" (http://tinyurl.com/y84psoyt), Riley says the conventional wis- dom was based on the notion that only black politicians could under- stand and address the challenges facing blacks. Therefore, electing more black city councilors, may- ors, representatives and senators was deemed critical. Even some liberal social scientists now dis- agree. Gary Orfield says, "There may be little relationship between the success of... black leaders and the opportunities of typical black families." Riley says that while ma- ny black politicians achieved con- siderable personal success, many of their constituents did not. A fter the 2014 Ferguson, Mo., riots, which followed the killing of Michael Brown after he charged a policeman, much was made of the small number of blacks on the city's police force. Riley asks: If the racial composition of the po- lice force is so important, how does one explain the Baltimore riots the following year after Freddie Gray died in police custody? Baltimore's police force is 40 percent black. Its police commissioner is black. Its mayor is black, as is the majority of the city council. What can be said of black political power in Bal- timore can also be said of Cleve- land, Detroit, Philadelphia, Wash- ington, Atlanta and New Orleans. In these cities, blacks have been mayors, police chiefs, city council- ors and superintendents of schools for decades. By contrast, when blacks had lit- tle political power, they made sig- nificant economic progress. Dur- ing the 1940s and '50s, black labor force participation rates exceed- ed those of whites; black incomes grew much faster than white in- comes. Between 1940 and 1950, black poverty rates fell by as much as 40 percent. Between 1940 and 1970, the number of blacks in mid- dle-class professions quadrupled. Keep in mind that was before af- firmative action programs. Riley says that racial gaps were narrow- ing without any special treatment for blacks. A fter the 1960s, the government began pouring tril- lions of dollars into various social programs. These programs dis- couraged marriage and also un- dermined the work ethic through open-ended welfare programs, helping keep poor people poor. The fact that political success is not a requirement for socio-eco- nomic success — and indeed may have an opposite effect — doesn't apply only to blacks. American Jews, Italians, Germans, Japanese and Chinese attained economic power long before they had politi- cal power. By almost any measure of socio-economic success, Japa- nese and Chinese are at or near the top. Riley asks, "How many prom- inent Asian politicians can you name? " By contrast, Irish-Ameri- cans have long held significant po- litical power yet were the slowest- rising of all immigrant groups. Riley says that the black expe- rience in the U.S. has been very different from that of other racial groups. Blacks were enslaved. A f- ter emancipation, they faced le- gal and extralegal discrimination and oppression. But none of those difficulties undermines the prop- osition that human capital, in the forms of skills and education, is far more important than political capital. Riley adds that the formu- la for prosperity is the same across the human spectrum. Traditional values — such as marriage, stable families, education and hard work — are immeasurably more impor- tant than the color of your mayor, police chief, representatives, sen- ators and president. Alden and I found it very easy to split up chores when we got married. I don't care for doing dishes, so he loads and reloads the dishwasher. Cleaning toi- lets doesn't bother me (except in the early stages of pregnan- cy), so that one's mine. And so on. Pretty much every chore one of us doesn't like to do, the other doesn't mind to do, and it's been easy breezy. Until just recently, that is. One of my chores is folding the laundry. Not something I mind to do, but it has gotten harder to do as Flannery has gotten older, more mobile and more curious. If I try to fold while it's just me and her at home, she's all over my carefully crafted piles, occa- sionally under the guise of help- ing, but mostly I think she knows it gets on my nerves. She's a tur- key, that one. Anyway, this has led to me not folding clothes as frequently as I maybe should, and so I started up what I thought was a well-used practice in households across the nation: the sock basket. In case you aren't aware of this con- cept, the sock basket is where you throw unmatched socks that pop up as you're folding, and you leave them there until they can be matched and added to the sock drawer at a later date. Yes, you lose valuable laundry basket re- al estate, but what else are you supposed to do when you don't have all the matches yet and not enough energy to fold another basket to look for them? The sock basket has turned in- to our first real argument about how chores are meant to be done – about three and a half years in- to our marriage, so not too shab- by if I may say so myself. But, you see, Alden insists he doesn't care I continued to watch the docu- mentaries on megafoods. I have al- ways enjoyed good restaurants and good food. I have always enjoyed watching preparations and cook- ing of different kinds of food in dif- ferent countries. One of the recent documenta- ries I saw was how cruise ships feed 5,000 to 6,000 people for five to seven days 24 hours a day. My interest in sharing this informa- tion is to give some insights as to what I did not realize. I have joined a cruise once and had enjoyed the experience but my preference real- ly is to stay inland rather than out in the ocean. Anyway, I have always heard that cruise ships have so many restau- rants on board and that the choices of food is unbelievably humongous. As I watched the entire segment on how cruise ships do this, I could not believe what was involved in accomplishing this feat. First, the documentary showed how truck- loads of food and beverages arrive at the port and load them up in the storage section of the ship. It appears that one level of the ship is used for storage, they had different sections for fruits and vegetables, sections for meat, sec- tions for dairy, sections for alco- holic beverages, etc. The storage sections had different tempera- tures, humidity, lighting and oth- er requirements for safety and pre- serving freshness for the time of journey. Then each level of the ship had several restaurants to cater to dif- ferent cuisines of the world. Being that cruise ship passengers have Continued on page 10 The Weekly by Jill Heuring The sock basket