The rest of us speak out quickly
enough. Why shouldn't former presidents have the same right?
Seriously, of course former
presidents should speak out against a current president if they disagree with
him or any of his policies. In addition, they should speak out in his support
when they agree with him.
Under the American political
system, the people elect the person they consider the brightest and the best in
the country to be their president. The individual doesn't lose these qualities
when his term of office is finished. By speaking out on issues of the day, he
can continue to offer guidance to the ship of state, though from a greater
distance.
Sometimes as citizens, we tend to
become preoccupied with our own lives or, at times we become just plain
lethargic. We fail to pay sufficient attention to government activities, to
foreign affairs or domestic policies being formulated in Washington. But wait a
minute!
If, suddenly, several former
presidents speak out strongly in support or against a particular law, or issue
being discussed in Congress, and it is widely reported in the media, many
people will snap to attention. They may even be motivated to become involved
and influence the outcome of the matter.
During their terms of office,
former presidents were made aware of background information that may not have
been available to the general public. Because of this, their judgements are apt
to be more informed and should carry greater weight. Shrewd listeners will pay
close attention.
These men still have connections
with influential friends and associates they met while in the White House. They
hear the rumours and back room gossip to which ordinary citizens are not privy.
They have the good sense to know which scuttlebutt is valuable and which should
be ignored.
In some cases. they also have
connections with leaders and other influential individuals overseas. They can
help voters see other viewpoints besides those of the current administration.
There are always two sides to every story.
Former presidents are, in most
cases, out of public life and back home in the bosoms of family and friends.
They no longer have to worry about party politics or maintaining a presidential
image. Their priorities are now likely to be similar to that of most ordinary
Americans.
They want peace and security for
their country, jobs and a decent living wage for their friends and relatives,
and a clean, healthy environment to leave to their children and grandchildren.
The difference is that they have greater skill and more privileged knowledge
than most of us, to bring to bear on attaining theses goals.
Former presidents should consider
it a duty to speak out as their conscience dictates, either for or against the
current president. Americans, and indeed, the citizens of the whole world will
be poorer and less knowledgeable if they choose to keep silent.
Ultrasound has made it possible to peer into the
sanctuary of a mother's womb and see the developing foetus moving about in the
amniotic fluid. Amniocentesis, whereby a needle is inserted into the
womb, and some of the fluid surrounding the baby is withdrawn, is another
prenatal test sometimes performed. The fluid can be checked for genetic birth
defects in the child. Occasionally one or both of these tests will reveal a
foetal abnormality. What happens then?
The answer usually depends on the
spiritual faith of the parents. If they believe in the sanctity of human life,
from conception to natural death, they will continue with the pregnancy,
ensuring that the mother has the best possible physical, emotional and
spiritual care, and preparing as well as possible for the birth of their child.
If, on the other hand, they believe that the foetus is just a blob of tissue,
the likely result will be abortion.
In actual fact, by the fourth
week after the egg is fertilized, often before the mother even realizes she is pregnant,
traces of all the body organs are present in the embryo. It is only 1/4 inch
long, but its face is beginning to take shape. Bulges that will become ears and
nose appear.
By the seventh to eighth week of
pregnancy, the head can be identified. It contains a developing brain.
Amazingly, the tiny heart has already begun to beat. Fingers and toes appear.
By the end of the third month,
nails form on the fingers and toes. The bones begin to calcify. The foetus
begins to make breathing movements. Skeletal muscles and muscles in the
intestines begin to contract and relax, already preparing for life in the
outside world.
Because the developing child is
recognizable as a human baby, abortionists will keep the ultrasound monitor
turned away from the mother, as they perform the procedure. If she saw her
baby, recognizable as it tries move away from the lethal instruments, she might
well change her mind.
In the near future, science may
progress to the stage where parents can produce designer offspring. They may be
able to choose the sex, hair and eye color, intelligence, athletic ability, and
every other feature that will form their child's physical appearance, character
and levels of natural abilities. Will this be a beneficial progression? I
submit that it will not.
We humans have no right to play
God. Choosing a new car is one thing. Wanting to possess a designer child is
quite another. The all-wise Creator knows exactly what child will be best fit
into each family situation, and He will not give any family a burden with which
it cannot cope. The disabled person is no less valuable than the able-bodied. A
quick study of the life and contribution of Stephen Hawking
will bear out this fact.
Modern technology, such as
ultrasound, should inspire in us emotions of wonder and awe. We are now
privileged to witness the creative action of God in the very process of
creating a new human being. It should definitely not be used to aid in the
destruction of His unfinished handwork.
There is great value, beauty, and
fascination for all of us in the diversity of people inhabiting our planet. God
has been doing a great job designing humans thus far. We should not usurp His
undertaking. If we try until eternity, we'll never be able to even approach His
talent.
If I were president, my first act
would be to order all American troops home from Afghanistan as soon as they could safely be evacuated. The people
from that part of the world would then be responsible for settling their own
differences. They've been battling each other for thousands of years. If they
choose to continue to do so, so be it.
I would send troop carriers to
the prison compound at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to return all prisoners to their
country of origin. They're not likely to become sterling citizens; why should
America spend time and money detaining them, trying them, imprisoning the
guilty and later attempting to rehabilitate them?
The Cuban base itself I return to
the government of Cuba. NATO allies no longer need a remote facility in which
to "persuade" alleged war criminals to confess.
As President, my next project
would be the construction several state-of-the-art military hospitals around
the country. Care would be available to all veterans wounded in either body or
mind while serving their country. Members of the military would be kept in
hospital as long as necessary, then given attentive follow-up care until they
were completely healthy, with no cost to themselves or their families.
With the money I had saved from
waging war, I would establish an effective health care system, so that every
man, woman and child in the United States would have quick access to the best
doctors and medical treatment available. This service would be free and the
same for everyone, no special treatment for sports figures or politicians.
International outreach committees
would be established to oversee foreign relations: no more confrontational
postures would be allowed. Our ambassadors would be instructed to hold
discussions with every country, to find areas of agreement and attempt to build
on them to form positive alliances. There would be no name-calling or
vilification. Labeling a country and its people "evil" is hardly the
way to win cooperation or establish a basis for fruitful negotiations.
I would strive to have America
lead by example. When she became once again the strongest, most honorable,
peaceful, most respected democracy in the world, other nations would be anxious
to install similar forms of government. And, the changeovers would be
accomplished by peaceful means.
I would appoint George W. Bush
and Dick Cheney as roving ambassadors for peace. They would travel the globe,
lecturing to all who would listen about the benefits of living in a peaceful
world. And if their audiences were always very small? Well, at least they won't
be getting themselves and us into any more trouble.
Finally, I would establish free
daycare for every family having young children or older dependents with special
needs. Every able-bodied adult would be required to work at an appropriate job,
40 hours daily, five days a week. Minmum wages would be adjusted so that
everyone would be assured of receiving a decent living wage.
Does this sound like an Utopian
dream? Perhaps someday, someone who is wise and competent enough will be
elected to the presidental office, and put this plan or a similar one into
action. What would you bet that this capable, far-sighted individual will be a
woman?
Jerusalem is regarded as the
holiest city in the world by many people. It is the site of places sacred to
three of the world's great religions. The Dome of the Rock is holy to the
Muslims, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher to Christians, and the Western Wall
of the Temple Mount to the Jews. The status of Jerusalem has been a stumbling
block to all peace negotiations in the Middle East. It seems ironic that
leaders and members of three of the world's great faith communities cannot find
a way to coexist peacefully with each other.
Control of Jerusalem has been
contested for centuries. Some of the bloodiest battles between Jews and Arabs
have been fought within its walls. In the 1967 war, Israel gained control of
Jerusalem. The Jews contend that it is now, and must remain the eternal capital
of Israel, and that it should remain forever under Israel's sovereignty. Their
government's official guidelines guarantee freedom of worship and access to
holy places to members of all faiths. Within the city there is tension and the
occasional skirmish, but day-to-day-life is relatively normal. To date, the
Israelis maintain control of Jerusalem, although there are neighborhoods of
Palestinians within the city.
The Palestinian authorities
maintain that Jerusalem should be the capital of an independent Palestinian
state. They demand that Israel withdraw from all territory captured during the
1967 war. At present, the status of Jerusalem has been left open until the
final negotiating period of an all-encompassing peace initiative, because it
will almost certainly be the greatest problem.
The question arises: should the
city be split, divided between the Israelis and the Palestinians? I submit that
it should not.
The chance of civil conflict
would be increased. The police of one state would inevitably clash with those
of the other on something. Even if the matter were minuscule, the citizenry of
each side would join in to support their officers, and the result would be a
battle. With the Middle East such a powder keg, it could easily escalate into a
more serious situation.
The Israelis seem to have done
well maintaining the peace in Jerusalem. There are adjustments which must be
made to facilitate access of Muslims to their shrine, but these could be
effected with a few strokes of a pen. Perhaps an advisory body, consisting of
several representatives of each faith, could be established to recommend
necessary changes in policies affecting Jerusalem to the Israeli government.
All of these three faith groups
honor some version of the Golden Rule, "...thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself." Leviticus 19:18
If a major publicity campaign
were launched and carried out by the leaders of all religions within the holy
city, persistently drumming this injunction into the consciousness of every
citizen, Jerusalem just might become the shining example of peace and
brotherhood in the Middle East, instead of the major stumbling block to peace.
One can only imagine God smiling
with delight at this development. "Well, they finally got the message.
It's about time..."
Beyond the usual interest and
concern that we should feel for fellow humans no matter where they live, the
plight of women in Afghanistan is not our business. They are merely at a point
in the evolutionary process that women in most parts of the Western World have
already passed. We tend to forget that women's suffrage was only gained in
Canada in 1918, and in the United States in 1920.
The women of Afghanistan will
procure more power within their society and greater human rights when they are
ready to fight for them, just as North American women did. At that time, no
outside nation would have dared to intrude and try to force Canadian or American
societies and governments to alter the customs of the day. The struggle had to
be launched and conducted by the women themselves.
Religious Muslims believe that
Western societies are degenerate and corrupt. If our military forces tried to
interfere in their established way of life, it would likely have a counter
effect. All Afghani citizens would unite in an effort to retain their
traditions and culture. It would take the women even longer to progress towards
equality with their male counterparts.
Think for a minute what our
reaction would be if Muslim forces descended on our cities and towns and tried
to force their traditions and customs on our society. Every citizen would be
ready to fight, with every means at their disposal, to repel the enemy. We
would cling even more ferociously to our cherished customs and way of life. The
Afghan people would react the same way, if outsiders tried to intrude and alter
the lifestyle they have created.
We can send the Afghan women our
prayers and good wishes as they wage their struggle to gain freedom from the
repression under which they live. Other than that, we should mind our own
business. The battle is theirs to wage. You can't stop progress. Sooner or
later they will prevail, and they will emerge stronger and more confident for
having wrestled the specter of male prejudice to the ground. We mustn't deprive
them of the opportunity to advance their cause through their own efforts.
