Anyway, leads me to the real story of Thanksgiving as written by me in my book “See, I Told You So!” We’re on Chapter Six here: “Dead White Guys or What Your History Books Never Told You,” page 70.
On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower set sail. It carried a total of 102 passengers, including forty Pilgrims led by William Bradford. On the journey, Bradford set up an agreement, a contract, that established just and equal laws for all members of the new community, irrespective of their religious beliefs.
Where did the revolutionary ideas expressed in the Mayflower Compact come from? From the Bible. The Pilgrims were a people completely steeped in the lessons of the Old and New Testaments. They looked to the ancient Israelites for their example. And, because of the biblical precedents set forth in Scripture, they never doubted that their experiment would work.
“But this was no pleasure cruise, friends. The journey to the New World was a long and arduous one. And when the Pilgrims landed in New England in November, they found, according to Bradford’s detailed journal, a cold, barren, desolate wilderness,” destined to become the home of the Kennedy family. “There were no friends to greet them, he wrote. There were no houses to shelter them. There were no inns where they could refresh themselves. And the sacrifice they had made for freedom was just beginning.
During the first winter, half the Pilgrims – including Bradford’s own wife – died of either starvation, sickness or exposure. “When spring finally came, Indians taught the settlers how to plant corn, fish for cod and skin beavers for coats.” Yes, it was Indians that taught the white man how to skin beasts. “Life improved for the Pilgrims, but they did not yet prosper! This is important to understand because this is where modern American history lessons often end. “Thanksgiving is actually explained in some textbooks as a holiday for which the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Indians for saving their lives, rather than as a devout expression of gratitude grounded in the tradition of both the Old and New Testaments.
Here is the part [of Thanksgiving] that has been omitted: The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share.
“All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well. They were going to distribute it equally. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. Nobody owned anything. They just had a share in it. It was a commune, folks. It was the forerunner to the communes we saw in the ’60s and ’70s out in California – and it was complete with organic vegetables, by the way.
Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives. He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus turning loose the power of the marketplace.
“That’s right. Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism. And what happened?
It didn’t work! Surprise, surprise, huh?
What Bradford and his community found was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personal motivation!
But while most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years – trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it – the Pilgrims decided early on to scrap it permanently.
What Bradford wrote about this social experiment should be in every schoolchild’s history lesson. If it were, we might prevent much needless suffering in the future. “‘The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years…that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing – as if they were wiser than God,’ Bradford wrote. ‘For this community [so far as it was] was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense…that was thought injustice.’
Why should you work for other people when you can’t work for yourself? What’s the point?
“Do you hear what he was saying, ladies and gentlemen? The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive. So what did Bradford’s community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property.
Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result?
‘This had very good success,’ wrote Bradford, ‘for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.’
Bradford doesn’t sound like much of a… liberal Democrat, “does he? Is it possible that supply-side economics could have existed before the 1980s? Yes.
“Read the story of Joseph and Pharaoh in Genesis 41. Following Joseph’s suggestion (Gen 41:34), Pharaoh reduced the tax on Egyptians to 20% during the ’seven years of plenty’ and the ‘Earth brought forth in heaps.’ (Gen. 41:47)
In no time, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat themselves…. So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians. The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London.
And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the ‘Great Puritan Migration.’”
Now, other than on this program every year, have you heard this story before? Is this lesson being taught to your kids today — and if it isn’t, why not? Can you think of a more important lesson one could derive from the pilgrim experience?
So in essence there was, thanks to the Indians, because they taught us how to skin beavers and how to plant corn when we arrived, but the real Thanksgiving was thanking the Lord for guidance and plenty — and once they reformed their system and got rid of the communal bottle and started what was essentially free market capitalism, they produced more than they could possibly consume, and they invited the Indians to dinner, and voila, we got Thanksgiving, and that’s what it was: inviting the Indians to dinner and giving thanks for all the plenty is the true story of Thanksgiving.
The last two-thirds of this story simply are not told. Now, I was just talking about the plenty of this country and how I’m awed by it. You can go to places where there are famines, and we usually get the story, “Well, look it, there are deserts, well, look it, Africa, I mean there’s no water and nothing but sand and so forth.”
It’s not the answer, folks. Those people don’t have a prayer because they have no incentive. They live under tyrannical dictatorships and governments. The problem with the world is not too few resources. The problem with the world is an insufficient distribution of capitalism.
2 Comments »
Friday, November 28, 2008
Friday, April 18, 2008
Unnecessary Terror in Texas for 416 innocent kids
Please don’t get me wrong here, if these guys are forcing girls under 16 to marry, have sex, get pregnant and have babies, then the men should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. That would be a Criminal Investigation and Prosecution by the State against the alleged perpetrators. If the State can prove them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then they should be punished, and punished severely. The MEN should be punished: not the kids. They got it backwards in Texas. They should have taken all the men out of the compound and left the women and children. Or, if they felt like they really had kids in danger of abuse, take the kids who were in danger of abuse and leave the other kids alone. Something like all girls between 12 and 16. It’s not like the women and children are going to run away or anything. They have cooperated throughout this entire investigation. But yet some Texas child care workers deemed it in the “Best Interest of the Child[ren]” to scare the hell out of these little kids and rip them apart from their Mothers and place them in unsanitary circus like conditions emotionally scarring them for life! And a Judge who had temporarily lost her senses commanded it to be. And so it was. Doh!
Like a highly trained surgeon can take out a scalpel and very carefully perform incisions during a miraculous surgery procedure, the Judge could have finely crafted an order for the search and investigation of the allegations that were allegedly made by the 16 year old caller. Instead, the Judge took out an axe and went CHOP! She cut these kids, most of whom do not come close to falling in the category of potential victim of the type of abuse that has been alleged. There are about 20 teen age girls with kids or pregnant that need to be checked out. The six month old babies and four year old boys little girls under ten do not fall under the category of “potential to be abused” unless the State took the drastic step and removed the children from the home, thereby separating them from their mothers.
My children are 6 (girl), 11 (boy), and 14(girl). If the State came and took my 6 year old she would be traumatized by being denied her mother. (Her father less so ha ha laugh at yourself). My 11 year old boy would be just as traumatized, if not more, by being denied his mom and dad. I read “The American Girl Doll” books to my daughter every night for a half an hour before she goes to sleep. With my son, I tuck him in every night, without exceptions, ever. That is something we share that is precious to me. My 6 year old I get up every morning and I take her to school along with the 11 year old. I cherish that time together. What if it were your kids? How would you feel? And, more importantly, how do you think your child would feel to be separated from you?
See, if this were pursued, as it should have been, as a criminal case against any man who forced a girl under 16 (or 17 whatever the law is in Texas) to marry, have sex, get pregnant and have babies, the law would require “Probable Cause” to get a search warrant and the “authorities” of the State of Texas did not have “Probable Cause,” only rumor, innuendo, and suspicion. By claiming that a mystery caller complained of being an underage mother and declaring therefore, that all the children risked possible abuse, was a brush stroke way, way too broad to have used rather than more pinpoint removal and investigation.
Judge Walther signed an emergency order nearly two weeks ago giving the state custody of the children after a 16-year-old girl called an abuse hot line claiming her husband, a 50-year-old member of the sect, beat and raped her. The girl has yet to be identified.
The children, who are being kept in a domed coliseum in San Angelo, range in age from 6 months to 17 years. Roughly 100 of them are under 4. Did these 100 children under 4 years old do anything that justifies them being taken away from their Mothers? Are children under 4 years old even potentially possibly in any kind of immediate jeopardy of any the acts alleged by the mysterious caller? By the way, where is the tape or tapes of the 911 or Hotline phone calls? With today’s technology and the State of Texas’ resources, why have the calls not been traced to a specific cell phone? Or did the call from a payphone somewhere? Just where did these calls come from?
FLDS members deny children were abused and say the state is persecuting them for their faith. What if this is true? The last time I remember the United States Government rounding up all the “people” of one group and placing them in concentration camp type situations was in WWII when we rounded up all the Japanese Americans and placed them in “relocation camps.” And the Supreme Court issued its worst decision ever in U.S. v Koromatsu and let the government get away with crystal clear violations of the Constitution. The Court, if I remember correctly, held that to place the Japanese into the camps was a violation of their rights, but that based upon the situation, the government was justified in that instance of violating those rights for the greater good.
Is the State of Texas justified in taking all the children out of the home in this case? No way. Not even close. However, the evidence does justify taking all of the girls from 12 to 17 out of the home. Or, in the alternative, take all the men from 18 on up out of the home and leave the little ones alone. (I believe the men even volunteered to leave the compound so the women and children could stay, but the State of Texas, in a blunder beyond belief, decided to remove all the children from the home instead and separate all of them from their mothers.
In today’s testimony, Crawford acknowledged the records contained no evidence of sexual abuse. However, 20 teen girls were pregnant or had already had a baby. What is the legal age in Texas to get married? Is it 16 or 17? If all the State has is 20 teenagers 16 and 17 that have kids that doesn’t prove squat. If a girl were under 16 and was “in the family way,” then we’d have proof of a crime. Punish the criminal, not the children victims.
Current talk by the MSM is about taking custody away from the parents and placing all the children in foster homes. But the relief the Judge can grant doesn’t require such a drastic step. The Judge has a whole range of dispositions to pick and choose from that are short of removing the children. And that’s the key here, removing the children. Was that warranted? Really? Wouldn’t it have been much smoother, quieter, peaceful and least disruptive to the children if the State simply took into custody all the men? Leave the kids alone, arrest the criminals. But no, the State didn’t have “Probable Cause” to do that so they manufacture probable cause through a juvenile case of a witch hunt. Where is the ACLU? Don’t these women and children have constitutional rights? Or does that only apply to Muslims and Hindus and anything other than Christians?
I agree that something had to be done. But what they did do is a clear violation of Constitutional Rights and certainly what they did was not “in the best interest of the child[ren].” I worked in Juvenile for over a year and I really enjoyed working on behalf of kids. The Juvenile system is supposed to be less adversarial than regular Criminal or Civil litigation. The Judge, the State’s Attorney, the Child’s Attorney and the Parent’s Attorney are all supposed to have the same goal in mind: What is in the best interest of the child?
The State could have decided, and should have decided, to investigate these calls from Sarah. But they could have done so in much, much less intrusive ways. The same can be said of the final disposition of this case, it can be a harsh removal of all the children like a whack from an axe; or, it can be finely tuned monitoring and education and support for all boys and girls between the ages of 10 to 16. And pregnancy testing of all girls under 16 on a monthly basis. Educate these kids about their own rights to be free from sexual abuse and monitor them on a monthly basis: trust, but verify!
Hold these older men accountable. They should be able, through DNA, to create a complete map of all the various inter-relationships and dates of activity. For example, they should be able to prove that Man X had a child with Girl Y and the child is now Z years old and the girl is now K years old, so when she had the baby she was only S years old and given typical 9 month pregnancies, she had to have been impregnated between this date and that date. Then you have him. Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Then punishment should be swift and severe. Punish the proven criminal, not the innocent children.
There is no need to punish the children. The State could have used more of a “velvet glove” approach rather than the “Iron Fist” they actually clobbered these poor children with. Texas, I’m with you for prosecuting criminals and looking out for the best interests of the kids, you guys just went about it in a very clumsy and bullish manner that certainly has already caused and will continue to cause deep emotional trauma in these youngsters who should be with their moms. Take away the men, and if you have to take some of the kids, take the girls between ages 12 and 17 only. These are the girls that are at risk. Not the four year old boy, or a six-month old baby! Come On! What Texas did to these kids was so unnecessary and so brutally harmful it should be an example for future cases of what “not” to do.
These people have the constitutional rights to practice their own religion. They do not have the constitutional right to commit child abuse and sexual abuse of children. Let’s hope that the Judge figures out a gentler, softer way to treat these precious children of God.
Like a highly trained surgeon can take out a scalpel and very carefully perform incisions during a miraculous surgery procedure, the Judge could have finely crafted an order for the search and investigation of the allegations that were allegedly made by the 16 year old caller. Instead, the Judge took out an axe and went CHOP! She cut these kids, most of whom do not come close to falling in the category of potential victim of the type of abuse that has been alleged. There are about 20 teen age girls with kids or pregnant that need to be checked out. The six month old babies and four year old boys little girls under ten do not fall under the category of “potential to be abused” unless the State took the drastic step and removed the children from the home, thereby separating them from their mothers.
My children are 6 (girl), 11 (boy), and 14(girl). If the State came and took my 6 year old she would be traumatized by being denied her mother. (Her father less so ha ha laugh at yourself). My 11 year old boy would be just as traumatized, if not more, by being denied his mom and dad. I read “The American Girl Doll” books to my daughter every night for a half an hour before she goes to sleep. With my son, I tuck him in every night, without exceptions, ever. That is something we share that is precious to me. My 6 year old I get up every morning and I take her to school along with the 11 year old. I cherish that time together. What if it were your kids? How would you feel? And, more importantly, how do you think your child would feel to be separated from you?
See, if this were pursued, as it should have been, as a criminal case against any man who forced a girl under 16 (or 17 whatever the law is in Texas) to marry, have sex, get pregnant and have babies, the law would require “Probable Cause” to get a search warrant and the “authorities” of the State of Texas did not have “Probable Cause,” only rumor, innuendo, and suspicion. By claiming that a mystery caller complained of being an underage mother and declaring therefore, that all the children risked possible abuse, was a brush stroke way, way too broad to have used rather than more pinpoint removal and investigation.
Judge Walther signed an emergency order nearly two weeks ago giving the state custody of the children after a 16-year-old girl called an abuse hot line claiming her husband, a 50-year-old member of the sect, beat and raped her. The girl has yet to be identified.
The children, who are being kept in a domed coliseum in San Angelo, range in age from 6 months to 17 years. Roughly 100 of them are under 4. Did these 100 children under 4 years old do anything that justifies them being taken away from their Mothers? Are children under 4 years old even potentially possibly in any kind of immediate jeopardy of any the acts alleged by the mysterious caller? By the way, where is the tape or tapes of the 911 or Hotline phone calls? With today’s technology and the State of Texas’ resources, why have the calls not been traced to a specific cell phone? Or did the call from a payphone somewhere? Just where did these calls come from?
FLDS members deny children were abused and say the state is persecuting them for their faith. What if this is true? The last time I remember the United States Government rounding up all the “people” of one group and placing them in concentration camp type situations was in WWII when we rounded up all the Japanese Americans and placed them in “relocation camps.” And the Supreme Court issued its worst decision ever in U.S. v Koromatsu and let the government get away with crystal clear violations of the Constitution. The Court, if I remember correctly, held that to place the Japanese into the camps was a violation of their rights, but that based upon the situation, the government was justified in that instance of violating those rights for the greater good.
Is the State of Texas justified in taking all the children out of the home in this case? No way. Not even close. However, the evidence does justify taking all of the girls from 12 to 17 out of the home. Or, in the alternative, take all the men from 18 on up out of the home and leave the little ones alone. (I believe the men even volunteered to leave the compound so the women and children could stay, but the State of Texas, in a blunder beyond belief, decided to remove all the children from the home instead and separate all of them from their mothers.
In today’s testimony, Crawford acknowledged the records contained no evidence of sexual abuse. However, 20 teen girls were pregnant or had already had a baby. What is the legal age in Texas to get married? Is it 16 or 17? If all the State has is 20 teenagers 16 and 17 that have kids that doesn’t prove squat. If a girl were under 16 and was “in the family way,” then we’d have proof of a crime. Punish the criminal, not the children victims.
Current talk by the MSM is about taking custody away from the parents and placing all the children in foster homes. But the relief the Judge can grant doesn’t require such a drastic step. The Judge has a whole range of dispositions to pick and choose from that are short of removing the children. And that’s the key here, removing the children. Was that warranted? Really? Wouldn’t it have been much smoother, quieter, peaceful and least disruptive to the children if the State simply took into custody all the men? Leave the kids alone, arrest the criminals. But no, the State didn’t have “Probable Cause” to do that so they manufacture probable cause through a juvenile case of a witch hunt. Where is the ACLU? Don’t these women and children have constitutional rights? Or does that only apply to Muslims and Hindus and anything other than Christians?
I agree that something had to be done. But what they did do is a clear violation of Constitutional Rights and certainly what they did was not “in the best interest of the child[ren].” I worked in Juvenile for over a year and I really enjoyed working on behalf of kids. The Juvenile system is supposed to be less adversarial than regular Criminal or Civil litigation. The Judge, the State’s Attorney, the Child’s Attorney and the Parent’s Attorney are all supposed to have the same goal in mind: What is in the best interest of the child?
The State could have decided, and should have decided, to investigate these calls from Sarah. But they could have done so in much, much less intrusive ways. The same can be said of the final disposition of this case, it can be a harsh removal of all the children like a whack from an axe; or, it can be finely tuned monitoring and education and support for all boys and girls between the ages of 10 to 16. And pregnancy testing of all girls under 16 on a monthly basis. Educate these kids about their own rights to be free from sexual abuse and monitor them on a monthly basis: trust, but verify!
Hold these older men accountable. They should be able, through DNA, to create a complete map of all the various inter-relationships and dates of activity. For example, they should be able to prove that Man X had a child with Girl Y and the child is now Z years old and the girl is now K years old, so when she had the baby she was only S years old and given typical 9 month pregnancies, she had to have been impregnated between this date and that date. Then you have him. Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Then punishment should be swift and severe. Punish the proven criminal, not the innocent children.
There is no need to punish the children. The State could have used more of a “velvet glove” approach rather than the “Iron Fist” they actually clobbered these poor children with. Texas, I’m with you for prosecuting criminals and looking out for the best interests of the kids, you guys just went about it in a very clumsy and bullish manner that certainly has already caused and will continue to cause deep emotional trauma in these youngsters who should be with their moms. Take away the men, and if you have to take some of the kids, take the girls between ages 12 and 17 only. These are the girls that are at risk. Not the four year old boy, or a six-month old baby! Come On! What Texas did to these kids was so unnecessary and so brutally harmful it should be an example for future cases of what “not” to do.
These people have the constitutional rights to practice their own religion. They do not have the constitutional right to commit child abuse and sexual abuse of children. Let’s hope that the Judge figures out a gentler, softer way to treat these precious children of God.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Welcome!
My name is J. Raymond Wright and I wish to welcome you to my political discussion blog. Some Ground Rules. On political issues, I am always open to hearing everyone's arguments before deciding on a diagnosis and prognosis. Truly "fair and balanced" is what I will strive to present. I will allow each side to lay-out their position and the support for that position and I'll try not to judge. No foul language and everyone must treat each other respectfully, even if they vehemently disagree with someone. Also, no attacking the person personally, attack their arguments, reasoning or factual basis, but no name calling. This blog is for serious discussion of important, relevant issues currently facing our great nation. And, let's not get too caught up in taking ourselves too seriously. One has to be able to laugh at themselves sometimes.
I like to think that I am a Ronald Reagan Republican. I completely support our men and women who have volunteered to serve our country in the armed services. Go Air Force, Army, Navy, Marines and Coast Guard! I'll be the first to admit when I make a mistake, and I will make mistakes. My background is in History, Political Science, Philosophy and Law. I did my undergraduate at North Central College in my hometown of Naperville, Illinois, and went to Chicago-Kent College of Law. After Law School, I worked as an assistant prosecuting attorney for one of the collar counties for several years. I have been in private practice for the last twelve years bringing my legal experience up to 16 years total. I have appeared in State Court and Federal Court. I have done trial work and Appellate work and have a background in Civil and Criminal Litigation, Corporate Filings and Commercial Construction negotiations and contracts.
I am an Evangelical Christian and happy and proud to be so. I love my Wife and my children and have a friendly disposition. Generally speaking, I'm a happy guy who has been truly blessed with experiences in Eastern and Western Europe and Asia. I attend the Evangelical Free Church of Naperville. I am a broken and very imperfect man who is involved in several 12 step groups, and qualify for even more. I think Americans need to know that it is OK to be a Christian! It is OK to be imperfect and broken. And it is OK to state your position. Christ died for my sins and because of that, if I simply believe in Him, I will be saved from eternal death and will enjoy eternal life. Praise God!
I like to think that I am a Ronald Reagan Republican. I completely support our men and women who have volunteered to serve our country in the armed services. Go Air Force, Army, Navy, Marines and Coast Guard! I'll be the first to admit when I make a mistake, and I will make mistakes. My background is in History, Political Science, Philosophy and Law. I did my undergraduate at North Central College in my hometown of Naperville, Illinois, and went to Chicago-Kent College of Law. After Law School, I worked as an assistant prosecuting attorney for one of the collar counties for several years. I have been in private practice for the last twelve years bringing my legal experience up to 16 years total. I have appeared in State Court and Federal Court. I have done trial work and Appellate work and have a background in Civil and Criminal Litigation, Corporate Filings and Commercial Construction negotiations and contracts.
I am an Evangelical Christian and happy and proud to be so. I love my Wife and my children and have a friendly disposition. Generally speaking, I'm a happy guy who has been truly blessed with experiences in Eastern and Western Europe and Asia. I attend the Evangelical Free Church of Naperville. I am a broken and very imperfect man who is involved in several 12 step groups, and qualify for even more. I think Americans need to know that it is OK to be a Christian! It is OK to be imperfect and broken. And it is OK to state your position. Christ died for my sins and because of that, if I simply believe in Him, I will be saved from eternal death and will enjoy eternal life. Praise God!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
