Science Always Wins

When it comes to knowledge of the physical world, science always wins. That doesn’t mean that science is always right. Sometimes it is wrong, but science is always open to new information and changes with increased knowledge of the physical world. 

Science has clearly won in many past disputes with widespread traditional Christian beliefs.

1) Science won in the dispute over the age of the earth. The date 4004 B.C. was at the top of the first page of the Bible I had when I was a boy. That was considered to be the date the world was created as depicted in the first two chapters of Genesis.

In spite of a few “young-earthers” still around, most modern people, including most Christians, readily acknowledge the age of the earth as being far, far older than 6,027 years. Science unquestionably won that dispute.

2) Science also won the dispute over the shape and centrality of the earth. Hardly anyone takes the claims of “flat-earthers” seriously; they are treated as a curiosity (as in this article on the LiveScience website).

And despite the persecution of Giordano Bruno (1548~1600) and Galileo (1564~1642), does anyone today (other than perhaps some flat-earthers) affirm the Ptolemaic view that Earth is the center of the universe? Science undeniably won again.

3) Science is winning the dispute over the biological evolution of humans. Partly because of the literal interpretation of the creation story/stories of Genesis, joined with the belief in a “young” earth, traditional Christians long opposed the theory of the biological evolution of homo sapiens.

According to the latest figures I could find, nearly all scientists (97%) say humans and other living things have evolved over time. That is far higher than the percentage of the general public who “believe” in evolution. But the latter will continue to shrink, and science will again be the obvious “winner.”

Science is also winning contemporary disputes as well. Consider just a couple of examples.

1) It will soon be two years since vaccinations for covid-19 began to be used by the general public, but there is a sizeable segment of the population that has spurned the vaccinations. In the U.S., about one-fifth of the population is still completely unvaccinated and fewer than 70% are “fully” vaccinated.

In spite of all the “scientific” tests and precautions taken, many have accepted non-scientific “myths” to discredit the “facts” (see this website, for example) and to refuse vaccination. But science has won this dispute also: there is ample evidence that vaccinations greatly reduced covid-19 deaths.

2) One of the most prevalent, and serious, ongoing disputes currently is regarding global warming. According to this NASA.gov website, “There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.” 97% of scientists believe this.

But, the general public’s views are quite different: according to Pew Research only 57% see global warming as a serious problem, and among Republicans that falls to 25% (compared to 83% of Democrats). However, eventually science will certainly win this debate also. Science always wins.**

When it comes to questions of Why? though, science doesn’t have the answer. As I said at the beginning, science wins in matters pertaining to knowledge of the physical world. But there is a “metaphysical” world as well.

The latter deals with reality “beyond” the physical world that can be known by the senses, which is all science can deal with. Science can only examine/explain the nature of what can be seen, measured, and explored by the senses.

“Metaphysics” deals with questions about why there is something rather than nothing, and with matters of meaning and value. This is the world of the three “transcendental” values of truth, beauty, and goodness. And there, science/scientists qua science/scientists have nothing to say.

These values can only be explored by philosophy and/or religion, not by science. So while it is true that science always wins in matters pertaining to the physical world, science isn’t even a player in the more important “game” of life, which is linked to reality beyond, as well as of, this physical world.

_____

** See this related 2017 article, “Climate change deniers, science always wins in the end,” on The Hill’s website. And for the few of you who want to think more, and more deeply, about this matter, I highly recommend the following article in the December 2022 issue of BioScience: “World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency 2022.”

Considering Common Sense: In Memory of Thomas Paine

For most of my life, I have known the name Thomas Paine. But also for most of my life, I have known little about him and his importance. This month, however, seemed like a good time to learn/think a little more about Paine, who was born 285 years ago, and about his emphasis on common sense. 

Who Was Thomas Paine?

Paine was born in England in 1737 on January 29, which was February 9 according to the “new style” calendar used after 1752.

After losing his wife and baby at childbirth in 1760, and then after various failures and the loss of his job in 1774, he moved to Philadelphia and got a job working as an editorial assistant for the Pennsylvania Magazine.

After the first battles of the Revolutionary War in 1775, Paine argued that the colonists should not simply revolt against taxation but demand independence from Great Britain entirely. He expanded that idea in a 50-page pamphlet called “Common Sense,” printed in January 1776.

Why Is Thomas Paine Memorable?

Within a few months after its publication, “Common Sense” sold more than 500,000 copies, and according to Biography.com (here), more than any other publication, it “paved the way for the Declaration of Independence, which was unanimously ratified on July 4, 1776.”

Then beginning in December of that year, a most uncertain time regarding the outcome of the revolution, Paine began publishing a series of pamphlets under the title The American Crisis, and he signed them with his pseudonym, “Common Sense.”

The first of those thirteen pamphlets famously begins, “These are the times that try men’s souls.” At the beginning of that harsh winter of 1776, a great many soldiers were ready to quit—until ordered by General Washington to read Paine’s Crisis (which can be read in full at this link).

The morale of the American colonists was bolstered and their resolve fortified by Paine’s words, “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered, yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”

In 1787, Paine returned to England, and two years after the beginning of the French Revolution in 1789, he wrote The Rights of Man. That tract moved beyond supporting that revolution to discussing the basic reasons for the widespread discontent in Europe and railing against an aristocratic society.

Paine’s last major book was The Age of Reason: Being an Investigation of True and Fabulous Theology, the first part of which was written in 1794 after he had been imprisoned for nearly a year in France.

Paine returned to the United States in 1802 or ’03, but by then his influential revolutionary work had mostly been forgotten. He died in 1809, and only six mourners were present at his funeral.

Because of his last book, though, he became known in the mid-nineteenth century as a leader of “freethinkers.” And then in the early twentieth century, Paine's reputation was restored and he again was (accurately) viewed as a vital figure in the American Revolution.

What Is Common Sense?

“Common sense” can be called that only for those who see the world through the same, or quite similar, “conceptual lenses.”

What Paine wrote about common sense for those who wanted to be free from the “tyranny” of England was, truly, common sense for them. But it certainly was not common sense for King George and all the Redcoats who fought for him.

And so it is regarding many burning issues today.

You would think it is only common sense that everyone would get covid-19 vaccinations and only common sense for the government to mandate vaccines and masks in order to control the spread of covid-19.

But, alas, a sizeable portion of society wears different conceptual lenses: they see the greatest good as personal “freedom” and oppose “tyrannical” governments they see as seeking to usurp that freedom. Even a “Christian” organization is used to support the “Freedom Convoy” in Canada (see here).

And you would think it is only common sense that we humans would acknowledge the seriousness of global warming and take even drastic measures to mitigate the coming environmental crisis. But, again, alas! 

Do Hope and History Rhyme? Assessing Biden’s First Year

It’s been a hard year since January 20, 2021, the day Joe Biden was inaugurated as the 46^th POTUS—and it has been a harder year for him than for most of us. What can be said, fairly and honestly, in assessment of Biden’s first year in the White House? 

1/7/22 image by Mandel Ngan

Biden’s Quote from Seamus Heaney

The President is said to be five-eighths Irish and has spoken frequently of his family ties to Ireland. He also likes Irish poets, especially Seamus Heaney (1939~2013), who was awarded the 1995 Nobel Prize in Literature.

In his inaugural speech a year ago today, the new President cited these words from Heaney’s poem “The Cure of Troy”:

History says, Don’t hope
On this side of the grave…
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up,
And hope and history rhyme.

These are memorable words, and Biden quoted them with great sincerity (and you can hear him read those words here), but one year later it seems as though the hopes of the President are far from rhyming with history now.

Biden’s Hard Year

As is true of each new President, except perhaps for #45, they start their term in office with high hopes for what they want to accomplish for the good of the nation. But those hopes are seldom realized (thus, history says, Don’t hope).

Perhaps the last President to have come close to realizing his inaugural hopes was FDR. Especially during the first two terms of his presidency (1933~1941), hope and history did rhyme to a large extent.

Roosevelt’s third inaugural address, though, delivered 80 years to the day before Biden’s address last year, was a lifetime ago. Few remember those remarks stressing America’s obligation to take action during the international crisis. Those next 4+ years were especially hard for FDR.

But for Biden, the first year has been a hard one:

* The covid-19 pandemic, with its new variants and the widespread refusal of being vaccinated, worsened instead of dissipating.

* Largely related to disruptions caused by covid-19, inflation grew rapidly and consumer prices increased perceptibly.

* Because of the intransigence of all 50 Republican and of two Democratic Senators, a democracy-protecting voting rights bill and an expansive infrastructure bill both failed to gain the support necessary for enactment.

* The events surrounding the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Afghanistan were widely criticized as Biden’s debacle.

* The Jan. 15 issue of The Economist states that Biden is “almost the most unpopular president since records began” (only Trump “rated worse” at the same point in his term). Accordingly, “a mid-terms shellacking for his party looks highly probable.”

Biden’s Hope in the Year(s) Ahead

One year doesn’t make or break a presidency. In spite of the setbacks and disappointments, there are first-year accomplishments that the President and his party can legitimately accentuate in the year ahead.

* The early rollout of vaccines was highly successful. (It was certainly not Biden’s fault that so many people, mostly Republicans, refused to get vaccinated—or that new variants, delta and then omicron, developed.)

* Early in his tenure Biden also won passage for a roughly $2 trillion stimulus package and followed that with enactment of a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill with bipartisan support.

* Also, as Heather Cox Richardson points out, last February the jobless rate was 6.2%; today it has dropped to 4.2%. This means the Biden administration has created 4.1 million jobs, more than were created in the 12 years of the Trump and George W. Bush administrations combined.**

* Further, according to a 12/20/21 Bloomberg News article, “America’s economy improved more in Joe Biden's first 12 months than any president during the past 50 years . . . “ The S&P 500 gained 26.9% and Dow Jones gained 18.7% in 2021.

Perhaps if the President stays the course and “soldiers on,” as James Carville admonished him to do this week on Meet the Press, the longed-for tidal wave of justice will yet rise up, and hope and history will begin to rhyme more and more.

_____

** This, and much more about Biden’s first year accomplishments, is found in Richardson’s 12/22/21 “letter” (see here).

Liberally Criticizing Libertarianism: The Case of Sen. Rand Paul

In the summer of 1959, June and I (with our young son) moved from Missouri to Kentucky where we lived for the next seven years. We soon became quite fond of Kentucky and most of the Kentuckians we came to know—there are always exceptions—and we still are.

However, two of my least favorite U.S. Senators now are the two from Kentucky.

Opposing Libertarianism

Although there are many negative things I could say about Sen. Mitch McConnell, who became a Kentucky Senator way back in 1985, this post is mostly about the junior Senator from Kentucky, Rand Paul, who was first elected to that post in 2010.

Please note: I am not criticizing Sen. Paul as a person. He is probably a fine man in many ways. He has long been an active member of a Presbyterian church and of Lions Club International.

But I oppose many of Paul’s ideas and political positions. Specifically, I am critical of his libertarianism, which seems to be the basis for his political views.

Libertarianism, according to Britannica.com, is the “political philosophy that takes individual liberty to be the primary political value.”

Two weeks ago (on Aug. 4), FoxNews.com (here) published an opinion piece by Sen. Paul. He forcefully spoke out against mandates for covid-19 vaccinations and the wearing of masks.

In his strongly-worded article, Sen. Paul implored his readers to “choose freedom” and declared, “We don’t have to accept the mandates, lockdowns, and harmful policies of the petty tyrants and feckless bureaucrats.” And, specifically, he criticized “Petty Tyrant Pelosi.”

This wrongheaded libertarianism, even when not so labeled, is prevalent among numerous Republican politicians. As eminent columnist Eugene Robinson wrote in an August 5 opinion piece, “Too many Republicans are taking covid-19’s side in the fight against the pandemic.”

Robinson asserts, “Public enemy number one is Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis,” who “has signed legislation barring local governments from imposing covid-19 restrictions and prohibiting businesses from requiring that patrons be vaccinated.”

Kearney protester

Further, “DeSantis has taken the position that pandemic public health measures are an intolerable assault on personal freedom.” This libertarian position is the same as Sen. Paul’s and seems to be “a message many rank-and-file Republicans apparently welcome.”

And this libertarian view, even when not recognized as such, is seen in local protests across the country. For example, in the small town of Kearney, Mo., about 15 minutes from where I live, there was a contentious school board meeting with some parents vociferously protesting mandatory masking.

Advocating Liberty

As you regular readers of this blog know, I have long advocated four foundational words beginning with the letter L: Life, Love, Light, and Liberty. But in writing/talking about liberty, I have regularly linked it with responsibility.

Liberty must always be tied to responsibility, so perhaps libertarianism would be all right if accompanied by an emphasis on responsibilitarianism. (Yes, the latter is a word used in several sites found by a Google search.)

It must also be recognized that there are variants of libertarianism: not all libertarians are as objectionable as Sen. Paul. But, in general, libertarians seek to live with freedom as individuals without external restrictions, especially by the government.

Even though they may not be Republicans, as Sen. Paul is, most libertarians agree with Pres. Reagan: “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.” A few years ago, that was a basic position of the Tea Party Movement, of which Sen. Paul was a part.

But I agree with Pastor Preston Clegg, who (here) wrote an August 10 opinion piece titled “Freedom Without Responsibility is Moral Adolescence.” Clegg asserts,

People are—quite literally—protesting what would save their lives and cheering their own death, all in the name of liberation from what they perceive to be an overreaching government that is advocating for nothing more than our safety from a deadly pandemic.

Such protesters are egged on by people like Sen. Paul, so that is one strong reason I liberally criticize libertarianism and ardently advocate liberty with responsibility. 

Hopes for the Biden Presidency

Barring unforeseen events, at noon today, January 20, 2021, Joseph R. Biden will be sworn in as the 46^th President of the United States. My first hope for the Biden presidency is that it will, indeed, begin with an inauguration unblemished by violence and bloodshed. 

Here are some of my main hopes for the Biden presidency.  

* Bringing the covid-19 pandemic under control

The first daunting challenge the Biden administration faces is the ongoing and even worsening covid-19 pandemic. There have now been over 400,000 coronavirus-related deaths in the U.S. Bringing this tragic disease under control must be a top priority for the new President and his administration.

On Jan. 14, Biden announced a massive, $1.9 trillion plan for combatting the pandemic and the economic problems caused by it. Dubbed the “American Rescue Plan,” that bold proposal was soon panned by some GOP politicians and will face much opposition. But I truly hope the Biden administration’s anti-covid efforts will be successful.

* Working to combat global warming

My first blog post of 2020 was about climate change, which I contended was the greatest challenge of the new decade. The last four years have seen a significant weakening of the government’s efforts to confront the global warming crisis.

The new President needs to lead the U.S. to rejoin the Paris Agreement, as he has promised to do. He also needs to restore many of the EPA regulations gutted by the Trump administration. This work is not for his own political benefit in the coming four years, but for the benefit of future generations.

* Supporting control of nuclear weapons

In addition to rejoining the Iran nuclear deal, the Biden administration needs to show support for the U.N.’s Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which goes into effect just two days from now, on January 22.

The U.S. and the other nations with nuclear weapons have not yet signed the TPNW. But in addition to global warming, the widespread presence of nuclear weapons in the world poses a serious threat to the well-being of all people now and in the future. I hope that will change during the Biden presidency.

* Working for a society with greater economic and racial equality

There is much that needs to be done to overcome the societal structures that favor wealthy people at the expense of the middle class and those struggling in poverty and that favor white people to the disadvantage of people of color.

The USAmerican goal has long been “liberty and justice for all.” ‘For all” means all individuals living in this country regardless of gender, race, economic status, political ideology, or religious background. I strongly hope the new administration will, indeed, lead the nation closer toward reaching this goal.

* Restoring political bipartisanship to the Capitol

In order to fulfill these hopes, there needs to be much greater bipartisanship among elected U.S. politicians. For especially the last twelve years there has been far too much polarization and lack of politicians seeking the common good.

I certainly hope President Biden can cultivate the cooperation needed for there to be good governance.

Much more needs to be said about each of the above hopes, and these are just a few of many other hopes I have for the Biden presidency.

Please note that these are not “political” hopes in support of one political party. They are hopes for the benefit of the American people and for the wider world.

What hopes do you have for the Biden presidency in place of or in addition to the matters I have listed above?

In Admiration of Beethoven and His Ninth Symphony

The great musical genius Ludwig van Beethoven was born 250 years ago this month. Although I made a blog post about Beethoven in 2017, I am writing about him again, and especially about his marvelous Ninth Symphony.

Here is the image of his portrait that Joseph Karl Stieler painted 200 years ago, in 1820, when Beethoven was 50 years old: 

Composing the Ninth

Beethoven’s compositions consist of 722 works written over forty-five years, from his earliest work in 1782, when he was only twelve years old, until his last work just before he died in Vienna in 1827.

Beginning with Symphony No. 1, which was first performed in 1800, Beethoven composed nine symphonies. He composed No. 9, also called the “Choral” Symphony, between 1822 and 1824.

His Ninth Symphony is regarded by many critics and musicologists as Beethoven's greatest work and one of the supreme achievements in the history of music.

One remarkable aspect of Beethoven’s composition of the Ninth Symphony is that he was completely deaf during that time. He began to lose his hearing when he was still in his early 30s, and by 1815 he was totally deaf.

How one of the world’s greatest composers could write his greatest work, a complete four-part symphony, while being totally deaf is almost beyond comprehension.

Performing the Ninth

Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 was first performed in Vienna in 1824, and since then it has been one of the most performed symphonies in the world.

At that initial performance, it seems that Beethoven was not the main conductor, but he was on the stage facing the orchestra. When the performance concluded, the contralto went over to Beethoven and turned him toward the loudly cheering audience, whom he could not hear.

The Ninth is still being performed by premier orchestras around the world—and a number of those performances are, happily, available on YouTube.

In preparation for writing this article, I listened to the performances of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra (CSO, here), which has been viewed over 25,600,000 times since 2015, and the (audio only) London Symphony Orchestra (here), accessed an inexplicable 106 million times since 2010.

There is a long tradition of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony being performed in Japan since it was first introduced there by German prisoners during WWI. The CSO’s website reports that in 2016 the Ninth was performed 175 times in Japan.

In Osaka, there is now a 20-year-old tradition of performing Beethoven’s Ninth with 10,000 musicians! (Here is the link to the fourth movement of their 2012 performance.)

Enjoying the Ninth

It is the fourth movement of Symphony No. 9 that makes it so enjoyable to so many people. In that movement, Beethoven used Friedrich Schiller’s 1785 poem "Ode to Joy,” in which he enthusiastically celebrated the kinship and unity of all humankind.

That fourth movement later morphed into one of my very favorite hymns, “Joyful, Joyful We Adore Thee," the hymn text written by Henry van Dyke in 1907.

A year ago, there were plans for many performances of the Ninth in this 250^th anniversary year of Beethoven’s birth, including a performance of “All Together: A Global Ode to Joy” in Carnegie Hall this month. But, alas, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused cancellations of most performances.

Nevertheless, thanks to the Internet, we can enjoy the Ninth in the comfort (and safety) of our own homes this month—and there are lessons we can learn from Beethoven along with enjoying his exquisite music.

A year ago, before the beginning of the pandemic, Arthur C. Brooks wrote about a lesson we can all learn from Beethoven: “Deafness freed Beethoven as a composer because he no longer had society’s soundtrack in his ears. Perhaps therein lies a lesson for each of us.”

Further, an article in the Nov. 21 issue of The Economist points out that, like the pandemic-hit celebrations of his 250^th birthday this year, Beethoven’s career was a struggle against adversity. Yet, “Fate has amplified Beethoven’s voice not as a struggler, but as a healer.”

So this month (and later), let’s listen expectantly (and repeatedly) to Beethoven’s stirring Ninth Symphony and enjoy deeply the encouragement found there, finding joy and hope despite the solemn times in which we now live.

Elections Have Consequences: 1844 and 2020

James K. Polk, the 11^th President, was born on November 2, 1795. As mentioned in my Oct. 30 post, Polk’s 125^th birthday anniversary in 1920 was the day when Warren G. Harding celebrated his 55^th birthday—and was also elected the 29^th POTUS.

Polk, elected in November 1844, was a successful President. His four years in office clearly indicates that elections have consequences—as they all do. 

Polk: One of the Best Presidents?

Presidential historian Andrew Bergen ranks Polk as the seventh best President of the first 43 in the history of the U.S. (see here). That is higher than what is found in most rankings, but Polk is regularly ranked in the top one-third. And yet, he is not widely known—although ten states have a county named for James Polk.

(Polk County, Missouri, where June was born and where we were married, was named after James’s grandfather. And now we live in Clay County, Mo., named after Henry Clay, whom Polk defeated in the election of 1844. My 4/20/17 blog post was titled “The Feats of [Henry] Clay,” and mentions his loss to Polk.)

Harry Truman summed up Polk’s legacy in these words: “James K. Polk, a great President. Said what he intended to do and did it.” Accordingly, Bergen states, “Polk followed through on every single campaign pledge that he ran on in 1844,” and that included not running for re-election.  

Election Consequences of 1844

But Polk’s “successful” presidency doesn’t mean that we should broadly praise him. Rather, there is much that should be denounced. Elections have consequences, and those consequences from the 1844 election were not good for many people in the U.S.

Polk is regarded as a protégé of Andrew Jackson, instigator of the deplorable Indian Removal Act of 1830, and that is one reason the consequences of the election of 1844 were not good for many. He was a strong advocate of “manifest destiny” (a term coined in 1845) that resulted in the extermination of many Native Americans.

Further, the annexation of Texas, which he strongly supported, was linked to the strengthening of slavery in the U.S., for annexation gave slavery room to expand. Subsequently, one indirect consequence of Polk’s election was the Civil War, which started just twelve years after his presidency ended.

Election Consequences of 2020?

The guest host on the Nov. 9 Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC kept repeating the words “radical normalcy” with reference to President-elect Joe Biden. That is one of the hoped-for consequences of this month’s election—a reversal of the abnormalities I wrote about in my 10/30 post and that this very lengthy WaPo Magazine article details.

Just as he promised, President-elect Biden has already set up a panel of experts to draw up plans on how best to find ways to control the covid-19 pandemic. And as an indication of the “radical normalcy” in that move, there were no family members or cronies selected for the team.

As a Nov. 9 WaPo article says, Biden’s appointed task force is “a group made up entirely of doctors and health experts, signaling his intent to seek a science-based approach to bring the raging pandemic under control.” This will surely lead to one very positive consequence of the Nov. 3 election.

Further, according to this Nov. 11 WaPo article, another encouraging consequence of the recent election is how “Biden aims to amp up the government’s fight against climate change.”

Of course, some evangelical Christians see negative consequences resulting from the election. For example, on Nov. 10, a conservative Christian Post reporter declared, “Biden planning to reverse Trump’s pro-life policies by executive order.”

It remains to be seen, of course, what all the consequences of the 2020 presidential election will be. I am hoping for, and expect, mostly positive ones that will, indeed, help save the soul of the nation.

TTT (Things Take Time)

For many years, I have used the abbreviation TTT for my book Thirty True Things Everyone Needs to Know Now (2018)—and I still encourage people to read that book. But this post is about a different meaning of TTT, one that I learned from a Japanese friend decades ago: things take time. 

The Presidential Election: TTT

As everyone knows, the U.S. elections were held two days ago, on November 3. But the results of the presidential election are not certain even now, although it is most likely that the Biden/Harris ticket will narrowly win.

The election results for most states won’t be “officially certified” until November 23 or later. And actually, the result of the presidential election is not official until January 6, the day a joint session of Congress meets to count electoral votes (cast on December 18) and declare the winner.

Things take time, and this year it is taking a much longer time than usual for the apparent results of the presidential election to be ascertained—and who knows what will happen between now and Dec. 18 or Jan. 6.

There will be recounts, lawsuits, angry tweets, and falsehoods told by the likely loser, who late on election night made numerous false and misleading statements in speaking to his supporters (see here).

The Return to Normalcy: TTT

As I wrote in my previous (Oct. 30) blog post, the election of Joe Biden would be the beginning of a return to normalcy as the many abnormalities I mentioned in that post—and that was by no means a complete list—would be righted.

However, even if Biden is inaugurated on January 20, current adverse conditions in the nation won’t get better immediately. Things take time.

The ongoing effects of the pandemic, the lingering economic/unemployment challenges for many, and current cynicism about government, etc. will take a long time to overcome and for there to be a sense of normalcy again.

Some, no doubt, will be disappointed, feeling that change/recovery is happening too slowly. There will likely be criticism of the new administration for not doing enough fast enough.

But, again, things take time—and patience seems to be much more difficult for us USAmericans than for the people of Japan, whose national beginning is said to have been in 660 BCE, a very long time before 1776.

The Re-building of Environmental Protection: TTT

Over the past nearly four years, we have seen much that has been wrecked in this country—and it takes much longer to build, or re-build, something than to wreck it.

The lead article in the October 31 issue of The Economist reports, “Of the 225 major executive actions in a studiously catalogued list of the Trump administration’s deregulation 70 . . . are environmental rollbacks.”

With broader criteria, an articlein the Oct. 30 Washington Post claims that “as Trump’s first term winds to a close, he has weakened or wiped out more than 125 rules and policies aimed at protecting the nation’s air, water and land, with 40 more rollbacks underway.”

There are numerous critical challenges that the new President faces. Of immediate urgency, of course, is controlling the spread of the covid-19 pandemic and dealing with the lingering problems caused by it.

But perhaps the biggest challenge, the one that is most critical for the future well-being of the country and the world, is re-building programs necessary for protecting the environment—and then taking bold measures to combat global warming.

Things take time—but dealing wisely and effectively with environmental issues is something that needs to be done sooner rather than later.

A Return to Normalcy?

No one in this country is unaware that next Tuesday, November 3, is Election Day. Many U.S. citizens have already voted, but what result can we expect from the presidential election? Can we expect a return to normalcy? 

Is this also Decision 2020?

Past Appeals for Normalcy

In his campaign for the presidency in 1920, Warren G. Harding’s slogan was “return to normalcy.” On May 14, he made his famous “Return to Normalcy” speech that included these words:

America's present need is not heroics, but healing; not nostrums, but normalcy; not revolution, but restoration; not agitation, but adjustment; not surgery, but serenity; not the dramatic, but the dispassionate; . . . .”

That sentiment proved to be an effective and fruitful appeal to the American voters, who were ready to move back to “normal” after the disastrous “Great War” and the equally disastrous effects of the Spanish flu.

On November 2, which happened to be his 55th birthday, Harding was elected, receiving over 60% of the popular vote, the highest percentage in a presidential election up to that time.

While the same words were not used, there was some similarity with Dwight D. Eisenhower’s campaign of 1952. There was no pandemic just before that election, but the effects of WWII were still being felt, and then the Korean War had been raging since 1950. Many hoped for a return to normalcy.

Eisenhower won that election with over 55% of the popular vote and over 83% of the electoral votes.

In “What Joe Can Learn from Ike,” a perceptive 10/10/20 article in The Atlantic, author Ted Widmer points out that “Eisenhower instinctively understood how deeply Americans wanted to calm down and get back to normal.”

Accordingly, Widmer states, Ike “pursued a policy of strategic blandness.” That was a successful strategy, for as noted, he won by a landslide.

Present Need for Normalcy

This is a time of considerable abnormality in the USA. As in much of the rest of the world, the covid-19 pandemic has greatly altered the normal activities of most Americans and taken the lives of more than 230,000—and at present, the situation is steadily getting worse, not better.

But perhaps the greatest abnormality is linked to the man occupying the White House. Without elaboration, here are some of the most blatant abnormalities associated with DJT.

** It is abnormal for a President to lie so much.

** It is abnormal for a President to seek political help from the heads of other countries, especially those who head a totalitarian government.

** It is abnormal for a President to have so many family members working in the White House.

** It is abnormal for a sitting President and his family to profit financially so much while in office.

** It is abnormal for a President to be so disrespectful of women, Blacks and other People of Color, immigrants and asylum seekers from other countries.

** It is abnormal for a President to expect the Department of Justice to serve his personal and political interests.

** It is abnormal for a President to be personally involved in the celebration of a new Supreme Court justice.

** Etc.

Future Hope for Normalcy

Many of us are eagerly hoping for the election next week to be the beginning of a return to normalcy in this country. Such a return would not happen immediately, though. Things take time, and I plan to write more about that next week.

It will certainly take many more months for life to return to anything like normal because of the covid-19 pandemic.

But I am hopeful that next week will be the beginning of a return to an administration committed to truthfulness; to respect for, and the endeavor to seek the well-being of, all citizens; and to civility.

Maybe the USA was never fully like that, though, so instead of a return to normalcy my main hope and prayer is for the beginning of a much-needed new normal that embraces, among other things, truthfulness, respect, and civility.

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

FYI: November 2 was also the birthday of James K. Polk, the 11^th POTUS. The election of 1844 was from November 1 until December 4, although Polk is said to have won the election on November 5.

Following the example of Heather Cox Richardson, I am posting below some hyperlinks to articles directly related to what I have written above.

“Trump is averaging more than 50 false or misleading claims a day” (WaPo, 10/22)

“Ballrooms, candles and luxury cottages: During Trump’s term, millions of government and GOP dollars have flowed to his properties” (WaPo, 10/27)

“Former U.S. attorneys — all Republicans — back Biden, saying Trump threatens ‘the rule of law’” (WaPo, 10/27)

“All the small things you can look forward to in a Biden administration” (WaPo, 10/27)

 

Between Two Monsters: The Scylla of the Pandemic and the Charybdis of Poverty

In my May 25 blog post, I referred to Scylla and Charybdis, two sea monsters found in ancient Greek mythology. In this article, I am again using that story to highlight the exceedingly difficult problem of dealing effectively with the covid-19 pandemic without consigning millions to poverty—and to death because of starvation. 

The Two Monsters in the U.S.

As was widely noted at the end of May, the number of deaths in the U.S. from covid-19 topped 100,000 people—and now that number is already nearing 115,000. It has also been noted, although not so widely, that the number of deaths is disproportionately higher among non-white and financially poor people.

According to a 5/28 article in The Guardian, “Figures compiled by APM Research Lab from 40 states show that African Americans are being killed at almost three times the rate of white people.

“Black Kansans are seven times more likely to die from the virus than white Kansans. In Missouri, Wisconsin and Washington DC the ratio is six times.”

That same article goes on to quote William Barber, co-chair of the Poor People’s Campaign (whom I first wrote about in this 9/15/16 blog post).

Barber emphasizes that covid-19 is a disease of the poor. “People are being forced to work, putting profit over protection,” he says. “This pandemic will highlight how poverty—and our willingness to let people remain in it—presents a clear and present danger for all of us.”

The wealthy can practice social distancing, work from home, etc. But what if you have only an over-crowded—or no—home to go to, and no paying work at all if you stay home?

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, nearly half of U.S. workers earn less than $15 an hour and nearly 70% have less than $1,000 in savings. Most of these people must show up for work if they are going to be paid.

Caught between the monsters of the pandemic and poverty, many must go back to work in unsafe conditions and take their chances of not getting sick.

The Two Monsters in the LICs

Worldwide, when the number of deaths reached 100,000 in the U.S., there were more than 350,000 deaths from covid-19. But more than 64% of those deaths were in just five of the wealthier countries: the U.S., the UK, France, Spain, and Italy.

But just this month, as the number of deaths worldwide topped 410,000, Brazil became the country with the third most deaths—and the surge has just started in the LICs (low-income countries) of sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia.

Most of the attention of us citizens in the USA has been on the domestic crisis—and that is especially true of DJT. As the headline in a June 3 WaPo editorial expresses it, “Trump irresponsibly abandons the WHO while the pandemic surges in less developed nations.”

A week earlier, a Boston U. epidemiologist wrote an op-ed piece titled “The coronavirus pandemic will turn into a poverty pandemic unless we act now.” The author contends that “the long-term health costs of an economic depression could ultimately far eclipse what covid-19 has wrought.”

That is especially true for the LICs. According to that article, a regional director of the WHO for Africa said last week that the coronavirus pandemic will move about 27 million Africans to extreme poverty.

Earlier, a May 28 article in a newspaper of India said, “The economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic could push as many as 86 million more children into poverty by the end of 2020.” (The image above accompanied that article.)

A report issued by Gospel for Asia the day before World Hunger Day on May 28 declared, “It’s estimated that nine million people will die in a coronavirus-worsened ‘scandal of starvation’ this year.”

The U.S. and countries around the world have made great efforts to avoid/control the monster of the covid-19 pandemic. Isn’t it time we also make a more concerted effort to avoid/control the monster of poverty? 

Thank God for Nurses!

The recently maligned (by DJT) World Health Organization has designated 2020 as “Year of the Nurse,” marking 200 years since the birth of Florence Nightingale (FN). This post is my third this year about an outstanding woman born in 1820, the other two being Susan B. Anthony and Fanny Crosby.  

Learning about FN

In preparation for writing this article, I read Florence Nightingale the Angel of the Crimea, first published in 1909. The author of that old book is Laura E. Richards, whose mother was Julia Ward Howe.

Julia, who is best known for writing “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,’ was born less than a year before FN and died just over two months after FN died 110 years ago in August 1910—and the two women knew each other to some degree. I was unable to find out whether Laura (1850~1943) also knew Florence personally.

According to Laura, it was her father, Samuel G. Howe, who in 1843 encouraged Florence to enter nursing at a time when, except for the Catholic Sisters of Charity, nurses in England “were for the most part coarse and ignorant women, often cruel, often intemperate” (p. 35).

Laura’s book, said to be “a story for young people,” was certainly a hagiographical account of Nightingale, but I much enjoyed reading it. Nearly three-fourths of the book is about FN’s meritorious work during the Crimean War (1854~56). 

The Influence of FN

Florence felt God’s call to service of others in 1837 when she was 17 years old, and then she became a nursing student in 1844. After several years of courtship, in 1849 she declined a marriage proposal. Four years later she became the superintendent of the Institution for the Care of Sick Gentlewomen in London.

In the spring of 1854, Britain and France joined Turkey in opposition to Russia in what became known as the Crimean War. In the fall of that year, Florence went with a party of 38 nurses to work in a hospital in Scutari, Turkey, where thousands of injured soldiers were being cared for—and where a large percentage of them were dying.

When Florence and the other nurses arrived in Scutari, they were not welcomed. According to Richards, “the military authorities did not want female nurses,” because as mentioned earlier, nurses at that time were “often drunken, generally unfeeling, and always ignorant” (p. 52).

But Florence began to implement significant changes. One of the patients there when she arrived wrote, “Everything changed for the better.”

According to an essay about Florence’s legacy, because of her work in Scutari and her subsequent teaching, FN “will forever be linked with modern nursing—and rightly so.”

The same essay says that three areas of contemporary medicine were “deeply influenced by her.” Those three were hospital infection control, hospital epidemiology, and hospice medicine.

Following in the Footsteps of FN

After retiring as a teacher/administrator in Japan and moving to the Kansas City area in 2005, I had the privilege of teaching a required theology course at Rockhurst University from 2006 to 2015. My classes in sixteen of those seventeen semesters were in the evening, and a majority of my students were in the nursing program.

With few exceptions, those nursing students were serious, hard-working students, and I wonder now how they are faring as practicing nurses during the current pandemic. I am quite confident that many of my former students are a part of the dedicated core of nurses ministering to covid-19 patients across the country.

I hope they all are all right, but some might not be. According to a recent report by the National Nursing Associations (see the reference in this article), at least 90,000 healthcare workers have been infected with covid-19 and more than 260 nurses have died.

The nursing students I taught (and all dedicated nurses) are following in the footsteps of Florence Nightingale, and I write this to honor them (and all nurses) this week, which is National Nurses Week. This special week begins each year on May 6 and ends on May 12, FN’s birthday.

Thank God for Florence Nightingale, and thank God for nurses!

Did Your Church Open Sunday?

Although you may not have heard about it, Sunday (May 3) was ReOpen Church Sunday. Did your church open? Mine didn’t either. But should they have? Is religious liberty being attacked by the federal and state governments? That is what some Christians are charging.

There are at least three important issues that intersect in the discussion about when to reopen in-person church services: (1) religious freedom, (2) local church finances, and (3) public health. 

Baptist Church in Des Moines, Iowa, on May 3

The ReOpen Church Sunday Initiative

Liberty Counsel is a conservative Christian law group that promoted May 3 as ReOpen Church Sunday. That organization was founded in 1989 by Mathew D. (Mat) Staver, who was the dean of the law school at Liberty University from 2006 to 2014.

I first learned about Staver in 2005 when talking with people from Kentucky who had bussed to D.C. to protest the removal of the Ten Commandments in public places. They did that in front of the Supreme Court Building, and I wrote about that in my book Fed Up with Fundamentalism (2020 ed., pp. 123-4).

In the days leading up to May 3, Staver and Liberty Counsel had promoted ReOpen Church Sunday, and more information about that can be found on their website.

For Staver and his supporters, the issue is primarily one of religious freedom. They claim that government agencies prohibiting churches from meeting for worship services, even during the current pandemic, violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Church Finances Issue

Despite stay-at-home orders, some churches have defied those directives and held public meetings anyway. Some did that because of their strong belief that they had the right and the need to conduct public worship.

Although usually not said, no doubt many of those churches were inclined to go against the grain for fear of losing financial support. And, in fact, a large majority of churches have seen a  marked decline in offerings and are suffering because of that.

(Without fail, we who are church members need to send our tithes and offerings to our churches even when they cannot conduct public worship.)

Already on April 24, an article in The Washington Post was titled “Church donations have plunged because of the coronavirus. Some churches won’t survive.” Four days later, ReligiousNews.com reported that more than $400,000 had already been raised for small churches at risk during covid-19.

The Churches Helping Churches Initiative relief fund was launched about a month ago, and by last Wednesday had received more than 1,000 applications.

The Public Health Issue

As a strong advocate of religious liberty and an ardent supporter of local churches, I sympathize with those who wanted to open their churches on May 3—or before. But I am also a strong supporter of the government seeking to protect the life and health of the citizens of the country.

I see no indication that churches (or synagogues or mosques) have been unfairly signaled out for mistreatment, although there were a few questionable actions by some local agencies.

I also see considerable indication that many governors and mayors have acted decisively to restrict public meetings in order to keep people safe during the pandemic.

Some have charged that the caution has been excessive. But how can people say that with a straight face when already there have been 70,000 covid-19 deaths in the U.S.?

What about May 10?

In Missouri where I live, Governor Parson’s March 21 order banning gatherings of more than 10 people expired yesterday (May 4). That means that, among other things, events in large venues and stadiums, including churches, will now be able to open with some restrictions.

Many churches in Missouri and elsewhere, it seems, will again have public worship on May 10, which is Mother’s Day. I hope and pray that that will not mean the deaths of an increased number of mothers, and others, because of opening churches too soon.