The Wall Street Journal reported on 5 December on page A-17 that Hillary Clinton has invited the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to hold a conference in Washington to discuss ways in which governments can prevent their otherwise free newspapers from criticizing Islam. She has said that the conference is to build “muscles of respect and empathy and tolerance” into Western societies that criticize Islam.
For more than 20 years, the OIC has pressed Western governments to restrict speech about Islam. In 2009 the OIC issued fatwas calling for free speech bans, including “international legislation” aimed at protecting “the interests and values of [Islamic] society,” and for judicial punishment for public expression of apostasy from Islam. Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu emphasized that “no one has the right to insult another for their beliefs.” (I wonder if Mr. Ihsanoglu thinks that no one has the right to KILL other people because of their beliefs!)
The OIC does not define what speech should be outlawed, but its leading member states’ practices are illustrative. These states are in the practice of severely punishing de facto “insulters” of Islam and condoning the attack upon their lives and families by Muslim vigilantes.
Civil society must vigorously protect the freedom of its press and of its speech. Any religion or world view that is worth its salt should stand in the strong winds of public criticism and prove its value by open debate. All religions of the world must stand and protect themselves publically, answering the following questions: Which religion teaches us to love our neighbor? Which religion teaches that we should tolerate differing opinions peaceably without resort to violent means for winning converts? Which religion convinces people to believe by means of persuasion rather than force?
Any religion that fails these questions must resort to such agencies as the United States State Department and to legislative coercion in order to protect itself from open debate.
Furthermore, I do not believe that our government has any business meddling in the freedom of our press or speech unless that expression is openly subversive of law and order in our society. Clearly, open criticism of Islam in the press of a Western nation is not disruptive, nor has it advocated overthrow of government based on religion. On the other hand, I cannot say that Islamic regimes have not advocated overthrow of non-Islamic governments. Islam has claimed suzerainty over governments in order to take complete control of them by their religion.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Should We Slow Down the Rich or Speed Up the Poor?
There is no question about American society, these days. The rich are becoming richer and the poor are becoming poorer. The spread between the two is becoming more marked every day. As I mentioned in my blog post of 23 November, the share of money going to the top 1% of earners in America has increased from 8% in the 1960’s to 20% today. At the same time, incomes of the lower income group have been stagnant for several decades. Observers have noticed that the middle income group has been decreasing in size.
Liberals insist that the way to remedy this situation is to tax the rich, knock them down in the economic hierarchy; and that is supposed to equalize our societal unbalance. I would propose a different approach to the same problem. My approach is founded on the fact that society is becoming more and more sophisticated and requiring of more sophistication in education and training.
I read in the newspapers that even in this recession and period of high unemployment; companies are having trouble finding skilled workers for blue-collar jobs. Welders, diesel mechanics, finish carpenters, etc. are in short supply—simply because those jobs require a higher level of training and education.
It is my opinion that instead of penalizing the upper income group for making money, our society should be working to train up more skilled blue-collar workers and white-collar executives and supervisors. That measure would narrow the gap between the rich and the poor.
Punishing the rich is an exercise in futility. Our government is experiencing a deficit if revenue; and overtaxing the rich will only decrease government revenues. One fact of taxation in the United states is that those who make $1 million/year accounted for about 0.2% of all tax returns but paid 20.4% of income taxes in 2009. Those with adjusted gross income above $200,000 a year were just under 3% of tax filers but paid 50.1% of the $866 billion in total personal income taxes. This means the top 3% paid more than the bottom 97%. Yet the 3% are the people that President Obama claims do not pay their fair share. Before the recession, the $200,000 income group paid 54.5% of the income tax. (Redacted from an editorial by Robert Barron in the Wall Street Journal 8/24/11)
The way to prosperity is to train up the poor and the uneducated to take their proper place in our economic scheme of things. Leave the rich alone and let them earn as much money as they can—that will benefit government revenues. But get the lower classes in our society to bring up their earning capacity.
Liberals insist that the way to remedy this situation is to tax the rich, knock them down in the economic hierarchy; and that is supposed to equalize our societal unbalance. I would propose a different approach to the same problem. My approach is founded on the fact that society is becoming more and more sophisticated and requiring of more sophistication in education and training.
I read in the newspapers that even in this recession and period of high unemployment; companies are having trouble finding skilled workers for blue-collar jobs. Welders, diesel mechanics, finish carpenters, etc. are in short supply—simply because those jobs require a higher level of training and education.
It is my opinion that instead of penalizing the upper income group for making money, our society should be working to train up more skilled blue-collar workers and white-collar executives and supervisors. That measure would narrow the gap between the rich and the poor.
Punishing the rich is an exercise in futility. Our government is experiencing a deficit if revenue; and overtaxing the rich will only decrease government revenues. One fact of taxation in the United states is that those who make $1 million/year accounted for about 0.2% of all tax returns but paid 20.4% of income taxes in 2009. Those with adjusted gross income above $200,000 a year were just under 3% of tax filers but paid 50.1% of the $866 billion in total personal income taxes. This means the top 3% paid more than the bottom 97%. Yet the 3% are the people that President Obama claims do not pay their fair share. Before the recession, the $200,000 income group paid 54.5% of the income tax. (Redacted from an editorial by Robert Barron in the Wall Street Journal 8/24/11)
The way to prosperity is to train up the poor and the uneducated to take their proper place in our economic scheme of things. Leave the rich alone and let them earn as much money as they can—that will benefit government revenues. But get the lower classes in our society to bring up their earning capacity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
