My wife, Nancy, and I are members of the Board of Directors of Caring Hands Pregnancy Center in southwest Denver. Caring Hands is a Christian compassionate ministry which attempts to help young women with unplanned pregnancies develop other choices for their unborn babies than abortion. In the process of doing that, we offer them free maternity clothes, baby items, counseling services, and community referrals for medical care. One of our main priorities is introducing them to the Savior. Most of our clients are illegal immigrants from Mexico or Central America; they are the poorest of peoples living in the United States. They are under extreme social and economic distress.
Frequently, we ask people to volunteer as counselors or Board members of our organization. Occasionally, Christian people will refuse to work with us, because they think that we are encouraging law breaking and more illegal immigration. They think that instead of helping these unfortunate people with their problem, we should be reporting our clients to the law.
In answer to that objection, we are not a law-enforcement agency; and there is no government regulation that tells us to report these people to the law. Indeed, it is against the law to hire these people; but we are not in the business of hiring anyone. All we are trying to do is to relieve their pain.
Furthermore, the paltry amount of material aid we deliver to our clients is so small that nobody in her right mind would immigrate all the way from Mexico or Central America to get it. Indeed, if all the aid from every compassionate agency in Colorado were poured upon them, it would not add up to anything significant which might stimulate more illegal immigration.
The problem with illegal immigration is a weak and ineffectual Federal Government that is not doing its job of stopping the chaos at the border and that does not establish a useful guest worker program. The job of Caring Hands is to help relieve social and economic pain among our very poor neighbors and to introduce them to Christ.
As Christians, we see very clearly mandates from the word of God for taking care of the alien and the stranger within our gates. For instance, Ex 22:21, 23:19, 23:12; Lev 19:10, 19:33 & 34, 23:22, 24:22; Num 15:16; Deut 10:18, 23:7, 24:14, 17, 19, 20, 21; 26:12 & 13, 27:19; Ps 146:9; Jer 7:6, 22:3; Ezek 22:7; Zec 7:10, the book of Ruth; Matt 25:35, 38, 43, 44.
Strict border regulations in combination with a meaningful foreign aid and guest worker program are not in opposition to Christian principles. But…neglecting the poor and needy among us is in absolute contradiction to Christian principles and practice.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
Do We Need More Taxes or Less?
Liberals say we need more and higher taxes to finance the government. Conservatives say we need fewer taxes to stimulate businesses which will then pay more taxes in the aggregate. Which is true? Let’s take a look at other countries to see how their tax rates effect business.
On 1 January, Canada cut their corporate tax rate to 16.5% from 18% compared to the United States federal rate of 35%. (If you add state corporate taxes to the federal levy, you come up with 40% of total income that United States companies must pay to the government in order to operate in this country.) As a result of these lower corporate tax rates, Canada has enjoyed a boom in investment, job creation, and growth since 1990 when their liberal government started cutting the taxes in order to attract investment to Canada. This is all because companies send capital where it can achieve the highest returns.
The United States ranks second highest in corporate taxes just behind Japan, which is still struggling to correct its economic downturn of the 1990’s.
The high taxes in America prevent hundreds of billions of dollars from coming to the United States in off-shore investments.
Who needs more taxation?!!
On 1 January, Canada cut their corporate tax rate to 16.5% from 18% compared to the United States federal rate of 35%. (If you add state corporate taxes to the federal levy, you come up with 40% of total income that United States companies must pay to the government in order to operate in this country.) As a result of these lower corporate tax rates, Canada has enjoyed a boom in investment, job creation, and growth since 1990 when their liberal government started cutting the taxes in order to attract investment to Canada. This is all because companies send capital where it can achieve the highest returns.
The United States ranks second highest in corporate taxes just behind Japan, which is still struggling to correct its economic downturn of the 1990’s.
The high taxes in America prevent hundreds of billions of dollars from coming to the United States in off-shore investments.
Who needs more taxation?!!
Thursday, December 30, 2010
How To Have A Conversation
Conversation is an art form that we all use daily. We should learn how to do it in a constructive and enlightening way, while keeping it enjoyable to all involved.
Many people seem to be talking at others rather than talking with them. Their “conversation” is one-sided, never taking into consideration what the other person might have to offer or might enjoy.
A good conversationalist will listen actively to the other person and ask penetrating and thoughtful questions as the discourse goes on. Conversation is more about listening intelligently than in talking about oneself.
There are times when two people are together; and no real bond is established between them indicating common interests for discussion. At times like those, one should change the subject repeatedly until some common interest is uncovered; and then, a real conversation can begin.
I believe that conversation should very seldom consist of “small talk” about inconsequential subjects, such as the weather or what was on sale at the grocery store. Surely, intelligent people can find subjects to talk about that have some real and important significance! We have all met someone who has the gift of sniffing out real subjects to talk about. With those people, it is virtually impossible to waste time talking about superficial subjects. To me, those people are to be sought out for inspiring and informative conversation.
Some lead-in comments or questions for initiating a good conversation might be such things as, “Tell me what you have been concerned about lately.” Or, “Have you been reading any books recently?” “Where do you go to church?” There are an infinite number of opening questions that might stimulate good conversation.
Always watch your respondent for signs of “listener fatigue:” Not maintaining eye contact or looking at the wrist watch or shifting stance from one foot to another might indicate that the respondent is tired of the subject being discussed.
Practice good conversation and think about it in advance: What do I want to discuss with the other person? Happy listening and talking!
Many people seem to be talking at others rather than talking with them. Their “conversation” is one-sided, never taking into consideration what the other person might have to offer or might enjoy.
A good conversationalist will listen actively to the other person and ask penetrating and thoughtful questions as the discourse goes on. Conversation is more about listening intelligently than in talking about oneself.
There are times when two people are together; and no real bond is established between them indicating common interests for discussion. At times like those, one should change the subject repeatedly until some common interest is uncovered; and then, a real conversation can begin.
I believe that conversation should very seldom consist of “small talk” about inconsequential subjects, such as the weather or what was on sale at the grocery store. Surely, intelligent people can find subjects to talk about that have some real and important significance! We have all met someone who has the gift of sniffing out real subjects to talk about. With those people, it is virtually impossible to waste time talking about superficial subjects. To me, those people are to be sought out for inspiring and informative conversation.
Some lead-in comments or questions for initiating a good conversation might be such things as, “Tell me what you have been concerned about lately.” Or, “Have you been reading any books recently?” “Where do you go to church?” There are an infinite number of opening questions that might stimulate good conversation.
Always watch your respondent for signs of “listener fatigue:” Not maintaining eye contact or looking at the wrist watch or shifting stance from one foot to another might indicate that the respondent is tired of the subject being discussed.
Practice good conversation and think about it in advance: What do I want to discuss with the other person? Happy listening and talking!
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Try Journaling—You Will Appreciate it Later
This post is to recommend to our young correspondents the value of journaling your life experiences and daily activities. We have a friend who has journaled his life daily since graduating from high school. He can tell you where he and his family spent Christmas in 1984, who was there, what were the significant gifts, what happened, what dinner was like, etc., etc. The information he can glean from his journal is most interesting and even inspiring. He and his wife have fun looking into that old journal after fifty plus years of notations.
Twenty years ago, my wife and I were missionaries in West Africa. We had many very interesting experiences in those days; but, alas, we did not keep a record of them in written form, and now we cannot remember many of them. I wish we had kept a journal!
I recommend that journals be kept in an old-fashioned logbook. It would, perhaps, be easier and more economical of space to do it on a hard drive or in some other electronic medium; but one never knows in these days of rapid technology advancement, if hard drives or CD’s will be around in 40 years.
Happy journaling!
Twenty years ago, my wife and I were missionaries in West Africa. We had many very interesting experiences in those days; but, alas, we did not keep a record of them in written form, and now we cannot remember many of them. I wish we had kept a journal!
I recommend that journals be kept in an old-fashioned logbook. It would, perhaps, be easier and more economical of space to do it on a hard drive or in some other electronic medium; but one never knows in these days of rapid technology advancement, if hard drives or CD’s will be around in 40 years.
Happy journaling!
Thursday, December 23, 2010
The Rewards for Street Picketing
For years, my wife, Nancy, and I have picketed abortion clinics. We have had some interesting experiences, which I would like to share with you.
The responses from the traffic on the streets to our picketing with Pro-Life signs has been about equally divided between positive approval of our activities by thumbs-up signs and other less mentionable finger signals of disapproval. One abortionist tried to hit us with his car as he was coming out of his office parking lot. Another angry man pulled a knife on Nancy several years ago. Some have thrown paint balls at us—-fortunately for us, the paint balls did not burst. Several people have stopped to yell at us and argue with us about our beliefs concerning life issues. Their arguments are always of a rather crude and un-thought-out nature, mostly because they have not taken the time to organize their thoughts well. They almost always bring up the issue of “It’s a woman’s body; she can do as she sees fit with it.” This argument, of course, is easy to refute; but, alas, our vocal opponents never seem to be convinced. One man stopped, approached one of our fellow picketers, grabbed his sign and tore it up. Then he raced off in his car. We, of course, called the Lakewood police; and they apprehended him before he had gone four blocks. He was brought into court, fined $100, and required to pay for the destroyed sign. In these confrontational situations, we always call the police; and they have always protected us.
On the other side of the leger, we have also had people park their cars, and come over to us to express their appreciation of what we are doing. Some of them have offered to take us out to lunch, and others have brought us hot chocolate on cold days. One restaurateur invited us to eat at his pizza shop free, which we did on many occasions.
Most recently, a teenaged boy, who was obviously homeless, crossed Union Avenue with his elderly homeless companion deliberately to tell us that he and his friend approved of our street message. Then the boy reached into his pocket and gave us
89¢. It was like receiving the widow’s mite!
We picket every Monday morning from 11 AM to 12 noon. We have counted the cars and multiplied by the average number of people per car. We have calculated that in one hour, we expose our signs to 3000 people. We hope that we are doing some good on the street; at the least, we are helping to keep the Pro-Life message alive and well in our community. Come out and help us some time!
The responses from the traffic on the streets to our picketing with Pro-Life signs has been about equally divided between positive approval of our activities by thumbs-up signs and other less mentionable finger signals of disapproval. One abortionist tried to hit us with his car as he was coming out of his office parking lot. Another angry man pulled a knife on Nancy several years ago. Some have thrown paint balls at us—-fortunately for us, the paint balls did not burst. Several people have stopped to yell at us and argue with us about our beliefs concerning life issues. Their arguments are always of a rather crude and un-thought-out nature, mostly because they have not taken the time to organize their thoughts well. They almost always bring up the issue of “It’s a woman’s body; she can do as she sees fit with it.” This argument, of course, is easy to refute; but, alas, our vocal opponents never seem to be convinced. One man stopped, approached one of our fellow picketers, grabbed his sign and tore it up. Then he raced off in his car. We, of course, called the Lakewood police; and they apprehended him before he had gone four blocks. He was brought into court, fined $100, and required to pay for the destroyed sign. In these confrontational situations, we always call the police; and they have always protected us.
On the other side of the leger, we have also had people park their cars, and come over to us to express their appreciation of what we are doing. Some of them have offered to take us out to lunch, and others have brought us hot chocolate on cold days. One restaurateur invited us to eat at his pizza shop free, which we did on many occasions.
Most recently, a teenaged boy, who was obviously homeless, crossed Union Avenue with his elderly homeless companion deliberately to tell us that he and his friend approved of our street message. Then the boy reached into his pocket and gave us
89¢. It was like receiving the widow’s mite!
We picket every Monday morning from 11 AM to 12 noon. We have counted the cars and multiplied by the average number of people per car. We have calculated that in one hour, we expose our signs to 3000 people. We hope that we are doing some good on the street; at the least, we are helping to keep the Pro-Life message alive and well in our community. Come out and help us some time!
Friday, December 17, 2010
The Purpose of Music
“The aim and final end of all music should be none other than the glory of God and the refreshment of the soul. If heed is not paid to this, it is not true music but a diabolical bawling and twanging.” Johann Sebastian Bach 1685-1750
Monday, December 13, 2010
Will More Taxes or Less Taxes Help the Country?
Democrats are convinced that the United States needs more taxes to dig us out of the current recession, unemployment problem, and run-away national debt.
Nancy Pelosi claims that the "tax cuts for the rich" cannot be continued because it would be "too costly." Former Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey says, "Demagoguery beats data" in politics, here are some data to help us evaluate the Democrat claim.
The first big cut in income taxes came in the 1920s, at the urging of Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon. He argued that a reduction of the tax rates would increase the tax revenues. What actually happened?
In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes-- and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income tax revenue--and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes.
How could that be? The answer is simple: People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared to when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefitting themselves, the economy and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise.
High tax rates which very few people are actually paying, because of tax shelters, do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying. It was much the same story after tax cuts during the Kennedy administration, the Reagan administration and the Bush Administration.
The New York Times reported in 2006: "An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year."
This country needs LESS taxation, not more!!
(This blog post was excerpted from Thomas Sowell, Townhall.com, 11/16/10)
Nancy Pelosi claims that the "tax cuts for the rich" cannot be continued because it would be "too costly." Former Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey says, "Demagoguery beats data" in politics, here are some data to help us evaluate the Democrat claim.
The first big cut in income taxes came in the 1920s, at the urging of Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon. He argued that a reduction of the tax rates would increase the tax revenues. What actually happened?
In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes-- and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income tax revenue--and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes.
How could that be? The answer is simple: People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared to when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefitting themselves, the economy and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise.
High tax rates which very few people are actually paying, because of tax shelters, do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying. It was much the same story after tax cuts during the Kennedy administration, the Reagan administration and the Bush Administration.
The New York Times reported in 2006: "An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year."
This country needs LESS taxation, not more!!
(This blog post was excerpted from Thomas Sowell, Townhall.com, 11/16/10)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
