Monday, May 28, 2007
MY FLAG
Looking out my front window on this dismal Memorial Day, I saw a beautiful sight. It was my flag, blowing freely in the morning breeze. Placed there by the gentle hands of a Civitan volunteer, and provided by a gift from a loving son, my flag was indeed a beautiful sight to behold.
My flag is not the symbol for any one political party. It signifies the unity of all parties in loyalty to one nation. My flag is not to be abused in political imagery, and certainly not to be a part of political chicanery. Honorably carried by honorable men into honorable and just wars, it is not to be employed emotionally to elicit misplaced support of military conflicts which are less than necessary.
Through childhood, a world war, and until age 34, the Militant Moderate pledged allegiance to the flag he served without the phrase "under God" in that oath. That was added by Congress to the pledge about 1960. My allegiance remains the same, with or without the added phraseology. But I resent anyone making those words sacred to the flag, or a matter of religious contentiousness.
This has been a sad Memorial Day. The recounting of the personal and family tragedies caused by the war in Iraq, as a way of memorializing these, has taken its toll on all of us who are sensitive to human suffering. What an utter, terrible tragedy this war has been!
Having suffered through the death of my only brother in World War II, and having observed the endless grieving of my mother through the years until her death, I understand fully the effects of war on families. Having lost a son tragically at age 25 in 1982, I have learned anew that grieving never, ever ends.
Yes, indeed, my flag flies beautifully on my front lawn. I love it. I have served under it in war. Many have died in allegiance to it. It is for us, the living, to dedicate ourselves to see that our young people die, and families suffer, only in necessary and honorable conflicts.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
My flag is not the symbol for any one political party. It signifies the unity of all parties in loyalty to one nation. My flag is not to be abused in political imagery, and certainly not to be a part of political chicanery. Honorably carried by honorable men into honorable and just wars, it is not to be employed emotionally to elicit misplaced support of military conflicts which are less than necessary.
Through childhood, a world war, and until age 34, the Militant Moderate pledged allegiance to the flag he served without the phrase "under God" in that oath. That was added by Congress to the pledge about 1960. My allegiance remains the same, with or without the added phraseology. But I resent anyone making those words sacred to the flag, or a matter of religious contentiousness.
This has been a sad Memorial Day. The recounting of the personal and family tragedies caused by the war in Iraq, as a way of memorializing these, has taken its toll on all of us who are sensitive to human suffering. What an utter, terrible tragedy this war has been!
Having suffered through the death of my only brother in World War II, and having observed the endless grieving of my mother through the years until her death, I understand fully the effects of war on families. Having lost a son tragically at age 25 in 1982, I have learned anew that grieving never, ever ends.
Yes, indeed, my flag flies beautifully on my front lawn. I love it. I have served under it in war. Many have died in allegiance to it. It is for us, the living, to dedicate ourselves to see that our young people die, and families suffer, only in necessary and honorable conflicts.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Thursday, May 10, 2007
ROUND ONE
The Militant Moderate has dutifully watched most of the first round of democrat and republican presidential primary debates. Before registering more detailed opinions, it must first be said that this was an excellent start toward becoming acquainted with the candidates.
We might wish for mandatory registration and attendance, albeit via mass media, at several debates a a qualification for voting. Our beloved writer of the Declaration of Independence, and ardent advocate of public education and founder of the Univrsity of Virginia, said roughly, "A well informed electorate is necessary to the maintenance of a democracy." Photo-ops, sound bites, and commercials are poor ways of becoming informed.
The democrat debate was a pleasant affair. Most showed up well. Although each candidate may have differed on a couple of views, most of us watching came away convinced that the nation and its freedoms would likely be safe in the hands of seven of the nine on the stage.
Every canddidate seemed empathetic with the problems of common people. With the exception of the issue of illegal immigration, most appeared attuned to the American political mainstream. Off-stage Edwards has lost ground due to the incongruity of his message with his $400 haircut and his $6 million mansion.
The line-up on the republican dais proved a frightening one. As was the case with democrats earlier, some of us thought we knew several of these candidates well enough to be generally positive toward them as persons, if not on certain issues. But the staccato of harsh comments from every candidate on the issues was frightening.
Only occasionally was that machine-gun rattle and rife punctuated with anything resembling an expression of humane concern. Ironically those rare expressions tended to come from the least expected, usually hard-nosed, rear echelon candidates such as Kansas' Brownback or Arkansas' Huckaby.
In a bright moment, only three of the republican candidates rejected the scientifically accepted theory of evolution. But half supported the intrusion of the Congress into the Schiavo case, decided properly by a Florida court.
Even those front runners with a favorable record on women's freedom in childbirth weaseled on the issue. Several actually came out against stem cell research efforts to solve some of our worst medical problems.
All candidates supported continuing Mr. Bush's war, although several were quick to criticize the past conduct of the war. Again, it was only Senator Brownback who offered a real solution, that being the one long advocated by the democrat candidate Senator Biden (and the Militant Moderate), i.e. dividing the country into three thnic entities with a central coordinating government in Baghdad.
Most candidates earned credits for a conservative stance on illegal immigration, but again most appeared unduly harsh in their rhetoric.
Their uniformly bitter personal attacks on Senator Clinton, accompanied by communal good-old-boy chuckles, made them all appear sexist.
The entire panel of republicans appeared to strive for the lowest common denominator of character within their party -- social callousness, religious superstition, rugged individualism, and a government-dominated personal life, void of rights, in the midst of a rapacious business environment.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
NOBODY ADVOCATES ABORTION
Every once in a while, when hearing or reading about an abortion controversy, the question occurs to the Militant Moderate: "Who advocates abortion? Who favors abortion?" The answer always comes up, "Nobody." Of course, that excludes a few warped eugenicists with a 1930's mentality that favors improving the heredity of the human race through eliminating the less fit.
Then there may be those who just don't want to pay taxes for the care of the handicapped and the mentally retarded, and who resent the huge medical bills for infants born with severe life-threatening defects. But the irony is that those who are politically opposed to taxes to pay for the care of problem children are the same ones who want to force mothers to birth those infants. Or, at least they belong to the same political party.
On the other hand, some of us do favor keeping the government out of the private business of a woman and her family. And, indeed, some of us believe in leaving decisions involving the health of the mother to a dialogue between the woman and her doctor. We believe in leaving medical practice and procedures to the doctor, and not the government.
Most proposed abortion laws seek to put the government into personal and medical situations where it does not belong. Recent court decisions are doing the same thing with certain medical procedures.
It seems that most of these legal and emotional controversies center on: (1) late term abortions; and (2) the so-called partial birth procedure. In fact, from all the prominent negative publicity and emotionalism about these, one would think that most abortions must indeed be both late term and done with that procedure.
Research indicates that only 1.4% of abortions are performed after twenty weeks of pregnancy. That means more that 98% occur in the first 4.67 months, and thus far short of the third trimester. Thus abortions in that third trimester, to which there is so much objection, is relatively rare.
Of this small number of later term abortions, nearly all are performed out of medical necessity and not from preference. Relatively few across the nation, about 2,000 only, require the partial birth procedure. Again, those are primarily to protect the life or health of the mother, including pro-life women in danger. Few doctors will even consider a late term abortion otherwise.
The heads of hydrocephalic fetuses, involved in most partial birth procedures, pose extremed medical risk to mothers. Delivery threatens the mother's life and health. Natural or Caesarian methods also threaten the mother's ability to have another child, according to doctors.
The partial-birth procedure is sometimes said to be "pro-life" because it preserves the ability of the mother to have other children.
Both pro-life and pro-freedom mothers may choose medically necessary procedures for the sake of their health and the preservation of their child bearing ability. Most of these rare late term abortions are non-political. Instead, these are medical decisions, and they should remain free of government interference.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
