Today is my birthday. Ordinarily, my birthday happens only once a year, so it has always been my intention to be as charitable as possible on this sanctified occasion.
It is very difficult to be charitable this year as we were told last Sunday, August 1st, that the terrorists planned to annihilate those of us in New York City, Washington, D.C. and Northern New Jersey. Homeland Secretary Tom Ridge made this breathless announcement on Sunday afternoon.
He needn’t have been so breathless as the events he was attempting to describe happened in 2000 and in 2001 – a mere three or four years ago. Old Tom never mentioned this fact which is charitably described to an oversight. Some oversight.
Whenever the Democrats have a favorable development to report such as the naming of John Edwards to the ticket or Kerry’s widely acclaimed Thursday night speech at the Democratic convention, Ridge or his hymn singing brother, John Ashcroft, always appears with a terror alert. It never fails. So you see my charitable impulses are being sorely tested with a large dose of cynicism.
Tom Terrific should have gotten off stage several minutes earlier because of his preposterous conclusion. This is hard to comprehend, but Ridge concluded his presentation with these nonsensical words: “We must understand that the kind of information available to us today is the result of the president’s leadership in the war against terror.” In short, he ended his screeching presentation with a commercial.
John Moreley wrote in the New York Times, “I realized that I was listening to a paid political announcement and turned the radio off. The credibility of the announcement had been reduced to zero.”
And so my intent to be charitable on this momentous occasion is being flayed by the whips and chains of absolute cynicism.
Nonetheless, it seems important to charitably consider two elephants in the room – American dead in Iraq and stem cell research – with perhaps a thought or two about military cemeteries which used to be called graveyards. And we may conclude with a piece of hilarious comment by the comedian, George Bush.
The Dead in Iraq
As of this morning, American dead in Iraq has reached the 921 mark. Another 126 soldiers from their so-called coalition have also lost their lives. On the Iraqi side, there have been as many as 20,000 lives lost. It is hard to imagine all these dead soldiers and civilians. What is even more preposterous, is that Bush and Kerry and Nader take no note of these deaths. Bush has time to campaign and to fall off his bicycle, but he has yet to attend a funeral for one American soldier killed in Iraq.
Bush started this tragically unfortunate war in Iraq with no exit strategy. He assumed we would be welcomed as heroes. There are 921 dead soldiers who could offer a thoroughgoing rebuttal.
So under the circumstances, it is understandable why Bush would refrain from mourning for the dead – American and others. Bush has reasons to overlook or ignore the elephant in the room. What is baffling is why Kerry and Edwards have said nothing about the pachyderm in the parlor. This is a ready made issue for the Democrats, but the Kerry campaign pretends that the Bush people are civilized. Stealing votes in Florida or contending that John McCain had a black child is par for the course for the Bush people when they campaign. Now they are suggesting that John Kerry is a coward.
John Edwards is a fine trial attorney who could make mincemeat out of the presidential stewardship which has cost us 921 deaths so far. But Edwards has been silent about the elephant he does not see.
Ralph Nader has made a pass to two at the casualties, but then his attention is drawn to why he is in the race in the first place. So Nader leaves the elephant undisturbed.
So the American Electorate is left with a conundrum. Why is the elephant in the living room unobserved and not commented upon. If 921 people died suddenly in someplace like Topeka, Kansas, there would be widespread comment. But when 921 of our best young men and women and 20,000 Iraqis are lost in what appears to be a never ending war, the politicians are silent.
So the conundrum continues. Any solution that this old soldier might offer would be unwelcome and rejected. The Army made it clear to me many years ago, that soldiers don’t get paid for thinking. Now, 62 years later, it appears to me that soldiers get paid to die. Slow learners like me seldom get to march in a parade with the rest of the troops.
Stem Cell Research
Ron Reagan, the son of the former President, made a non-political speech at the Democratic Convention in which he praised medical advances in stem cell research. His father died of Alzheimer’s disease which is one of the diseases stem cell research would work on. The Roman Pope is heavily afflicted with the evidence of Parkinson’s disease. Parkinson’s would be among the first diseases tackled by the researchers of stem cell work.
Reagan’s speech was well received by the convention. Estimates are that stem cell research is backed by an overwhelming majority of the American public. But the fact remains that while stem cell research is heavily favored by the American public, George Bush continues to make opposition to it a plank in his platform. Another conundrum as Kerry, a Catholic, is in favor of the research work. The answer here is out and out pandering by Bush. This is pandering of the first and worst sort.
Martin Luther (1483-1546) led a reformation movement out of the Catholic Church. From the year 1529, Luther established the Reform movement which we now know as the Protestant Church. Bush reads no history, but if he did, he would know the United Methodist Church is a member of the Protestant faith. Bush claims membership in that branch of the Protestant faith which he adopted after 40 years of dissolute behavior. His church affiliation was to prevent him from losing his wife and his twin daughters. The Methodists have never announced any opposition to stem cell research.
Now we come to the pandering part of his desperate attempt to secure a second term. The Vatican claims that stem cell research is contrary to their beliefs. This is well and good for Catholics. By Executive Order, Bush has decreed that stem cell research funded by the U.S. Government be severely limited in this country – which is why Ron Reagan and his mother have taken the position in favor of research work going forward.
In so doing, Bush has proclaimed that Catholic theology will now apply to all the rest of Americans who owe no faith to Rome. Not long ago, Catholics were forbidden to eat meat on Fridays. If Bush had the power back in the 1930’s, he may have decreed that all the meat eating non-Catholics would have to struggle through on Jack salmon or tuna fish on Fridays.
The point here is pandering to potential voters. If Bush were sincere about stem cell research, he would at the least, have to accept the primacy of the Roman Pope in all religious matters. Absent his acceptance of the Pope’s authority, Bush is cherry picking which equates to nothing other than pandering.
As an aside, Bush, in his rush to embrace Catholic theology, overlooks the fact that the Pope has condemned his war in Iraq. Furthermore, Bush has expressed no belief in Purgatory nor have we seen him asking his daughters to refrain, at all times, from birth control. Nothing is said by Bush about the death penalty, which the Pope opposes.
Bush panders to the Catholics and to the Jews and to the rest of the Christian faiths mainly because his intellectual ability is so limited that it is impossible for him to make a case on the merits of the issue. And so the conundrum continues.
Now let us move on to the disaster that awaits any country that moves to break the Church-State division. My example is the 18th Amendment, which shut down alcohol beverage sales in this country for a time between the end of the First World War and March, 1933.
Soon after the First World War was settled, this country invoked the Volstead Act which led to the 18th Amendment of the United States Constitution. Under this amendment, there was a legal prohibition of the manufacture, transportation or the sale of alcoholic beverages. The era of Prohibition lasted until Franklin Roosevelt was inaugurated in March, 1933.
The idea of Prohibition came largely from Southern politicians who wanted to be seen as destroyers of “Demon rum,” in accordance with Protestant beliefs. It was nothing other than the intrusion of religion into the political process. A good number of the Southern politicians were known to be heavy drinkers, but they wanted to win an election, so they imposed Prohibition on all of us.
Disaster followed. Bootlegging was rampant. Gangs grew up captained by such men as Al Capone who wanted to maintain his dominance in the liquor trade. One of my religious aunts made “home brew” during Prohibition, which turned me off beer for life.
What is being said here is that Bush will do anything to pander to religious groups. When religion moves into politics, disaster follows. Perhaps we ought to be encouraged by the defeat of the amendment to bar same sex marriages. That annulment was simply another way for Bush to wallow around in religious affairs.
In any case, however, when it comes to stem cell research, politicians are staying away in droves and voicing no opinions, regardless of its benefits. It may even cure baldness in men.
Military Cemeteries
As long as we are dealing in conundrums, and as long as we are toying with the unmentionable subject of religion, it would seem appropriate for a brief discussion of military cemeteries. They have always intrigued me because they show that in the vast preponderance of cases, the buried soldiers lie under a cross, thus marking a Christian grave.
It is my contention without full fledged research, that crosses mark about 95% to 98% of the graves in military cemeteries. Here and there one finds a Star of David marking a grave. Marking a grave with the symbol of the Hindu, or Buddhist or Moslem faiths has never come to my attention. Did none of such soldiers ever die in military service?
When one looks at a military cemetery, there is a sea of white crosses presumably marking the graves of observant Christians. But the facts on the ground don’t seem to bear that out. One might think that given the dangers posed by being a soldier or a marine or a sailor, that church services would be a focal point of military service. The facts would suggest otherwise.
In wartime situations, work continues seven days a week. For example, the first raid on Ploesti, Romania was a Sunday morning operation. We lost more than half of our crews and planes in that mission. To the best of my ability to reconstruct events, no religious service took place on Saturday, July 31st in 1943, or on Sunday, August 1st, 1943. Yet it must be supposed that when the Army Graves Registration Unit recovered whatever bodies were left, they were probably all buried under a wooden or cement cross. Whether they were ardent Christians is unknown to me. Perhaps there were aspiring preachers, but also it must be considered that some had no faith at all or that some were Atheists. But their graves are marked by crosses.
In the Vietnamese War, when Lt. Calley had his troops burn down villages huts in My Lai and killed old women and children, presumably when those soldiers died, they were buried under a cross even though they had committed a heinous crime. Throughout my career as a WWII soldier, there was never any instruction on my part but to claim total non-belief. Yet the “P” (Protestant) on my dog tags would have guaranteed me a grave under a cross.
Finally, we now have the report of the so-called “9-11” Commission chaired by Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton. That report warns against “group thinking.” To pretend that our intelligence is the best, to pretend that we cannot be attacked, to pretend that we can impose our will on other nations are examples of GROUP THINK. Similarly, to pretend that 95% to 98% of the soldiers in the American Army are supporters of the Christian faith is only another example of group think. Some are back sliders, some never attended church services, some are atheists, and some are non-believers. To bury them all under a cross is another example of military group thinking.
If the military service wants to use crosses to mark graves, that is fine with me, providing the dead military person has asked for a Christian burial. My point is amazingly simple. Not everyone who rests below those crosses necessarily supported the Christian religion. So this is another conundrum.
War is a secular experience. One of my Christian friends has told me of an effort to change the lyrics to “Onward Christian Soldiers” to “Onward Christian Pilgrims.” To try to kill an enemy is not a religious exercise; it is a genuinely secular undertaking.
Far be it from me to pose a problem without a solution. My solution to any conundrum about burying a military person is a secular one. In place of a cross or a Star of David, why not mark the grave with an engraved marker which says, “Here lies an American soldier or marine or a sailor or a coast guardsman.” Date of birth and date of death would also be engraved. My proposal would not include rank. Perhaps his hometown might also be included. His or her name would appear in all caps at the beginning of the marker.
This takes religion out of the death which occurred in a secular action, not in a religious assault. My marker suggestion may not be adopted anytime soon, but there it is as a solution to secular conflicts that result in military deaths.
Assuredly, it is my birthday, but that doesn’t mean that anyone will pay attention to my thoughts. Well, maybe next year – if there is a next year. This old soldier has given you three conundrums in this one little essay. This old writer has done his best. Solving the conundrums is now up to the reader.
A Final Conundrum
This ancient essayist has very limited love for George W. Bush. In truth, the gauge on my affection for Bush reads perpetually below zero. On the other hand, Bush often gives us head shaking conundrums when he speaks.
You may recall his determined mispronunciation of NUCLEAR. You may also recall that he said his political opponents frequently MISUNDERSTIMATED him.
Shortly after signing the $417 billion defense spending bill early in August, Bush added these deathless remarks about our supposed enemies: “They will never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and NEITHER DO WE.” A few weeks earlier, Bush said, “more and more of our imports come from overseas.” No kidding?
Yale and Harvard must be very proud of Bush.
This was all in the same week where the dullard Tom Ridge failed to mention that his breathless warning stemmed from events three or four years old.
When this country needs a laugh or two, Bush or his helpers will be there to supply it. That is, when he is not busy finding new ways to harm us. Perhaps we ought to be thankful
E. E. CARR
August 4, 2004
P.S. As of publication date, 8/19/04, the number of US casualties has risen from 921 to 953. Other coalition deaths now total 130. Additionally, a partial listing of contractors killed or missing in Iraq totals 126, including many Americans. (On October 4, 2004, the number is 1063).
~~~
When caught between an idiot president who can’t put a sentence together, and a malicious president who can put together sentences like “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything [when you’re a star],” I’m suddenly feeling unexepctedly nostalgic for the Bush era.
It’s also nice to know now where Pop got his distaste for beer from — I’ve had a botched homebrew before, and can confirm that it would not make for a strong first impression. And sometimes when I’m out at a bar, I’ll definitely still have moments like this: https://xkcd.com/1534/.
I have always wondered now, in our increasingly secular society, what a military gravestone for a Buddhist looks like. If anyone has an example, please send that my way!