Letters to the Editor March 15, 2009Written by Administrator | | email@example.com
A note of congratulations to metropolitan Toledo and the State of Ohio as recipients of Site Selection Magazine’s 2008 Governor’s Cup, which recognizes our state as tops in the nation for new and expanded capital projects.
Columbia Gas of Ohio is excited to see communities of all sizes within our service territory among those nationally recognized. From major metropolitans, including Toledo and Columbus, to micropolitans such as Findlay and Tiffin and cities literally ‘A’ to ‘Z’ (Ashland to Zanesville), Columbia Gas is proud to serve these communities. We hope our presence has helped play a role in winning this award. And we continue to help lay the foundation for the economic development of Ohio, despite current financial conditions, through significant capital reinvestment in the communities we serve.
Columbia’s 25-year, $2 billion upgrade of our natural gas delivery infrastructure will help create the environment to attract and maintain businesses while developing a state-of-the-art system for all our customers, business and residential. The Governor’s Cup is outstanding recognition of the tireless work by many to rejuvenate our state and our community, and Columbia Gas of Ohio looks forward to working with all our partners to help fulfill the promise and potential this award recognizes.
Chris Kozak, Columbia Gas of Ohio and Member, Regional Growth Partnership Board of Directors
Problems with Pilliod
David Pilliod’s March 8 political opinion, “The inevitability of government,” is terribly flawed, but indicative of the opinion of many individuals who are in some level of political office. Two themes were presented in the article. One, Christianity and Capitalism are antithetical. His theory is that capitalism is self serving and Christianity is serving others. Two, the solution is an ever burgeoning government. Here are the problems:
- Government does not produce anything. The only funds that government can redistribute are acquired through taxes and fees.
- A fact one rarely sees published is the annual cost of government totaled across local, state, and federal.
- Capitalism is not necessarily self serving but, a monetary system in which one can work as hard as one wants to earn as much as one can and determine how best to use one’s gains.
- Christianity is neither a monetary system nor a form of government. Christianity is a path for one to develop a personal relationship with God.
- This personal relationship with God leads one to live a communal life of giving to others.
- What is given is an individual choice and varies from person to person based upon one’s natural abilities.
An orthodox Christian capitalist will tithe, at minimum, ten percent of annual gain (money, product, volunteer, etc.) into the community in which the individual resides. And, this could be the local area, state area, national area, or global community. This method is of free will and not forced by costly large government.
Imagine what our nation would be like if everyone of working age tithed ten percent of their income or volunteered ten percent of their time. Our state and federal governments would be able to shrink dramatically in size and provide just those services our founding fathers established in our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. Most of which are detailed in the Federalist papers, personal writings, and other documents authored during the founding and early development of our nation.
Mr. Pilliod’s stated opinion leads me to believe he has not read our historical founding documents. And, if by chance Christian, has not studied in depth what being a Christian is all about. Going to church for an hour each Sunday is just the start.
Christianity is not the sole exclusive path to recognition of one’s responsibility to the community. A comparative religion class would well serve Mr. Pilliod too. What I am most afraid of is that government has become the religion of Mr. Pilliod and too many other individual’s within our nation.
I enjoy reading your paper as it is more inclusive of varied opinion and views than most other papers available locally and nationally. Thank you for your effort to clearly delineate fact and opinion.
More problems with Pilliod
This essay is in response to an article from the March 8 Toledo Free Press, by guest columnist David Pilliod, who is a council member for the village of Swanton, Ohio.
Mr. Pilliod asks why would a country that has historically celebrated initiative, individual achievement and free markets become so dependent on large government.
Although Mr. Pilliod employs G.W.F. Hegel’s dialectic of thesis, antithesis and synthesis, unlike Hegel who made a distinction between the civil government (thesis) and the family, (antithesis), Mr. Pilliod argues that in our society, it is capitalism (thesis) and Christianity (antithesis) which are the two opposing forces at work.
Later, I will argue that these forces are opposed to each other only in the sense that one is not the other, but not in the sense that Christianity opposes capitalism on moral grounds or on the basis, that [Christianity] preaches that, we have an obligation help the poor and underprivileged.
Mr. Pilliod’s conclusion is that, “the combination of these two inherently different models of society has resulted in the synthesis of the two. The impersonal welfare state (the synthesis) is the byproduct of the collision between the two major ideas our society has historically embraced. It is an accommodation that most Americans have come to accept.
While I agree that this synthesis has occurred resulting in the impersonal welfare state, this writer will attempt to show how Mr. Pilliod’s argument contains unwarranted assumptions.
In conclusion, the argument that Christianity is the antithesis of capitalism does not hold up unless one assumes that the synthesis, which has resulted, may still be regarded as Christianity. In its core essentials of the faith, Christ’s true Church has held from the day in which it began on the day of Pentecost throughout history, has remained unchanged. It cannot change, accommodate, or synthesize. When that happens, it then becomes something else.
In examining the proper functions of the institutions of our society, in light of the founding fathers’ intention for the United States, and also looking at what the proper role is for the Church, in light of the Protestant Reformers’ theory of the two kingdoms, (which ultimately are derived from the teachings of Scripture) that this accommodation results in; is not some benign, paternalistic, welfare state. Instead, the synthesis must be regarded as for what the respective errors have become; a departure from the Constitution regarding the proper role for government and apostasy concerning the proper role of the Church.
As a solution, I propose that the government get back to its proper function as delineated by the U.S. Constitution and the intent of the founding fathers and the Church getting back to proclaiming the Gospel and making disciples