January 8

Table of Contents

January 8, 2003

U.S. Supreme Court and Free Speech

The U.S. Supreme Court voted 8 to 1 in favor of the right to free speech without the need for local government license. What arguments influenced their decision?

3 The Issue​—How It All Began

4 The Supreme Court Accepts the Case

6 The First Hurdle​—Oral Argument Before the Supreme Court

9 Supreme Court Rules for Freedom of Speech

12 Making Your Pregnancy Safer

21 Mobile Phone “Addiction”

22 Autos, Past and Present

28 Watching the World

30 From Our Readers

31 ‘We Obey God Rather Than Men’

32 The Bible​—God’s Word or Man’s?

A Close Encounter With Marmots 15

One couple got some rare glimpses of these elusive creatures. What did they see?

Freed From the Chains of Hate 18

Learn how the Bible halted one man’s murderous quest for revenge.

[Picture Credit Lines on page 2]

COVER and above: Photo by Josh Mathes, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States

Gerken/Naturfoto-Online.de

The Issue​—How It All Began

STRATTON, OHIO, U.S.A., is a small community located near the Ohio River, which separates Ohio from West Virginia. It is defined as a village and has a mayor. This small community of fewer than 300 inhabitants suddenly became a center of controversy in 1999 when the authorities there tried to obligate Jehovah’s Witnesses, among others, to obtain a permit before visiting the homes of the local people with their Bible-based message.

Why is this an important issue? As our account develops, you will see that this type of governmental ordinance and control would effectively limit the free-speech rights of not just Jehovah’s Witnesses but all who live in the United States.

How the Conflict Developed

The residents of Stratton had been visited for years by ministers of the local Wellsville Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, who had had problems with a few local officials regarding such house-to-house ministry ever since 1979. In the early 1990’s, a local police officer chased a group of Witnesses out of town, stating: “I couldn’t care less about your rights.”

The matter came to a head in 1998 when the mayor of Stratton personally confronted four of Jehovah’s Witnesses. They were driving out of the village after having returned there to speak with residents who had shown interest in having Bible-based discussions. According to one of the women who was confronted, the mayor stated that if they were men, he would put them in jail.

The source of the latest conflict was a village ordinance “Regulating Uninvited Peddling and Solicitation Upon Private Property,” which required anyone wishing to engage in door-to-door activity to obtain a permit, at no cost, from the mayor. Jehovah’s Witnesses viewed this ordinance as an infringement of freedom of speech, free exercise of religion, and freedom of press. Therefore, they brought a lawsuit in federal court after the village refused to modify their enforcement of this ordinance.

On July 27, 1999, a hearing was held before a U.S. district court judge for the Southern District of Ohio. He upheld the constitutionality of the village’s permit ordinance. Thereafter, on February 20, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit likewise affirmed the constitutionality of the ordinance.

For the issue to be settled, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York along with the local Wellsville Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses requested that the U.S. Supreme Court review the case.

[Map/Picture on page 3]

(For fully formatted text, see publication)

Los Angeles

New York

OHIO

Stratton

The Supreme Court Accepts the Case

IN RECENT YEARS, the Supreme Court has annually accepted for formal written opinions some 80 to 90 cases out of more than 7,000 requests​—a little over 1 percent!

In May 2001, Jehovah’s Witnesses filed their Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (permission to review the case) to the Supreme Court, asking: “Are religious ministers engaged in a Scripturally based centuries-old practice of communicating their religious beliefs from door to door constitutionally equivalent to peddlers of merchandise, subject to the prior restraint of obtaining municipal permission to speak about the Bible or offer Bible-based literature at no cost?”

On October 15, 2001, Watchtower’s Legal Department was notified that the U.S. Supreme Court had accepted Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., et al. v. Village of Stratton et al. for review!

The Court limited its acceptance of the case to a specific freedom of speech issue, that is, whether the First Amendment’s protection of free speech includes the right of people to speak to others about a cause without first having to identify themselves to some governmental authority.

Now the case would have to be argued orally in front of the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Witnesses would have their lawyers; and the Village of Stratton, its opposing team. How would matters turn out in that forum?

[Box on page 5]

WHAT IS THE FIRST AMENDMENT?

“AMENDMENT I (THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION; FREEDOM OF RELIGION, SPEECH, PRESS, ASSEMBLY, PETITION) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”​—The U.S. Constitution.

“The First Amendment is the basis of the democratic process in the United States. The First Amendment forbids Congress to pass laws restricting freedom of speech, of the press, of peaceful assembly, or of petition. Many people consider freedom of speech the most important freedom and the foundation of all other freedoms. The First Amendment also forbids Congress to pass laws establishing a state religion or restricting religious freedom.” (The World Book Encyclopedia) Interestingly, in Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940), a landmark decision also involving Jehovah’s Witnesses, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment’s guarantees preclude not just “Congress” (the federal government) but also local authorities (state and municipal) from passing laws that would unconstitutionally infringe on First Amendment rights.

[Pictures on page 5]

The issue involved affects various forms of door-to-door approaches

[Picture Credit Line on page 4]

Photograph by Franz Jantzen, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States

The First Hurdle​—Oral Argument Before the Supreme Court

THE DATE SET for the oral argument before Chief Justice William Rehnquist and eight associate justices of the Supreme Court was February 26, 2002. The interests of Jehovah’s Witnesses were represented by a team of four attorneys.

The lead attorney for the Witnesses opened his argument with an attention-grabbing introduction: “It’s 11:00 Saturday morning in the Village of Stratton. [He then knocked three times on the lectern.] ‘Good morning. In light of recent events, I’ve made a special effort to come to your door to speak to you about what the Prophet Isaiah has referred to as something better. That’s the good news Christ Jesus spoke about, the good news of the Kingdom of God.’”

He continued: “It is a criminal act to go from door to door in the Village of Stratton and deliver that message unless one has first obtained a permit from the village to do so.”

‘You Don’t Ask for Money?’

Justice Stephen G. Breyer raised some pointed questions for the Witnesses. He asked: “Is it the case that your clients don’t ask for any money, not a penny, and [that] they don’t sell Bibles, and they’re not selling anything, all that they do is say, ‘I want to talk to you about religion’?”

The attorney for the Witnesses answered: “Your Honor, the record is absolutely clear, in the Village of Stratton, Jehovah’s Witnesses did not ask for money. In other jurisdictions the record is equally clear that sometimes they will mention a voluntary donation. . . . We are not seeking a solicitation of funds. We’re merely seeking to talk to people about the Bible.”

Government Permission Needed?

Justice Antonin Scalia perceptively asked: “Isn’t your position that you don’t have to go to the mayor and ask for permission to talk to a neighbor about something that’s interesting?” The Witnesses’ attorney replied: “We don’t believe that this Court should sanction a regulation of a Government that requires one citizen to get a license to speak to another citizen at that citizen’s home.”

Change of Arguments, Change of Mood

It was now time for the Village to present its case. Lead counsel explained Stratton’s ordinance, saying: “Stratton is exercising its police power when it seeks to protect the privacy of its residents, when it seeks to deter crime. The no canvassing or soliciting on private property ordinance simply requires preregistration and the carrying of a permit during the course of the door-to-door activity.”

Justice Scalia went immediately to the heart of the matter when he asked: “Do you know any other case of ours [the Supreme Court] that has even involved an ordinance of this breadth, that involves solicitation, not asking for money, not selling goods, but even, you know, ‘I want to talk about Jesus Christ,’ or ‘I want to talk about protecting the environment?’ Have we had a case like that?”

Justice Scalia continued: “I don’t even know of such cases, over two centuries.” To which Chief Justice Rehnquist quipped: “You haven’t been around that long.” That provoked laughter in the courtroom. Justice Scalia pressed his argument: “The breadth of this thing is novel to me.”

A Beautiful Idea?

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy asked a pointed question: “You think it’s a beautiful idea that I have to ask the Government for permission before I go down the block, where I don’t know all of the people, [and] I say, I want to talk to you because I’m concerned about the garbage pick-up, because I’m concerned about our Congressman, whatever. I have to ask the Government before I can do that?” He added, “It’s astounding.”

Then Justice Sandra Day O’Connor joined the argument, asking: “Well, how about trick-or-treaters? Do they have to get a permit?” Justices O’Connor and Scalia both pursued this line of reasoning. Justice O’Connor introduced another argument: “How about borrowing a cup of sugar from your neighbor? Do I have to get a permit to go borrow a cup of sugar from my neighbor?”

Are the Witnesses Canvassers?

Justice David H. Souter asked: “Why are Jehovah’s Witnesses covered? Are they canvassers, solicitors, peddlers, hawkers, itinerant merchants or transient vendors of merchandise or services? They’re none of those, are they?” The Village’s counsel quoted the ordinance at length and added that the lower court had defined Jehovah’s Witnesses as canvassers. To this, Justice Souter rejoined: “So you have a very broad definition of canvassers, if it includes Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

Justice Breyer then quoted the dictionary definition of a canvasser to show that it did not apply to the Witnesses. He added: “I haven’t read anything in your brief that says what the purpose is for requiring these people [Jehovah’s Witnesses] who are not interested in money, not interested in selling, not even interested in votes, to go to the city hall and register. What’s the city’s purpose?”

The “Privilege” of Communication

The Village then argued that “the city’s purpose is to prevent annoyance of the property owner.” He clarified further that it was to protect the residents from fraud and criminals. Justice Scalia quoted the ordinance to show that the mayor can demand further information concerning the registrant and his purpose in order “to accurately describe the nature of the privilege desired.” He added pointedly: “The privilege of going about to persuade your fellow citizens about one thing or another​—I just can’t understand that.”

Justice Scalia again pressed: “So should you require everybody who rings a doorbell to get fingerprinted at city hall before [he] can ring a doorbell? That minor risk of a crime occurring is enough to require everybody who wants to ring a doorbell to register at city hall? Of course it isn’t.”

Residents Protected?

With his 20 minutes expired, counsel for the Village handed over the argument to the solicitor general for the state of Ohio. He argued that the no-solicitation ordinance protected the residents from visits by a stranger, “certainly an uninvited person, [who] is here on my property . . . and I think the village is entitled to say, ‘We’re concerned about that kind of activity.’”

Justice Scalia then observed: “The village is saying even those people who welcome Jehovah’s Witnesses, they’re sitting there lonely, they would love to talk to somebody about anything, and these people [Jehovah’s Witnesses] still have to go register with the mayor to get the privilege of ringing their doorbell.”

“A Very Modest Restriction”

During the questioning Justice Scalia made a powerful point when he said: “We can all stipulate that the safest societies in the world are totalitarian dictatorships. There’s very little crime. It’s a common phenomenon, and one of the costs of liberty is to some extent a higher risk of unlawful activity, and the question is whether what this is directed at stops enough unlawful activity to be worth the cost of requiring the privilege of ringing somebody’s doorbell.” Then the solicitor general responded that “it’s a very modest restriction.” Justice Scalia countered that it was so modest that “we can’t find a single case reporting a single municipality that has ever enacted an ordinance of that type. I don’t think that’s modest.”

Finally, under pressure from one of the justices, the solicitor general had to admit: “I’d be hesitant to say you can have an outright ban on ringing doorbells or knocking.” On that note, his argument ended.

During rebuttal, the Witnesses’ attorney pointed out that the ordinance had no verification mechanism. “I can go to the village hall and say, ‘I’m [So-and-so],’ and get a permit and go from door to door.” He also pointed out that the mayor has the power to refuse to issue a permit to a person who says that he is unaffiliated with an organization. “We believe that this is manifestly exercise of discretion,” he said and added: “I respectfully suggest that our [Jehovah’s Witnesses’] activity indeed lies at the heart of the First Amendment.”

Shortly after this, Chief Justice Rehnquist closed the oral arguments, saying: “The case is submitted [to the Supreme Court].” The whole process had taken just over an hour. How important that hour was would be shown in the written judgment that was announced in June.

[Pictures on page 6]

Chief Justice Rehnquist

Justice Breyer

Justice Scalia

[Credit Lines]

Rehnquist: Collection, The Supreme Court Historical Society/Dane Penland; Breyer: Collection, The Supreme Court Historical Society/Richard Strauss; Scalia: Collection, The Supreme Court Historical Society/Joseph Lavenburg

[Pictures on page 7]

Justice Souter

Justice Kennedy

Justice O’Connor

[Credit Lines]

Kennedy: Collection, The Supreme Court Historical Society/Robin Reid; O’Connor: Collection, The Supreme Court Historical Society/Richard Strauss; Souter: Collection, The Supreme Court Historical Society/Joseph Bailey

[Picture on page 8]

Courtroom interior

[Credit Line]

Photograph by Franz Jantzen, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court Rules for Freedom of Speech

THE DECISIVE DAY came on June 17, 2002, when the Supreme Court published its written opinions. What was the decision? Newspaper headlines told the story. The New York Times proclaimed: “Court Strikes Down Curb on Visits by Jehovah’s Witnesses.” The Columbus Dispatch of Ohio stated: “High Court Invalidates Permit Requirement.” The Plain Dealer of Cleveland, Ohio, simply said: “Solicitors Don’t Need OK From City Hall.” The Op/Ed page of USA Today proclaimed: “Free Speech Wins.”

The lower-court decisions against Jehovah’s Witnesses were reversed by a vote of 8 to 1! The official 18-page Opinion of the Court was written by Justice John Paul Stevens. The decision was a sweeping reaffirmation of the First Amendment protection accorded the public ministry of Jehovah’s Witnesses. In its review the Court explained that the Witnesses did not apply for a permit because they claim that “they derive their authority to preach from Scripture.” Then the Court quoted the testimony cited in their brief: “For us to seek a permit from a municipality to preach we feel would almost be an insult to God.”

The Opinion of the Court stated: “For over 50 years, the Court has invalidated restrictions on door-to-door canvassing and pamphleteering. It is more than historical accident that most of these cases involved First Amendment challenges brought by Jehovah’s Witnesses, because door-to-door canvassing is mandated by their religion. As we noted in Murdock v. Pennsylvania, . . . (1943), the Jehovah’s Witnesses ‘claim to follow the example of Paul, teaching “publicly, and from house to house.” Acts 20:20. They take literally the mandate of the Scriptures, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” Mark 16:15. In doing so they believe that they are obeying a commandment of God.’”

The Opinion then quoted again from the 1943 case: “This form of religious activity occupies the same high estate under the First Amendment as do worship in the churches and preaching from the pulpits. It has the same claim to protection as the more orthodox and conventional exercises of religion.” Quoting a 1939 case, the Opinion stated: “To require a censorship through license which makes impossible the free and unhampered distribution of pamphlets strikes at the very heart of the constitutional guarantees.”​—Italics theirs.

The Court then made a significant observation: “The cases demonstrate that efforts of the Jehovah’s Witnesses to resist speech regulation have not been a struggle for their rights alone.” The Opinion explained that the Witnesses “are not the only ‘little people’ who face the risk of silencing by regulations like the Village’s.”

The Opinion went on to state that the ordinance “is offensive​—not only to the values protected by the First Amendment, but to the very notion of a free society—​that in the context of everyday public discourse a citizen must first inform the government of her desire to speak to her neighbors and then obtain a permit to do so. . . . A law requiring a permit to engage in such speech constitutes a dramatic departure from our national heritage and constitutional tradition.” The Opinion then spoke of “the pernicious effect of such a permit requirement.”

Threat of Crimes

What about the view that the permit is a safeguard against burglars and other criminals? The Court argued: “Despite recognition of these interests as legitimate, our precedent is clear that there must be a balance between these interests and the effect of the regulations on First Amendment rights.”

The Court’s Opinion continued: “It seems unlikely that the absence of a permit would preclude criminals from knocking on doors and engaging in conversations not covered by the ordinance. They might, for example, ask for directions or permission to use the telephone, . . . or they might register under a false name with impunity.”

Harking back to decisions of the 1940’s, the Court wrote: “The rhetoric used in the World War II-era opinions that repeatedly saved petitioners’ [Watch Tower Society] coreligionists from petty prosecutions reflected the Court’s evaluation of the First Amendment freedoms that are implicated in this case.”

What was the Court’s conclusion? “The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered.”

Thus, the end of the matter was, as stated in the Chicago Sun-Times, “Court Backs Jehovah’s Witnesses,” and that by a majority of 8 to 1.

What of the Future?

How have Jehovah’s Witnesses in the nearby Wellsville Congregation viewed this victory in the Supreme Court? There certainly is no reason to boast about it at the expense of the inhabitants of Stratton. The Witnesses harbor no ill will toward the good people of the village. Gregory Kuhar, a local Witness, said: “This court case was not something that we wanted to do. The ordinance in itself was just wrong. What we did was not just for us, but for everyone.”

The facts show that the Witnesses have gone out of their way not to provoke the local people. Gene Koontz, another Witness, explained: “The last time we preached in Stratton was March 7, 1998​—well over four years ago.” He added: “I was personally told that I would be arrested. We’ve had a lot of reports during the years of police threatening us with arrest. Then when we asked to see the ordinance in print, we never got an answer.”

Koontz added: “We would rather have good relations with our neighbors. If some do not want us to visit them, we respect that decision. But there are others who are friendly and who welcome a conversation about the Bible.”

Gregory Kuhar explained: “We didn’t pursue this case to antagonize the people of Stratton. We simply wanted to establish legally our freedom of speech under the Constitution.”

He continued: “Eventually, we hope to go back to Stratton. I’d be happy to be the first one to knock on a door when we return. In accordance with Christ’s command, return we must.”

The outcome of “Watchtower v. Village of Stratton” has had far-reaching effects. After learning of the Supreme Court decision, a number of U.S. municipal officials recognized that local ordinances could no longer be used to restrict the evangelizing work of Jehovah’s Witnesses. To date, door-to-door preaching difficulties have been resolved in approximately 90 communities in the United States.

[Box on page 9]

“JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES HAVE DONE IT AGAIN”

Charles C. Haynes, senior scholar and director of education programs at the First Amendment Center, wrote the above words on the Freedom Forum Web site, under the title “The Freedom of Faith.” Haynes continued: “Last week [the Witnesses] chalked up their 48th Supreme Court victory​—an extraordinary line of cases that have significantly expanded First Amendment protections for all Americans.” He cautioned: “Remember this: If the government can restrict the freedom of one faith, it has the power to restrict the freedom of any faith​—or all faiths. . . . Of course, people have a right not to listen​—and to close the door. But the government shouldn’t have the authority to decide who gets to knock on the door. So two cheers for the Supreme Court.”

Haynes concludes: “We all owe the Jehovah’s Witnesses a debt of gratitude. No matter how many times they’re insulted, run out of town, or even physically attacked, they keep on fighting for their (and thus our) freedom of religion. And when they win, we all win.”

[Box/Pictures on page 10, 11]

THE SUPREME COURT DECISION​—WHAT THE PRESS SAID

◼ “Court Backs Jehovah’s Witnesses; Door-to-Door Ministry Doesn’t Require a Permit

In a life of knocking on doors as Jehovah’s Witnesses, [the Witnesses] always believed they had God behind them. Now they have the U.S. Supreme Court, as well.”​—Chicago Sun-Times, June 18, 2002.

◼ “Free Speech Wins

The next time some Jehovah’s Witnesses interrupt your dinner, you might consider thanking them. In gritty dedication to their religious principles, this out-of-the-mainstream denomination of scarcely 1 million members [in the United States] has probably done more than any other institution to secure freedom of speech for individual Americans. . . .

“For the Witnesses, going to the high court is a familiar routine. In more than two dozen cases over 65 years, they’ve effectively fought against the tyranny of the majority.”​—USA TODAY, June 18, 2002.

◼ “Door-to-Door Soliciting Ruled Constitutional Right. Decision a Victory for Jehovah’s Witnesses

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that politicians, religious groups, the Girl Scouts and others have a constitutional right to go door-to-door promoting their causes without first getting permission from local officials.”​—San Francisco Chronicle, June 18, 2002.

◼ “Supreme Court: You Can’t Keep Jehovah’s Witnesses, Girl Scouts From Knocking

WASHINGTON​—The Constitution protects the right of missionaries, politicians and others to knock on doors without first getting permission from local authorities, the Supreme Court ruled today. . . .

“By a vote of 8 to 1, the court reasoned that the First Amendment right to free speech includes the entitlement to take a message directly to someone’s door.”​—Star Tribune, Minneapolis, June 18, 2002.

[Picture on page 9]

Justice Stevens

[Credit Line]

Stevens: Collection, The Supreme Court Historical Society/Joseph Bailey

Making Your Pregnancy Safer

BY AWAKE! WRITER IN MEXICO

ACCORDING to the United Nations Population Fund, each year more than half a million women die of pregnancy-related causes. In addition, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) notes that annually more than 60 million women suffer acute complications from pregnancy and that nearly a third of these sustain lifelong injuries or infections. In developing countries many women are trapped in a cycle of pregnancies, deliveries, and self-neglect, leaving them worn out and ill. Yes, pregnancy can be harmful​—even dangerous. Is there anything a woman can do to make her pregnancy safer?

Health Care Before Pregnancy

Planning. Husbands and wives may need to discuss how many children to have. In developing countries it is common to see women with small children nursing a baby and, at the same time, expecting another. Careful planning and consideration might allow time to elapse between the birth of one child and the next, resulting in relief for the woman, who would then be able to recuperate after giving birth.

Nutrition. According to the Coalition for Positive Outcomes in Pregnancy, before becoming pregnant a woman needs at least four months to recover from exposure to harmful substances and to build a good nutritional supply. For example, the risk of spina bifida, caused by a defective closing of the neural tube, is greatly reduced when the expectant mother has an ample supply of folic acid. Since the embryo’s neural tube closes between the 24th and 28th day after conception​—long before many women realize that they are pregnant—​some women who are planning to become pregnant take folic acid.

Another crucial nutrient is iron. Indeed, a woman’s iron requirement doubles during pregnancy. If her reserve is low​—which is true of many women in developing countries—​she can come to have iron-deficiency anemia. This condition can be worsened by repeated pregnancies, as the woman may not have time between them to replenish her iron reserve.a

Age. Risk of death in pregnant girls under 16 is 60 percent greater than in those in their 20’s. On the other hand, women over 35 are more likely to give birth to babies with congenital abnormalities, such as Down’s syndrome. Mothers who are very young or are in their later childbearing years are more prone to preeclampsia. This disorder, characterized by high blood pressure after the 20th week of gestation along with the presence of edema and an increased amount of protein in the urine, increases the risk of mortality in both baby and mother.

Infections. Urinary, cervicovaginal, and gastrointestinal infections can worsen during pregnancy and can increase the risk of premature birth and preeclampsia. Any infection is best treated before pregnancy.

Health Care During Pregnancy

Prenatal care. Regular visits to a doctor throughout pregnancy lower the risk of maternal death. Even in countries where regular access to clinics and hospitals is limited, properly trained midwives may be available.

Prenatal care can alert trained personnel to situations that could make special care necessary. These include multiple gestation, hypertension, heart and kidney problems, and diabetes. In some countries a pregnant woman can receive tetanus toxoid vaccine to prevent neonatal tetanus. She may also be tested for group B streptococcus between the 26th and the 28th week of gestation. These bacteria, if present in the lower intestinal tract, can infect the baby during delivery.

The mother-to-be should be prepared to provide health professionals with all the information she can, including her medical history. She should also freely ask questions. Immediate medical assistance should be sought if there is vaginal bleeding, sudden inflammation of the face, strong or continuous headaches or pain in the fingers, sudden impaired or blurred vision, strong abdominal pain, persistent vomiting, chills or fever, changes in frequency or intensity of fetal movements, loss of liquid through the vagina, pain while urinating, or abnormal lack of urine.

Alcohol and drugs. A mother’s use of alcohol and drugs (including tobacco) increases her child’s risk of mental retardation, physical abnormalities, and even behavioral disorders. Babies of drug-addicted mothers have even been known to show signs of withdrawal. Although some people believe that an occasional glass of wine is not harmful, experts usually recommend total abstinence during pregnancy. Expectant mothers should also beware of second-hand smoke.

Medicines. No medicine should be taken unless specifically prescribed by a doctor who is aware of the pregnancy and who has carefully weighed the risks. Some vitamin supplements can also be harmful. An excess of vitamin A, for instance, can cause fetal deformities.

Weight gain. A pregnant woman should avoid extremes. According to Krause’s Food, Nutrition and Diet Therapy, a low-birth-weight baby’s risk of death is 40 times greater than that of a normal-weight newborn. On the other hand, eating for two only promotes obesity. Proper weight gain​—more evident from the second trimester on—​indicates that the expectant mother is eating the right amount for her increased demands.b

Hygiene and other considerations. Baths and showers can be taken normally, but vaginal douches should not be used. A pregnant woman should avoid contact with anyone who suffers from a viral infection, such as rubella, also called German measles. Furthermore, in order to prevent toxoplasmosis, undercooked meat and contact with the feces of cats must be carefully avoided. Basic hygiene procedures, such as the washing of hands and of raw foods, are essential. Sexual relations do not usually pose a risk, except during the last weeks of pregnancy or in the case of hemorrhage, cramps, or previous miscarriage.

A Successful Delivery

A woman who takes care of herself during pregnancy will be less prone to complications upon delivery. Naturally, she will have planned whether she prefers to deliver at home or in a hospital. She will also know, to a good degree, what to expect and how to cooperate with the skilled midwife or physician. This person, in turn, will know the woman’s informed preferences​—where a choice is possible—​on such issues as delivery position, episiotomy, and the use of forceps, analgesics, and electronic fetal monitoring. There must also be agreement on other issues: To what hospital or clinic will they go if the home delivery becomes complicated? What exactly will be done in case of excess blood loss? Since hemorrhage causes many maternal deaths, blood substitutes must be readily available for patients who do not accept transfusions. Also, forethought should be given as to what will be done if a cesarean section is required.

The Bible says that children are a blessing from God, an “inheritance.” (Psalm 127:3) The more a woman knows about her pregnancy, the better off she will be. By taking care of herself before and during pregnancy and by giving adequate forethought to the various aspects of delivery, a woman will be doing all she can to ensure a safer pregnancy.

[Footnotes]

[Box on page 14]

TIPS FOR PREGNANT WOMEN

● Normally a pregnant woman’s daily diet should include fruits, vegetables (especially dark-green, orange, and red ones), legumes (such as beans, soybeans, lentils, and chick-peas), cereals (including wheat, corn, oats, and barley​—preferably whole grain or fortified), food from animal sources (fish, chicken, beef, eggs, cheese, and milk, preferably skimmed milk). Fats, refined sugars, and salt are best consumed in moderation. Drink plenty of water. Avoid caffeinated beverages, as well as foods containing preservatives and additives (such as artificial colorings and flavorings). Starch, clay, and other nonedible substances can cause malnutrition and toxicity.

● Beware of possible environmental hazards, such as overexposure to X-rays and harmful chemicals. Limit use of sprays and other household substances. Do not become overheated because of exposure to excessive temperatures or overexercise. Avoid prolonged standing and overexertion. Use proper seat belt positioning.

A Close Encounter With Marmots

BY AWAKE! WRITER IN ITALY

WOULD you like to get acquainted with a shy little creature that is both fascinating and amusing? Let me tell you about a close encounter my wife and I had with a group of furry little animals called marmots.

We are in the Dolomites, a mountain range in northern Italy, within view of two majestic mountain peaks​—the Latemar and the Catinaccio. The steep path we have chosen leads to the slopes of the Catinaccio. A variety of flowers grow in the clearings. We stop to admire the elegant Turk’s-cap lily. Also capturing our attention is the black vanilla orchid, a small composite flower with a distinct vanilla fragrance. By mid-morning the sun has warmed the bark of the scattered conifers​—arolla pines, spruce firs, and larches—​causing them to fill the air with an intense balsamic fragrance.

Later we come upon a treeless valley. On our right is a steep, grassy slope. The area to the left is covered by large boulders. Suddenly, there is a quick movement. I turn instinctively, but all is still. When I look more carefully, I notice a marmot perched on a spike of rock. Perhaps a colony has taken up residence in the gaps between the boulders.

The marmot is the largest member of the squirrel family. One of the best-known species of this plump rodent is the woodchuck of North America. The marmots found in our part of the world are Alpine marmots. They are quite gregarious and live in colonies.

We leave the path and try to get a closer look, but the marmot is gone. We wait, hoping that the shy creature will reemerge. Moments later, my wife gestures excitedly. There is one peering at us from behind a boulder! Its gray-brown fur blends in with the rock, making the animal nearly invisible. Looking more carefully, I notice that a younger marmot is also peeping out at us. A little farther away, we see still another marmot​—what we imagine to be the father. Although we cannot be sure, we like to think that we are looking at a marmot family.

The “father” marmot is about 18 inches [45 cm] tall and is sitting upright on his hind legs, as though on guard. Meanwhile, the other two marmots are moving around among the rhododendron bushes. When hunting for food, marmots dig into the earth with their forelegs, which are equipped with strong claws. On finding some root to their liking, they sit upright to gnaw it, lifting it to their mouth with their forelegs. Marmots eat in the early morning and in the evening, taking a siesta in between. Besides vegetation, they eat grasshoppers, beetles, worms, and birds’ eggs, but they do not store food in their burrows.

The family scene is amusing, but when I try to get closer to photograph the marmots, all three of them freeze. When I make another move, the silence of the valley is pierced by two shrill whistles from the “father” marmot. Quick as a flash, “mother” and “junior” dive into two cramped passages and disappear under the boulders. “Father” gazes at me for a moment. Then, after emitting two more whistles, he scurries off to join the rest of the family.

Farther down the valley, I find a boulder that appears to be an ideal observation point. I lie on top of it in wait. Not long after, two more marmots venture into the open. One clambers onto a big boulder and lies prone. The other climbs onto the same boulder from the other side. When they meet, the two marmots seem to exchange kisses.

I continue to watch the marmots, fascinated by their quick little movements, which are punctuated by long pauses. Any slight movement on my part makes them freeze and lift their heads, on the alert. Then they take their siesta, seemingly indifferent to my presence.

I notice that the grassy carpet in front of me is full of holes that are easily identified by light-colored mounds of earth. These are the marmots’ emergency burrows, where they take refuge if they sense danger during their brief feeding excursions. The underground burrows have a central chamber served by several side tunnels. The tunnels can each be from 3 to 20 feet [1 to 6 meters] in length, and the marmots navigate through these mazes with their black whiskers, called vibrissae, which are located around their muzzle.

During the rigors of winter, groups of between 10 and 15 marmots retire into hibernation chambers. Young and old marmots from different summer burrows gather in these chambers, previously filled with hay, and curled up side by side, they begin a long sleep. Their body temperature drops to less than 46 degrees Fahrenheit [8°C], their heart rate drops to between three and five beats per minute, and they breathe only two or three times per minute​—for marmots, this is the very limit of survival. About once a month, they interrupt their sleep to excrete in latrines, specially excavated in a different part of the burrow, which are closed off by airtight plugs. The different chambers of the hibernation burrows are blocked off from each other as well, but the seals are not airtight. This way a minimal circulation of air is maintained in the burrows.

Scientists have long tried to understand how marmots survive winter conditions. It has recently been determined that hibernation is regulated by certain endocrine glands, particularly the thyroid. In fact, when animals are injected with hormonal extracts, they do not go into hibernation. But, interestingly, when animals are exposed to intense cold during the summer, they react by increasing their thyroid activity and their metabolic rate to maintain normal body temperature. Evidently, they instinctively know that the time for hibernation has not yet arrived.

The marmots are so charming that we do not notice the time. It is already afternoon, and we must leave them and return to the bottom of the valley. We reach there at dusk. We have seen many wonders of nature this day, but perhaps the greatest highlight was our close encounter with marmots.

[Picture on page 16]

Marmots greeting each other

[Pictures on page 17]

Alpine flowers

Bearded bellflower

Turk’s-cap lily

Edelweiss

[Picture Credit Line on page 15]

Marmots: Gerken/Naturfoto-Online.de

[Picture Credit Line on page 16]

Marmots: Gerken/Naturfoto-Online.de

Freed From the Chains of Hate

AS TOLD BY JOSÉ GOMEZ

I WAS born September 8, 1964, in Rognac, a small town in the south of France. My parents and grandparents were Andalusian Gypsies, born in Algeria and Morocco, North Africa. As is common in Gypsy culture, ours was a large extended family.

My father was a violent man, and some of my earliest memories include scenes of him hurting my mother. In time, my mother opted for divorce​—something that is rare among Gypsies. She took my brother, my sister, and me to Belgium, where we lived peacefully for the next eight years.

Things changed, however. We children wanted to see our father, so Mother took us to France and was reunited with my father. Living with Father again presented challenges for me. In Belgium we went everywhere with Mother. But on my father’s side of the family, men were to associate with men. Their macho mentality was that men have all the rights and women have all the duties. One day, for example, when I wanted to help my aunt clean up after dinner, my uncle accused me of being a homosexual. In his family, doing the dishes was strictly a woman’s chore. Eventually, this unbalanced thinking rubbed off on me.

It was not long before my mother once again became the victim of my father’s violent disposition. Several times when we tried to intervene, my brother and I had to escape through the window to avoid Father’s blows. My sister was not spared either. As a result, I spent as much time away from home as possible. At 15 years of age, I had no direction in life.

In time, I became known for my violent temper. I enjoyed being a bully. Sometimes I would deliberately provoke other young men, but very few dared to defy me​—especially since I was often armed with a knife or a chain. Soon I began to steal automobiles and sell them. In some cases I would just set them on fire and enjoy watching the firemen put out the flames. Later I took to breaking into shops and warehouses. I was arrested several times. And each time, I prayed to God for help!

Yes, I believed in God. While we were in Belgium, I had attended a religious school. So I knew that what I was doing was bad. Still, my belief in God did not have any effect on my conduct. I thought that all I had to do was ask and my sins would be forgiven.

In 1984, I was sentenced to 11 months in prison for stealing. I was sent to the Baumettes Prison, in Marseilles. There, I tattooed various parts of my body. One tattoo read “hate and vengeance.” Far from being reformed, I allowed prison to deepen my hatred for authority and for society in general. Upon being released, after serving only three months in prison, I was filled with more hate than ever. Then, a tragedy changed the course of my life.

Vengeance Becomes My Goal

My family had a dispute with another Gypsy family. My uncles and I decided to confront them to resolve the matter. Both families were armed. In the argument that ensued, my uncle Pierre and a cousin of my father were shot dead. I was so distraught that I stood in the street, gun in hand, yelling in a fit of rage. One of my uncles finally wrestled my gun away from me.

The loss of Uncle Pierre, whom I viewed as a father, left me stricken with grief. I went into mourning according to Gypsy custom. For many days I did not shave or eat any meat. I refused to watch television or listen to music. I vowed to avenge the death of my uncle, but my relatives prevented me from getting a gun.

In August 1984, I was inducted into military service. At 20 years of age, I enrolled in the United Nations peacekeeping force in Lebanon. To kill or be killed was a risk that I accepted. At the time, I was smoking large quantities of hashish. In addition to giving me a sense of well-being, the drug made me feel that nothing could harm me.

It was easy to obtain arms in Lebanon, so I decided to ship weapons back to France to further my plan to avenge my uncle. I bought two pistols, along with ammunition, from local residents. I disassembled the guns, hid them in two radios, and sent them home.

Just two weeks before the end of my military service, three of my companions and I went absent without leave. On returning to barracks, we were locked up. While in jail, I flew into a rage and attacked a guard. It was inconceivable for me to be belittled by a payo​—a non-Gypsy. The following day I had another violent clash, this time with an officer. I was sent to the Montluc Prison, in Lyons, for the remainder of my military service.

I Find Freedom​—In Prison

On my first day in Montluc Prison, I was warmly greeted by a pleasant young man. I learned that he was one of Jehovah’s Witnesses and that he and others of his faith were in prison simply because they did not take up arms. That puzzled me. I wanted to learn more.

Jehovah’s Witnesses, I found, had a genuine love for God, and their high moral standards impressed me. Still, I had many questions. In particular, I wanted to know if the dead can communicate with the living through dreams​—something that many Gypsies believe. A Witness named Jean-Paul offered to study the Bible with me, using the book You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth.a

I devoured the book in one night, and my heart was touched by what I read. Here, in prison, I had found true freedom! When I was finally released from prison, I took the train home, with my bag full of Bible publications.

To contact the Witnesses in my home area, I went to the Kingdom Hall in Martigues. I continued studying the Bible, now with the help of a young full-time minister named Eric. Within a few days, I stopped smoking, and I stopped seeing my former partners in crime. I was determined to act in harmony with Proverbs 27:11, which says: “Be wise, my son, and make my heart rejoice, that I may make a reply to him that is taunting me.” In Jehovah, I had found a loving Father whom I wanted to please.

The Challenge of Changing

It was not easy for me to put Christian principles into practice. For example, I had a relapse with my drug problem that lasted several weeks. But the hardest challenge for me was to get rid of the desire for vengeance. Unknown to Eric, I always carried a gun and was still actively plotting my revenge against those who killed my uncle. I spent entire nights tracking them down.

When I told Eric about this, he clearly explained to me that I could not establish a good relationship with God while being armed and seeking vengeance. I had to make a choice. I meditated deeply on the apostle Paul’s admonition at Romans 12:19: “Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath.” This, along with fervent prayer, helped me to control my feelings. (Psalm 55:22) Finally, I got rid of my weapons. On December 26, 1986, after studying the Bible for one year, I symbolized my dedication to Jehovah God by water baptism.

My Family Responds

The changes that I had made in my conduct encouraged my parents to study the Bible. They remarried, and my mother was baptized in July 1989. In time, several other members of my family responded to the Bible’s message and became Jehovah’s Witnesses.

In August 1988, I decided to become a full-time minister. Then I fell in love with a young sister in my congregation named Katia. We were married on June 10, 1989. Our first year of marriage was not easy, for I still had some adjustments to make in my attitude toward women. It was difficult for me to apply the words of 1 Peter 3:7, which encourage husbands to assign their wives honor. Repeatedly, I had to pray for the strength to swallow my pride and change my thinking. Things gradually improved.

My uncle’s death still causes me great pain, and at times I cannot hold back the tears when I think about him. I struggle with strong emotions triggered by memories of his murder. For years, even after my baptism, I was afraid of a chance encounter with members of the family with whom we previously had a vendetta. What would I do if they attacked me? How would I react? Would my old personality take over?

One day I gave a public talk in a nearby congregation. There I saw Pepa, a relative of the men who had killed my uncle. I will admit that seeing her tested every fiber of my Christian personality. But I put aside my feelings. Later, on the day of Pepa’s baptism, I embraced her and congratulated her on her decision to serve Jehovah. In spite of all that had happened, I accepted her as my spiritual sister.

Every day, I thank Jehovah for helping me to break free from the chains of hatred. Where would I be today without Jehovah’s mercy? Thanks to him, I enjoy a happy family life. I also have a hope for the future​—that of a new world free of hate and violence. Yes, I have every confidence that God’s promise will be fulfilled: “They will actually sit, each one under his vine and under his fig tree, and there will be no one making them tremble; for the very mouth of Jehovah of armies has spoken it.”​—Micah 4:4.

[Footnote]

[Picture on page 19]

With UN peacekeeping forces in Lebanon, 1985

[Picture on page 20]

With Katia and my sons, Timeo and Pierre

Mobile Phone “Addiction”

BY AWAKE! WRITER IN JAPAN

“ATTACHMENT to Mobile Phones Reaching Point of Addiction,” stated a headline in The Daily Yomiuri of Japan. Addiction? “Young people appear to view their mobile phones as parts of their bodies and may even start to panic if they are separated from their phones,” explained the newspaper. In fear of being cut off from others, many keep their mobile phones on all the time, everywhere. If they “do not receive any messages on their mobile phones, they feel uneasy and irritable, and start to feel they are not needed by anybody.” This uneasiness impels them to answer all incoming text messages immediately, which is often not necessary.

Of course, mobile phones can be advantageous. In fact, they have often proved invaluable in emergency situations. Even casual use of mobile phones is not necessarily wrong, as long as this is done in a balanced way. But some authorities say that mobile phone “addiction” could harm normal communication skills. A middle-school teacher in Osaka worries that because of mobile phones, “children are losing the ability to interpret the facial expressions, behavior and tones of voice of others. A consequence of this is increased aggressiveness among children, coupled with a disregard for others’ feelings,” said the newspaper.

The article concluded: “It seems inevitable that children’s reliance on cell phones will grow in the future. The only way to minimize the negative effects of this trend is to ensure that adults set children a good example in using cell phones.”

Autos, Past and Present

FROM the earliest of times, man has been interested in transportation. At first, he depended on animals for locomotion. But there was a need for more efficient ways of getting around. A key element was the wheel, which led to horse-drawn carts and coaches. However, innovations of the 19th century revolutionized transportation in ways that were previously unimaginable.

Improved Engines

In the second half of the 19th century, a German named Nikolaus August Otto developed a four-stroke gas-powered engine, which eventually prevailed over both steam and electric engines. Carl Benz and Gottlieb Daimler of Germany were important pioneers in European automobile manufacturing. In 1885, Benz ran a three-wheeled car driven by a two-cycle, one-cylinder engine that reached 250 revolutions per minute. Daimler had been building stationary gas engines since 1872. More than a decade later, along with Wilhelm Maybach, he developed a high-speed internal-combustion engine with a carburetor that made it possible to use gasoline as fuel.

Soon Daimler and Maybach built an engine that reached 900 revolutions per minute. Later, they built a second engine, which they mounted on a bicycle and ran for the first time on November 10, 1885. In 1926 the Daimler and Benz firms merged and sold their products under the name Mercedes-Benz.a Interestingly, the two men never met.

In 1890 two Frenchmen​—Emile Levassor and René Panhard—​produced in their shop a four-wheeled vehicle with a motor mounted in the center of the chassis. The following year they placed the motor on the front end, where it was better protected from the dust and mud of the unpaved roads.

Making Autos More Accessible

The first autos were quite expensive and, hence, beyond the reach of most people. But this changed in 1908 when Henry Ford began the assembly-line production of the Model T, which came to be known as the tin lizzie. This car revolutionized the auto industry. It was inexpensive, versatile, and easy to maintain. Even people of modest income could afford one.b According to the book Great Cars of the 20th Century, the Model T “was responsible for putting America​—and ultimately the world—​on wheels.”

Now, nearly a century later, many deem the automobile a necessity rather than a luxury. Indeed, one study published in the Independent daily newspaper of London indicates that people sometimes even use them for trips of less than half a mile [1 km].

Technological advances have permitted not only greater speed but also greater safety. Indeed, recent years have seen decreases in fatal accidents in a number of countries. For some, safety has become more of a selling point than aesthetics. For example, improved crumple zones enable the greater part of an impact to be absorbed by certain parts of the chassis, while the more rigid structure immediately around the driver and passengers forms a safety cage. Antilock brakes allow for better control of the vehicle on slippery surfaces. Three-point seat belts secure the chest as well as the hips, while air bags can keep the head from hitting the steering wheel or dashboard during a collision.c

Of course, there is no substitute for good driving habits. “It does no good to make cars safer if the way we drive is not right; not even the most advanced technology on safety will be able to save us if we break certain physical laws,” points out El Economista, of Mexico City.

Some of today’s vehicles seem to resemble rolling homes. A number are equipped with a compact disc player, television, telephone, and separate sound and temperature controls in the front and back. There are also cars with a satellite-aided global positioning system, enabling drivers to find the most convenient route to their destination. Some systems offer updated information on road problems. Of course, having the latest devices and the most recent model has become a status symbol for many people​—a tendency that manufacturers and advertisers have not ignored.

As we have seen, the auto has come a long way since its first appearance more than a century ago. Used responsibly and safely, it can be a powerful tool for business or pleasure travel.

[Footnotes]

[Chart/Pictures on page 22-25]

Years indicated are production period

1885 Benz Motor Car

First practical automobile in the world

1907-25 Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost

Fast, powerful, quiet, luxurious, and reliable

1908-27 Ford Model T

Fostered mass production; more than 15,000,000 cars sold

Background: Ford production line

1930-7 Cadillac V16 7.4-L

World’s first and most successful production of a 16-cylinder engine

1939–today Volkswagen Beetle

More than 20,000,000 produced. The new Beetle (below left) was released in 1998

1941–today Jeep

May be the world’s most recognized vehicle

1948-65 Porsche 356

Based on Volkswagen Beetle; started Porsche’s success

1952-7 Mercedes-Benz 300SL

Nicknamed Gullwing, it was the first car with a space frame and a fuel-injection engine

1955-68 Citroën DS 19

Had hydraulic power in its steering, brakes, 4-speed gearshift, and self-leveling suspension

1959–today Mini

This innovative and popular car was also very successful in races and rallies

1962-4 Ferrari 250 GTO

A 300-horsepower V-12, very capable sports racer

1970-3 Datsun 240Z

A reliable and affordable sports car

1970–today Range Rover

Considered the world’s best 4-wheel-drive utility vehicle

1984–today Chrysler Minivan

Helped to start the minivan craze

Thrust SSC

On October 15, 1997, crossing the desert of Black Rock, Nevada, U.S.A., it set an official speed record of 763.035 m.p.h. [1228 km/h]

[Credit Lines]

Benz-Motorcar: DaimlerChrysler Classic; background: Brown Brothers; Model T: Courtesy of VIP Classics; Rolls-Royce: Photo courtesy of Rolls-Royce & Bentley Motor Cars

Jeep: Courtesy of DaimlerChrysler Corporation; black Beetle: Courtesy Vintage Motors of Sarasota; yellow Beetle: VW Volkswagen AG

Citroën: © CITROËN COMMUNICATION; Mercedes Benz: PRNewsFoto

Chrysler Minivan: Courtesy of DaimlerChrysler Corporation; Datsun: Nissan North America; Thrust SSC: AP Photo/Dusan Vranic

The Bible’s Viewpoint

Must Christians Be Poor?

JESUS once told a rich young ruler that he needed to go and sell all his belongings and give to the poor. The account says that the man grew sad at Jesus’ saying and went off grieved, “for he was holding many possessions.” Then Jesus said to his disciples: “How difficult a thing it will be for those with money to enter into the kingdom of God!” Jesus added: “It is easier for a camel to get through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to get into the kingdom of God.”​—Mark 10:21-23; Matthew 19:24.

What did Jesus mean? Are wealth and true worship incompatible? Should Christians feel guilty if they have money? Does God require that they lead a materially austere life?

God Welcomes “All Sorts of Men”

In ancient times God did not demand that the Israelites live in poverty. Consider: After taking up the land that was apportioned to them, the people engaged in farming and business to provide for themselves and their loved ones. Such factors as economic conditions, weather, health, or business acumen would affect the success of their efforts. The Law of Moses directed Israelites to be compassionate if any suffered economically and became poor. (Leviticus 25:35-40) On the other hand, some became rich. Boaz, a man of faith and integrity who became an ancestor of Jesus Christ, is described as “a man mighty in wealth.”​—Ruth 2:1.

The situation remained the same during Jesus’ lifetime. In speaking to the rich man mentioned at the outset, it was not Jesus’ intention to promote asceticism. Rather, he was teaching an important lesson. From a human standpoint, it might appear impossible for rich individuals to display humility and accept God’s means of salvation. Yet, Jesus said: “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”​—Matthew 19:26.

The first-century Christian congregation welcomed “all sorts of men.” (1 Timothy 2:4) This included some who were rich, others who had a comfortable means of living, and many who were poor. Some individuals may have accumulated riches before becoming Christians. In other cases favorable circumstances and wise business decisions might have brought wealth afterward.

Likewise, the Christian brotherhood today includes people in a variety of economic circumstances. They all strive to follow the Bible’s guidance on money matters, as materialism can affect anyone. The lesson Jesus taught involving the rich young ruler alerts every Christian to the powerful hold money and possessions can have on a person.​—Mark 4:19.

A Warning for the Rich

While wealth in itself is not condemned in the Bible, the love of money is. The Bible writer Paul said: “The love of money is a root of all sorts of injurious things.” He noted that by forfeiting spiritual interests out of a desire to be rich, “some have been led astray from the faith and have stabbed themselves all over with many pains.”​—1 Timothy 6:10.

Interestingly, Paul gave specific instructions for the rich. He said: “Give orders to those who are rich in the present system of things not to be high-minded, and to rest their hope, not on uncertain riches, but on God, who furnishes us all things richly for our enjoyment.” (1 Timothy 6:17) Evidently there is a danger that rich people might become proud and feel superior to others. Also, they may be tempted to think that riches can offer true security​—something that only God can fully provide.

Affluent Christians can guard against these dangers by being “rich in fine works.” These works include being “liberal, ready to share,” giving generous assistance to those in need. (1 Timothy 6:18) Christians​—rich and poor—​can also use some of their resources to spread the good news of God’s Kingdom, a chief concern of true Christians today. This openhearted spirit reveals a proper attitude toward material assets and endears a person to Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, who love cheerful givers.​—Matthew 24:14; Luke 16:9; 2 Corinthians 9:7.

The More Important Things

Clearly, Christians are not required to be poor. Neither should they be “determined to be rich.” (1 Timothy 6:9) They simply work hard to earn a reasonable means of living. Depending on various factors and the economic system under which they live, their efforts will meet with different levels of success.​—Ecclesiastes 11:6.

Whatever their financial circumstances are, Christians should endeavor to “make sure of the more important things.” (Philippians 1:10) By putting spiritual values first, they are “safely treasuring up for themselves a fine foundation for the future, in order that they may get a firm hold on the real life.”​—1 Timothy 6:19.

Watching the World

Obesity​—A Growing Global Concern

Obesity among both adults and children is “rising to alarming levels around the world” and now includes some of the poorest countries, reports The Lancet. According to University of North Carolina economist and nutrition epidemiologist Barry Popkin, this is partly due to technological advances that have enabled the extraction of edible oils from such seeds as corn, soy, and cotton. “In Asian and African countries, extra calories added to the daily diet come largely from these oils,” says The Lancet. Also, government agricultural and trade policies allow sugar to be exported at low prices, giving manufacturers a cheap product to enhance the taste of foods. Technology in many fields has also led to decreased activity and energy expenditure, which has gradually added to people’s weight. What concerns food and health experts is that obesity can lead to such chronic diseases as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease.

Strange New Organism Discovered

Scientists at the University of Regensburg, Germany, have discovered an interesting microbe on the volcanic ocean floor north of Iceland. It thrives only in scalding-hot, oxygen-free water that is rich in sulfur, notes the newsmagazine Der Spiegel. The bacteria owe their name, Nanoarchaeum equitans, or primitive riding dwarf, to the fact that they live on the surface of a much bigger organism named Ignicoccus, or fireball, on which they seem to depend for growth. With a diameter of just 400 nanometers, the microbes are so small that, according to the report, “over six million would fit on the point of a needle.” They are also unique in that their DNA does not even contain 500,000 base pairs. “Thus the primitive dwarf is the creature with the smallest known genome,” says Der Spiegel.

“Celebrity Worship”

“New psychological research suggests that worship of celebrities by the public has begun to take the place of religion in many people’s lives,” says psychiatrist Dr. Raj Persaud. Writing in The Sunday Times of London, Persaud states that the weaker a person’s religious convictions, the more likely he is to “worship” celebrities. This form of worship is demonstrated by those who are willing to pay high prices to collect items owned or touched by celebrities. Additionally, Persaud says, “celebrity worshipers” will pattern their values and life-style on those of their favorite idol, who is often perceived as incapable of wrongdoing and as “operating under a different set of rules which cannot be understood by ordinary mortals and for which allowances must be made.” The impact that celebrities have on others is also evident in the results of product endorsements and in the mimicking of crucial health-care decisions, notes Dr. Persaud. He adds: “This suggests that our worship of celebrities does indeed turn them into the most powerful people on the planet​—the equivalent of gods in our midst.”

India Has 25 Percent of World’s Blind

“India has the dubious distinction of having 12 million blind people, who constitute 25 per cent of the world’s total blind population,” says India’s Deccan Herald. A report by Youth Vision India, 2002, based on information gathered from colleges and schools in more than 40 cities throughout India, also pointed out that “more than 50 per cent of youth needing vision corrections were not even aware of the fact.” According to the findings, refractive errors and cataracts accounted for the majority of eye disorders in the country, and these were correctable. “Lack of awareness” and an “inadequate number of eyecare practitioners” are mentioned by the newspaper article as the major causes of India’s problem. It adds: “India has only 5000 optometrists, as against 40,000 recommended by the WHO.”

Inuit Bible Completed

The Canadian Bible Society has finished its 23-year task of translating the complete Bible into Inuktitut, the language of Canada’s Inuit people. Translation was a challenge. “Trying to translate a culture that had sheep, camels and donkeys and palm trees into a culture built around seals, walruses and very few plants was difficult,” said Hart Wiens, director of Scripture translation for the Canadian Bible Society. “For example, the Bible has many words for palm trees. But in Nunavut [Canada’s northernmost territory], there are no trees at all, which makes them hard to describe.” Inuktitut is the mother tongue of approximately 28,000 Canadians. According to the National Post, “the Bible is now available in more than 2,285 different languages.”

Internet Dangers

According to Britain’s biggest marriage guidance organization, Relate, misuse of the Internet often causes marital strife, says The Times of London. “Husbands and wives complain of becoming Internet widowers or widows after being left to sit alone as a partner spends hours at the computer messaging strangers in chat rooms, downloading music and games, or looking at pornography.” Internet sites that enable people to revive old romances by E-mail, as well as experience cybersex, can also threaten marital harmony. Relate offers relationship counseling to 90,000 couples a year, 10 percent of whom blame the Internet for their difficulties. And the problem is growing. Relate’s chief executive, Angela Sibson, says: “Our counsellors report that, more and more, the Internet is a relationship breaker.”

Challenge of an Aging Population

“Population ageing is a global phenomenon that has or will affect every man, woman and child anywhere in the world. . . . By 2050, the number of older persons in the world will exceed the number of young for the first time in the history of mankind,” said Ivan Šimonovic, president of the Economic and Social Council, addressing the Second World Assembly on Ageing, which was held in Madrid, Spain, in April 2002. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan told the assembly that in less than 50 years, the number of people who are over 60 years of age will grow from 600 million to almost 2 billion, outnumbering those under 15 years of age. He also said that 80 percent of these older people will be in developing countries. Declining birthrates and increasing longevity worldwide have contributed to major changes in the makeup of the population. The assembly has called for increased health-care workers and services to meet the special needs of older people so that they can age “with security and dignity.”

Offensive Stamps

“Religious personalities and issues on stamps can sometimes be a headache,” states Israel’s Jerusalem Post newspaper. A South African immigrant, Alan Silver, took note of one of the stamps that the postal authority had issued to mark the Hebrew months. “Using a magnifying glass, Silver saw the Elul stamp had several instances of God’s name, which by Jewish law cannot be used except for holy purposes,” says the Post. He showed it to his rabbi, “who ruled that it is forbidden under Jewish law to use the Elul stamp. One also may not buy it, he said, and if you have any, you have to put them in the collection of holy texts that are taken for burial, instead of being thrown in the garbage can.” This was not the first stamp to cause problems. One that had been designed to memorialize the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menahem Mendel Schneerson was opposed by some of his followers who claimed that he had “not died” and by others who “said it was improper for the back of a stamp showing their rebbe to be licked or the front to be canceled.” The stamp was not issued.

From Our Readers

Globalization I appreciated your cover series “Globalization​—Curse or Cure?” (May 22, 2002) I have attended several lectures regarding globalization and found the presentations biased and partisan. The speakers would either try to favor globalization by citing its benefits or criticize it without providing an alternative. Yet, as your articles pointed out, God’s Kingdom will bring about a globalization that will benefit each one of us. How eagerly I wait for such beneficial changes to come!

E. F., Philippines

Once again you have written a very fine article that will generate wide acclaim. As your conclusion emphasizes, the only solution for mankind is the rulership of God’s Kingdom over a paradise earth. I just wish to express my appreciation for your fine work in producing articles that are relevant to the perilous days we live in.

G. B., Ireland

I would like to thank you for your praiseworthy evangelizing work. I read the cover series “Globalization​—Curse or Cure?” and found it to be remarkably accurate. This series helps us to become aware of our human limitations. It also helps us to appreciate that if we do not live in harmony with Jehovah’s laws, things cannot succeed.

J. D., Belgium

I wish to express my admiration for the articles on globalization. They were very well written and illustrated. Before reading these articles, I did not have the slightest idea of the meaning of the term, but now I feel well-informed. I always enjoy reading Awake!

E. K., Peru

Hearing Many thanks for the article “Protect Your Hearing!” (May 22, 2002) I am in my first year of training to be a hearing-aid specialist, so I see the effects of noise every day. In particular, it is important to make youths aware of the everyday noise they expose themselves to.

C. K., Germany

Young People Ask I found the article “Young People Ask . . . How Can I Find a Good Roommate?” (May 22, 2002) to be very informative. I am not young, but recently I was divorced from my husband. I was shocked to find that because of the high cost of living, I could not make it on my own. My only recourse was to find a roommate. I thought that because of my age, this was going to be a real challenge. A young sister, new in our congregation, needed a roommate too. We moved in together. The arrangement was really a blessing. After a while, we found ourselves in a financial dilemma, and another sister moved in with us. I have to say that only in Jehovah’s organization could a 60-year-old grandmother and two young women from different backgrounds find so much peace and love living together! We’ve become a little family, and in many ways it has filled a void in our lives.

L. G., United States

Watching the World Thank you for the “Watching the World” item entitled “Understanding Mental Illness.” (May 22, 2002) I have had bipolar disorder for 18 years. Despite this illness, I have lived a productive life. I have raised three sons and have been a good wife to my husband. I have also helped some individuals to a knowledge of the Bible. I have a loving family and loving friends in the congregation. Thank you for Awake! It brings all of us up to the same level of education.

H. B., South Africa

[Picture Credit Line on page 30]

Mountain High Maps® Copyright © 1997 Digital Wisdom, Inc.

‘We Obey God Rather Than Men’

When he was 17 years of age, Adam was one of three winners of a contest sponsored by the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. Those submitting an entry​—nearly 500 in all—​used art or writing to depict courage under Nazi oppression. Adam is one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and he decided to create a collage that would portray the adversity faced by members of his religion under the Nazi regime. The art, Adam says, reflected, not defeat or bitterness, but joy in that Jehovah’s Witnesses triumphed over the onslaught of that cruel oppressor. A child is shown. Why? “To point out that even children remained strong against Nazi persecution,” Adam says.

It is well-known that during the Nazi era, Jehovah’s Witnesses refused to salute Hitler or support his political party. Their stand is illustrated in the upper right corner of Adam’s collage. There a letter is quoted that was sent to the German government on October 7, 1934, by all congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses. In part, the letter stated: “There is a direct conflict between your law and God’s law, and, following the lead of the faithful apostles, ‘we ought to obey God rather than men,’ and this we will do. (Acts 5:29) . . . Since your government and its officers continue in your attempt to force us to disobey the highest law of the universe, we are compelled to now give you notice that we will, by his grace, obey Jehovah God and fully trust Him to deliver us from all oppression and oppressors.”

Adam is proud of his spiritual heritage. “Jehovah’s Witnesses firmly believed in not harming their fellowman and in giving worship to no one other than God, even if this meant death,” he says. The unwavering position of Jehovah’s Witnesses is reflected in the title of Adam’s collage: “We Will Obey God Rather Than Men!”

The Bible​—God’s Word or Man’s?

THE MODERN WORLD has too many problems. Marriages are breaking up. Family violence is widespread. Hundreds of millions go hungry. Crime runs rampant. Peace and security are elusive. Why are things like this? Are there any solutions?

The Bible not only offers answers to these questions but provides guidance in everyday living as well. Should we not, then, be interested in what the Bible says?

Some people maintain that the Bible is little more than a collection of myths, legends, and folk wisdom. Others, though, hold that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. Which viewpoint is correct? The book The Bible​—God’s Word or Man’s? will help you to answer that question. We invite you to consider the facts for yourself. Doing so may well change your life forever.

You can fill in this coupon and mail it to the address provided or to an appropriate address listed on page 5 of this magazine.

□ Supply me with a copy of the book The Bible​—God’s Word or Man’s?

□ Please contact me concerning a free home Bible study.

[Picture Credit Line on page 32]

Alexander the Great: Roma, Musei Capitolini