By Malachy McCourt

When I was running for governor on the Green Party ticket, I advocated for a number of quality of life improvements.

One of those improvements was to place a dollar tax on every stick of chewing gum. Then cut the idiotic spitting of that disgusting glob on subway platforms and sidewalks. See if we could remove the stupid look from the faces of the half-wits who are constantly chewing gum.

Other measures I would have enacted included: stopping baseball players from speaking so much and to stop calling New York “the Empire State,” as I didn’t want to be emperor, I wanted to be governor. (Little did I know that people who were supplying Gov. Spitzer’s girls were known as “The Emperor’s Club”).

I also advocated imposing the death penalty on graffiti artists (i.e. graph idiots) and on politicians who take money from corporations and tell lies.

Another item on my platform was to make sugar a controlled substance.

Now I am no lightweight when it comes to eating sugar, due to a very loving relationship with carbohydrates, particularly the potato and that “staff of life” bread.

These items have a close relationship to sugar and I think they actually become sugar at one point. So what was the point of making it a controlled substance?

Americans consume about 140 pounds. of sugar in one form or another every year. Suppose that some enterprising mayor secured 140-lb. bags and filled them with sugar and placed said bag in front of a food stamp recipient and instructed them to feed one of their children the contents of the bags before a year has elapsed. I’m sure that those parents would think again about the benefits of consuming sugar.

Mayor Bloomberg says sugar in soft drinks is a significant factor in childhood obesity and that our government is contributing to the problem by allowing people to use food stamps to purchase said poison. He says we should put a stop to that and only allow that which is nutritious to be doled out in vending machines. I say, if the vending of sugar products is allowed, then why not other addictive items such as beer, gin, cigarettes and glue for sniffing?

When I was a child in Ireland, the St. Vincent DePaul Society gave us poverty families a docket, which allowed us about a dollar’s worth of food every month. It helped to get that bit of food and sometimes there was a penny or two left over. That wouldn’t be enough to pay for anything and when we asked for some sweets, the righteous Catholic women who owned the shop erupted into a rage about charity cases who were lucky to get a loaf of bread for nothing. Of course we were ordered off the premises as these good Christians pocketed the pennies of the poor.

So I have mixed feelings about sweet things. But I maintain that sugar is not by any stretch of the imagination a food item. It rots teeth, helps cause diabetes and can turn ice cream into a danger to life and limb.

Still, should the government stick its nose into this controversy? If the government giveth, the government can taketh away. If it taketh away though, then it should offer alternatives such as reduced fat milk and real fruit juices.

By the way, all of the excess sugar should be donated to the Tea Party to help eliminate the sourness of their souls and to see what a sweet and wonderful place America is.n
_
Check out more musings from Malachy McCourt at malachymccourt.com.

This columnist, who often warns about alcohol abuse, never claims it’s a character flaw or willpower. I write mostly about the enormous harm that can result from over-drinking, even just one episode. My great concern is that alcohol has been given a pass compared to tobacco smoking and obesity.

Some individuals can never drink “socially” due to something in their biological makeup. I believe others become addicted by the overuse of alcohol to reduce stress. I believe most people need help to stop drinking and often find it in 12-step programs, which do have a spiritual element.

As for responsible drinking, infinitely more needs to be said about its importance, should adults chose to imbibe. And relatively new medical guidelines show that more than one drink daily for women, and two for men, is excessive.

Now it’s spring break time, when shamefully little is said about the truly over-the-top alcohol consumption among students, often resulting in the most regrettable—even dangerous—behaviors. Attention must be paid!

And here’s to Archbishop Timothy Dolan speaking out against St. Patrick’s Day’s over-imbibing, as did the late Cardinal John O’Connor.

Bette Dewing
Columnist, Dewing Things Better

–
Letters have been edited for clarity, style and brevity.

He says, “The so-called Christians… converted the feast of the sun god into a celebration of the birth of Jesus…” Actually, “Christmas” was created in the third century when Constantine (who ironically had become a Christian by then) refused to allow the celebration of Jesus’ birth as a separate holiday, but instead required it to be “subsumed” into the late-year pagan celebration of Saturnalia, which celebrated Saturn, the god of agriculture and the harvest (not the sun). N.B. There is an alternative claim that the Christians wanted their celebration to coincide with Saturnalia, but this is less likely.

Mr. McCourt also says, “Nobody seems to know how St. Nicholas rose to such popularity.” St. Nicholas was a wealthy do-gooder in Turkey in the early third century. According to one source, “Many stories are told of his generosity, as he gave his wealth away in the form of gifts to those in need, especially children. Legends tell of him dropping bags of gold down chimneys or throwing the bags through the windows where they landed in stockings hung near the fireplace to dry… Some years later, Nicholas became a bishop; hence the long-flowing gown, white beard and red cape… Eventually [after his death], the Catholic Church started celebrating Christmas, and St. Nicholas was incorporated into the season… When the Reformation took place, the new Protestants no longer desired St. Nicholas as their ‘gift-giver,’ as he was too closely associated with the Catholic Church…. [E]ach country… developed its own gift-giver. In France, he was known as Pere Noel. In England, he was Father Christmas… To the Dutch, he was Sinterklass, which eventually… became ‘Santa Claus.’”

Finally, Mr. McCourt says, “The 25th of December is an arbitrary date of birth.” It is. That date was actually chosen in 350 A.D. by Julius I, then Bishop of Rome. Mr. McCourt then suggests a late March birth date for Jesus. Here he is probably incorrect. We know from Luke that John the Baptist was exactly six months older than Jesus. And there is evidence from historical sources that John was born in the spring, likely March or April. If so, this would mean that Jesus was most likely born in September or October—which is likely why Constantine chose Saturnalia to include the Christian celebration, since it was the closest major holiday.

Rev. Ian Alterman
Upper West Side

Letters have been edited for clarity, style and brevity.