PDA

View Full Version : The Mother's Day Story


Don
05-08-2009, 05:55 PM
This story (http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/?p=3045), which takes a look at how Mother's Day came to be, is another object lesson in the evolution of government actions. The Readers' Digest version:


Mother’s Day was the brainchild of Anna Jarvis, a Philadelphia woman stricken with grief over the death of her saintly mother in May 1905.

In May 1908, freshman Senator Elmer Burkett (R-NE) put Miss Jarvis’s proposal before his colleagues. It was not a Hallmark moment.

Burkett’s mawkish if well-meant discourse was met by a hail of mockery.

Senator John Kean (R-NJ) immediately moved to amend Burkett’s measure by striking everything after “Resolved” and substituting the Fifth Commandment: “Honor thy father and thy mother.”

It is not a proper subject for legislation,” declared Senator Weldon Heyburn (R-ID). “[T]he sentiment that exists between the parent and the child” was “too sacred to be made the subject of bandying words” and symbolic resolutions.

By a margin of 33-14, the Senate contemptuously returned this first Mother’s Day resolution to committee. But a few constitutionalist pettifoggers were not going to stop Anna Jarvis. She enlisted the potent support of the World’s Sunday School Association. By 1914, members of Congress were falling all over each other in praise of a federally sanctioned day of maternal homage. Mother’s Day, celebrated on the second Sunday of May, was here to stay.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the florist. Anna Jarvis, the mother of Mother’s Day, became its harshest critic.

Jarvis denounced the greeting card and gift and candy manufacturers who battened on her day. In vain, she urged sons and daughters to buy buttons instead of flowers for mom; she called greeting cards “a poor excuse for the letter you are too lazy to write.” The embittered Jarvis concluded that “charlatans, bandits, pirates, racketeers, kidnappers and other termites” had corrupted “with their greed one of the finest, noblest, truest Movements and celebrations known.”


Once again, unintended consequences raised their ugly head.

So what's your take on Mother's Day, and national holidays in general? Something FedGov should be spending their time and our money on, or not?

Unique
05-08-2009, 06:58 PM
I don't celebrate holidays. Period. Or rather I make up my own. I don't need a special day to celebrate the people I love.

C.bronco
05-08-2009, 07:16 PM
I like every holiday, especially those that create extra vacation days. :) Too bad National Fabio Day is a whole 11 months away!

whistlelock
05-08-2009, 07:25 PM
Something FedGov should be spending their time and our money on, or not?


Okay, I want to get this straight.

You blame the government, which is apparently still spending money in some fashion that is unclear in your post, on Mothers Day and all the free market crap that springs up around it?

You're upset because people are able to make money and sell things because the Government penciled in an annual non-binding appointment for everyone to take a moment to appreciate their mother?

BenPanced
05-08-2009, 07:44 PM
Okay, I want to get this straight.

You blame the government, which is apparently still spending money in some fashion that is unclear in your post, on Mothers Day and all the free market crap that springs up around it?

You're upset because people are able to make money and sell things because the Government penciled in an annual non-binding appointment for everyone to take a moment to appreciate their mother?
The govmint conspiracy continues apace, I guess.

Don
05-08-2009, 07:50 PM
Whoa, dude, take a chill pill. I simply posted an article that pointed out the unintended consequences that arose from a good-intentioned government action, and asked a question about the wisdom of those sort of actions.

I didn't blame the government for anything, I simply pointed out that certain unanticipated (and I even said unintended) consequences arose from their actions, as always occurs. I didn't even specify whether I believe those consequences are good or bad, simply unanticipated (and unintended), so that's a pretty big leap. Ugly, in context, had more to do with the Anna Jarvis' opinion than mine. Also, I don't know how you got that I was 'upset' from the language I used in the post.

Actually, being a free-market kinda guy, I generally think it's a good thing when people buy and sell stuff.

It is ok to question the government's actions without having a meltdown, isn't it?

TerzaRima
05-08-2009, 09:20 PM
Well, somebody sure needs a lecture on filial duty from Mr T. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_rBidCkJxo)

Now I'm thinking of Mr T treating my mother right, and I need to go soak my frontal lobes in Betadine.

Cyia
05-08-2009, 10:22 PM
Jarvis denounced the greeting card and gift and candy manufacturers who battened on her day. In vain, she urged sons and daughters to buy buttons instead of flowers for mom; she called greeting cards “a poor excuse for the letter you are too lazy to write.” The embittered Jarvis concluded that “charlatans, bandits, pirates, racketeers, kidnappers and other termites” had corrupted “with their greed one of the finest, noblest, truest Movements and celebrations known.”

Sounds like she wanted a holiday - but only if it was celebrated her way. Everyone else is just wrong.

DeleyanLee
05-08-2009, 10:32 PM
So what's your take on Mother's Day, and national holidays in general? Something FedGov should be spending their time and our money on, or not?

Frankly, I don't think of Mother's Day as a national holiday since I don't get a day off work with pay. I don't care that some long ago Congress thought it would be a good idea, it's not one that registers on my consciousness. I'd be surprised to discover that there's acutally an allowance for Mother's Day spending in the new budget proposal, honestly.

For all that I don't give two whits about Mother's Day or any of the other "Hallmark Holidays", I think that national holidays are important to humans in general. It's something that (theoretically) can unite us as a community, share values, goals, etc in. That was the purpose of declaring Martin Luther King Day, wasn't it? To mark the civil changes within our country by honoring one of the founders, a "face" of that change, and give ourselves a chance to unite as a community with a new perspective.

Just because we don't DO it doesn't change the value of it. Not yet, at least. There might be a time coming when there no longer is any value in it, but I have every confidence that that generation of people will find something they do value to replace it with. And the cycle will continue.

SHBueche
05-09-2009, 01:31 AM
Aye, aye matey, I'm waitin' for Speak Like a Pirate Day. Hey, interesting comments, learned something today (had to look up the definition of 'pettifoggers').

som1luvsmi
05-09-2009, 01:50 AM
Aye, aye matey, I'm waitin' for Speak Like a Pirate Day. Hey, interesting comments, learned something today (had to look up the definition of 'pettifoggers').

September 19th! Woo hoo! I mean, ARRGGH!