Newspaper Page Text
Page 22
The Southern Israelite
Kealfh
IT'S AN INVESTMENT IN
1 Jfreedoiwi A $ convenience
%
« >»
You used to call it your “light bill.”
Quite properly, too. It was a “light
v bill.” It represented a few lights
here and there about your home.
Even if all the wonderful labor-
saving, comfort-bringing appliances
we now have had been available
then—only the very wealthy could
have afforded them. The cost of the
electricity to operate them was too
high.
Now, the cost of electric energy
has been made so low that it pro
vides no obstacle for the use of any
of these modern servants by any
one. Now the poor man and his wife
can—and many of them do—enjoy
the benefits of having electricity do
the irksome tasks about the home
.... banish drudgery.
It is so because the present rates
for household electric service are
designed specifically to make it
so!
Since the revision of the rates of
this Company in 1929, thousands
of women all over Georgia have
voted their approval of the new
rates by having their homes equip
ped with electric refrigerators,
ranges and other modern devices
which they could not have afforded
under the old rates.
During the past two years—since
the new rates went into effect —
Georgia dealers have sold tens of
thousands of electric ranges and re
frigerators, as well as a constantly
increasing number of vacuum clean
ers, washing machines, percolators,
toasters, fans and other time-saving,
comfort-bringing appliances.
In large part, Georgia women are
responsible for these purchases of
electrical home equipment. And
they could not be induced to part
with them.
For women have learned that let
ting electricity help in the home
tasks is the path away from back
breaking drudgery to fuller, better,
happier life.
i
"4.
v. -
Georgia
power ns
COMPANY
lV.7.
~ 1
. >
CITIZEN WHEREVER WE SERVE
er
hat
ity”
nor
s a
pie
rity
ion.
end
re-
life
No
REFORM JUDAISM
(Continued from Page 16/
fused her by the elders of the Sp j s h
and Portugese Synagogs in their ;r i-
al ground. These, and numerou
instances, could be cited to prov
the “breach in the world-comm
was not caused by the Reformer
by the principle that Judaism
religion only. Besides, that pri
was not concurred in by the ma
of the Reformers of any gener
The modern Reform Rabbis co
only that Judaism is primarily
ligion, that Judaism is a way o
permeated by the religious spirit
one denies that we are a people 'des
cended largely from a certain . cial
stock, but we do deny that we re a
nation in the usually accepted .< nse
of the word. There is no such thing
as a Jewish culture or Jewish civiliza-
tion; there are Jewish cultures or folk
ways, each differing considerably from
the other. The Jewish culture of
Bialgstok is one thing; that of Teh
eran another. Shall we, because of
that, accuse either of broaching the
world-community of Israel? Besides,
in the world-community of Israel. Mr
Hurwitz himself confesses gladly that
whenever a serious Jewish crisis arises,
the Reformers, despite their Goyish
theory, reason and work together with
their non-Rcformist brethren. There
are, to be sure, differences in opinion,
world-wide or local, but that is an in
evitable sequel of our human nature.
Democrats differ with Republicans,
Prohibitionists with anti-Prohibition-
ists, Protectionists with Free-Traders,
atheists with religionists, Menckensians
with Rotarians,—is the American group
consciousness therefore destroyed? Is
uniformity of opinion altogether de
sirable, and even if an opinion or
theory be venerable and sponsored by
a majority, need it be true? What
Mr. Hurwitz naively deplores is that
the Reform Jew does not agree with
his brethren in the definition of nation
alism in the religio-cultural value of
the Hebrew language, in ceremonial
emphasis, and in certain other details.
And there is a world-community in
the consciousness of common ancestry,
common history and suffering, and a
common spiritual goal. So long as
these remain, there can be no breach.
Let me finally quote Mr. Hurwitz in
his stimulating essay—to Mr. Hurwitz.
“without criticism, in short, no pro
gressive social institutions. It is non
sense to stigmatize criticism as des
tructive" ; well—the Reform theon i
a criticism of the Orthodox theory,
and of Jewish Nationalism, and % ' cc
versa. Why speak of “breach , which
is another name for destructive:
Unfortunately, I have not the - 1 ^
to consider at length the oft-rept
indictment of the Reform the,
Assimilation. The term is amb;- •
because of its many connotation- ®
remove Peoth and boards is con'’
by some as assimilation to Gen,
toms. But Mr. Hurwitz does not an
that. He believes that the Rc ^
theory assimilates to Christian
But he gives no detailed evidence ex
cept to say that “the Retorn,
accepts the Christian dogma t
ligion is but one interest in h- ^
stead of religious interpenetrati