Romeo Mike reports that the fight to save Christmas isn’t confined to the US of A. Australian secularists are on a “purge Christmas” crusade as well. But reason and tradition are fighting back….
Christmas Won Back – Romeo Mike’s
After last year’s furore over the scrooging of Sydney’s Chrissie decorations, this year Clover has gone all out. It’s a win against secularising a Christian tradition, however local socialists deny there was ever a problem to begin with. Just a media beat up, they say. The point is a little undermined when their allies order the re-Christmassing of schools and kindies, thanks Mr Bracks, and challenge those who oppose it, thanks Mr Aly.
Still, Sydney City Council is dominated by progressive socialists, which means political correctness and atheism are the institutional standards. So what do you do when your commie ideology makes you opposed to Christianity, but your citizenry needs humouring with Christmas decorations? Naturally, you go subliminal on them….
(go to Romeo Mike’s to see the Communist-inspired Christmas decorations in Sydney)
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Frankly, I think we need to start pushing for a Constitutional Amendment to protect religious expression. I think it would simply permit the display of religious symbols by the US or any state, and clarify that public expressions of faith by states, governments, or their officials or employees do not constitute the establishment of a state religion in violation of the First Amendment.
A constitutional amendment protecting the right of religious expression would not only cut off the ACLU and Michael Newdow at the knees, it would also re-affirm the conservative principle that when you don’t like something, you change it through the Constitutional process. We on the right often accuse the left of enacting through the courts what they can not enact legislatively. We should lead by example.
Or maybe we shouldn’t waste the court’s time or ammend the Constitution when it really seems like the only one’s who have their panties in a twist over this, year after year, are Bill O’Reilly and Ann Coulter…
and even NewsCorp is having a “holiday” party for their employees….
Meanwhile, the ever-tolerant left is having conniption fits over The Chronicles of Narnia.
Oh gosh … here I am, reading these comments at work, and someone mentions Ann Coulter’s panties.
Sorry Julie….. I meant jockstrap.
Scrooge is right. Only Bill O’Reilly and Ann Coulter (plus, of course, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Lou Sheldon, et alia) are the only ones exercised over this issue. According to today’s NYT, some fundies are outraged that the White House, yes, the White House, sent out “holiday” cards, not Christmas cards. So even GWB isn’t caught in the swirl of this nonsense. Of course, he doesn’t personally get involved in such trivial issues, he’s too busy screwing up the War.
I respect those Christians who send me religious cards, just as I appreciate those who send me generic “holiday” cards. And I’m glad that the U.S. Government sanctions a Christian holy day as a national holiday (although this is frightfully close to endorsement of religion).
For those who worship at the altar of Christianity, I hope they don’t feel threatened when other people don’t worship at the same altar. Who cares if Target Stores proclaims “Happy Holidays?” Get over it already. If you are THAT insecure in YOUR religion, maybe it’s the religion’s fault.
“Frightfully close to an endosement of religion” is pretty much on the money.
When the Christians hijacked Yule from the Pagans, this is exactly what they had in mind.
Religious expression *is* protected by the Constitution. What *isn’t* protected is using my tax dollars to fund promoting your religion.
How collectivist is that?
Just one more reason to hate commies.
I’m suspicious that Bill O’Reilly and other Fox News talking heads took up the cause of Christmas “being under assault” about the same time fellow Fox rightwing host (4 p.m. CST weekdays) John Gibson’s new book, “The War On Christmas”, was published. They all seem to spend a lot of air time promoting each other’s books. (By the way, their parent company, News Corporation, is having a Holiday Party on December 16.
I don’t think we need any religious-based amendment to the U. S. Constitution. Neither I nor my neighbors needed anyone’s permission to purchase and put up Christmas trees. A lot of houses are still being decorated for Christmas. My church is still having a Christmas Eve service and a Christmas morning service. There’s a Natvitiy scene on the church lawn, where it belongs — not on the city hall lawn. The Post Office accepted my Christmas cards and is delivering them. I’m still able to travel to spend Christmas with my sister.
So I don’t see a war agaubst Christmas. Quite the opposite. To date, I’ve been to eleven stores (including three Wal-Marts in three different states) in an unsuccessful qwest to find Hanukka cards.
I’m not offended by store clerks saying “Happy Holidays”. That’s preferable to them trying to figure out if I’m a Christian for “Merry Christmas” greetings or a Jew for “Happy Hanukka” greetings.
Ever since O’Reilly started his nightly tirades about “Happy Holidays” I’ve asked people at the doctor’s office, at the grocery store, at the post office, at the drug store, at church, etc., and have encountered only one person — a pastor’s wife — who’s offended by the greeting “Happy Holidays”.
We’ve got a lot of issues on the table that are much more important than whether the lighted tree on the court house lawn is a Christmas tree or a holiday tree.
The only reason such an amendment is necessary is because of aggressive atheists and idiot liberals who can’t tell the difference between a creche on a courthouse lawn and establishment of an official religion.
As long as Christmas is a federal holiday, I see no reason for the federal government distancing itself from it. In addition, Christmas has long since been more than a religious holiday. My atheist father celebrates it along with my Christian mother, although not in the same states.
To me, saying “Happy Holidays” means the traditional combination of Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. When did it become a multicultural, generic greeting for every holiday that happened in December?
When the government tells postal workers and public school teachers that they have to work on Christmas(without overtime), I’ll have no problem with the new definition of “Happy Holidays”
#9
Jack, it’s not the phrase “Happy Hollidays” that some folks find objectionable. It’s when weak-kneed folks actively replace “Merry Christmas” with it instead to appease the weak minded. That’s the point of the objections toward Wally World and Target.
So did any of the persecuted see the plethora of “Pope” movies on TV this week?… Yeah, Christianity is SURE in trouble in America!
p.s. Brokeback Mountain opens tonight…..
“it would also re-affirm the conservative principle that when you don’t like something, you change it through the Constitutional process.”
That’s what you call conservative? I thought conservatives thought the market knew best when it came to changes. Since when has it been a conservative position for the nanny-state government to get involved in these matters at all? Since when has it been the government’s place to protect religion? “Defender of the Faith” is a title for KINGS, not for the president of a republic. Or is that the kind of conservative you are, who thinks government is the solution to every problem?
To The GayConservative in #12: Until I see specific evidence that Wal-Mart and other retailers weakly caved in under pressure from anti-Christmas forces I prefer to believe their use of “Happy Holidays” is inclusive, welcoming customers of all faiths to their stores during the holiday season. And it’s not as bleak for Christians as Fox News portrays it. Some of Wal-Mart’s TV advertising includes “Christmas” and “Merry Christmas” and at the local Wal-Mart, in a trade area that likely includes some non-believers but probably no Jews or Muslims, the employees still wish us a “Merry Christmas”.
“Happy holidays” got started a long time ago, at least in the 50’s. because retailers didn’t want to ffend customers. It’s a capitalist thing. It is not some court-ordered nonsense, it’s business sense. Salesmen are the most PC people in the world. It’s all about the profit motive. “The customer is always right” – how’s that for moral relativism. So tell again how O’Reilly and his fellow whiners are anything other than nanny-state Socialists.