Friday, December 01, 2006

The Xmas Grinch strikes again

"War on Christmas". What comes to mind? Do you think of religious nuts running amok looking for persecution under every rock, secularists mocking the religious nuts while busily filing silly lawsuits, or media talking heads using both for ratings? While all might apply, stories keep popping up suggesting there is a low-level war.

Jay Sekulow's ACLJ is currently defending several school employees in Middle Tennessee's Wilson Country (just east of Nashville) against a lawsuit filed by the ACLU. Get a load of this:
The ACLU claims that the plaintiffs have been harmed, injured and “suffered irreparable damage” through the Christmas program because of its “Christian themes and songs.” The ACLU will then ask for these actions be declared “unconstitutional and illegal.”
I'm no religious homer on the separation of church and state issue. The Founders wanted a structure that allowed freedom to worship (or not) without persecution. The Church of England was still fresh on their minds. At the same time they understood most of their legal framework was based on Judeo-Christian principles essentially rooted in the tenet of "do unto others". The fact America never lapsed into a theocracy or into rank tyranny is truly amazing. We were blessed to have such wise founders, even if they were old white guys.

Yet detractors would say this issue is purely a separation question. While not without merit the fact remains that many of these cases revolve around religious freedom. There's no law against saying "Jesus is Lord" in the courthouse unless you happen to be a judge proclaiming it under official capacity. Since the Feds already recognize Christmas as a legal holiday then school plays that allow people to discuss the true meaning of the day would seem fair game under the First Amendment.

The only way for the secular forces to win this fight is to have the holiday abandoned altogther, which is a hard sell to any realist politician. The secularists more likely yearn to return Christmas to the pagan roots from whence it came, but if that occurs it cannot be called Christmas anymore. Otherwise there's no good reason to hold a holiday and pay government workers double time.

Therefore, as long as it remains recognized the issue becomes one of logic. The holiday is not Clausmas, Walmas, Kwanzmas, or Sharperimagemas. It's reasonable for people to assume they can provide explanations of the meaning of the day, even on government property, in a similar fashion to explanations about the meaning of Thanksgiving and Independence Day (we hold these truths as self-evident/all men are created equal/endowed by Creator, etc).

I'm not suggesting rampant proselytizing or distribution of religious pamphlets by school or government officials, but c'mon. "Away in a Manger" or "Silent Night" harmful? Ridiculous. It brings to mind that nasty green cartoon character with the cool theme song, before his conversion, of course.

Speaking of cartoons, how long can this one avoid the Xmas Grinch?...


(pilfered from Steven Jones).

Perhaps we're heading for this one someday soon. Interestingly it was tagged as offensive (you decide) while the one spoofing Kwanzaa (I've decided) was not. Either way, Schultz is definitely spinning in his grave like a centrifuge.

MORE 12/5/06

Seems pertinent.

No comments: