The Ongoing Battle to Secularize Christmas

A small but very vocal minority in the United States is waging an ongoing battle to secularize Christmas.  A multi-front attempt for years waged in the courts under the guise of protecting the First Amendment Establishment clause that prohibits the establishment of any one religion by the Federal Government–a clear attempt by the founders to prohibit the U.S. from establishing the Church of the united States along the lines of the British “Church of England.” Unhappy at their ability to erase all references to religion and all displays of religious observance in the courts, proponents of a “god-free” America have increasingly focused their efforts on attacking religion on grounds of “inclusiveness” and general political correctness. In a country where the only recognized sin  appears to be political incorrectness, wishing someone a “Merry Christmas” has actually been banned by some retailers in recent years, only to reverse themselves when people made their displeasure known. In the more recent past, a group of atheists posted a billboard in New York’s Times Square demanding that Christ be taken out of Christmas, asking rhetorically “Who needs Christ in Christmas — No one.” And today, as I write this, I saw a news report on CNN about the classic Christmas song “Holy Night” having its words changed when performed by school children in a choir at one American school  to omit references to both Christ and to the Virgin Mary. Atheists have long complained about the Pledge of Allegiance containing teh phrase “One nation, under God . . ..” May I suggest “One nation, paralyzed by political correctness” as an alternative?
 
I accept a “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Chanukah” or “Happy Winter Solstice” for that matter in the spirit in which the greeting is offered. My Jewish Friends and colleagues usually wish me a Merry Christmas and I them a Happy Chanukah (or Happy belated Chanukah this year when the holidays do not coincide). How a well-intentioned greeting can be offensive is itself offensive to me. Billboards on Times Square broadcasting “Who needs Christ in Christmas — Nobody” on the other hand are extremely offensive, as are the idiot attempts to “sanitize” “Silent Night” by omitting references to Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary in today’s news from some misguided school in the U.S..

Can you imagine the universal (and righteous) outrage if anyone put up a billboard in Times Square with similarly intentionally offensive comments about religious holidays like Ramadan, Chanukah or, for that matter, any religion but Christianity? Humanists, atheists and run of the mill cranks and wingnuts of all stripes should take notice, in case they did not get the memo: Christmas is exclusively about Christ. It is not about consummerism, Rudolph, Frosty the Snowman, Jack Frost or blooming chestnuts roasting on an open fire, any more than Easter is about chocolate bunnies or baskets of goodies doled out to children.
In our insane politically correct society, anything that offends anyone must be co-opted, changed or banned. (Unless, of course, offense is directed at targets for which the political left feels disdain and contempt, like Christianity (and, to a lesser extent, all organized religion), Conservatives, Republicans (from the right, left and center), Tea Party members, the military, and so on.

If anyone is offended that Christmas is a Christian holiday and “feels bad” about it for much of December, then the response is to secularize the holiday. Ban the wishing of a “Merry Christmas,” and push for getting Christ out of Christmas. And, of course, let’s inject race into the equation. Santa Claus should not be portrayed as a white man. The fact that the character is based on a white Christian Saint of Turkish/Greek origins is, well, irrelevant. Does any thinking human being other than a bigot actually believe that GOD gives a flying fig about the color of St. Nicholas’ skin? Of the race of His only son? Or of yours, mine or of the misguided fools who put up the billboard on Times Square?

I respect all religions and I equally respect agnostics and atheists who question all religion or reject it outright. How could I not, having had friends and colleagues whom I dearly respect who are atheists, Jews, Muslims and, yes, even Wiccans? (Yes, I actually know a good witch or two and care for them no less or more than my good Catholic friends.) I do no impose my religion on anyone or, in general, wear it on my sleeve. If you do not practice a black mass or worship Satan, I will respect your religion too and expect the same courtesy in return. I also give very wide berth to those who would push any religion–including mine–on me or anyone else. But I will not tolerate anyone co-opting a religion or a religious holiday for their own use.

If you like the spirit of Christmas but are not Christian, no problem. Erect your own holiday tree, Chanukah Bush, Winter Solstice Tree, or Frosty the Snowman and have a great time. The spirit of Christmas transcends the religious significance of the holiday; good will is not the province of any single religion and is, in fact, independent of religion altogether. Having said that, Christmas is, has always been and will always be first and foremost about Christ. Anyone who did not get (or does not like) the message is free to foam at the mouth, howl at the moon, and to celebrate (or invent) their own holiday to coincide with the Christian Holiday. Americans can celebrate the season any way they wish, or not celebrate it at all. They can rail against the blatant commercialization of Christmas (and I will agree with them on that front). What they cannot do is redefine a High Holy Day for the vast majority of Americans to suit their political, philosophical or religious predilections. Doing is, well, un-American.

On the Passing of Nelson Mandela

Nelson Mandela’s heroism, quiet strength and incredible courage are qualities that we can all agree on, however difficult it may be for us to agree on the value (or lack thereof) of other world leaders. He is someone fully deserving of praise, emulation and remembrance. God bless him for he was truly one of His best creations.

It takes a man like Nelson Mandela to change our perspective. No one has had a greater reason to be bitter, angry, or to embrace violence in the name of justice/revenge. No one was less likely to do any of these things than he. Some speak of change and some effect it. Some pontificate on the value of their ideas and some add enormous value through the power of their ideas. Some speak endlessly and say nothing while some waste no time in idle chatter and go about changing the world for the better through their actions, their example, and their principles throughout their lives.

Outgoing NYC Mayor Bloomberg very wisely named a school for Nelson Mandela that he had visited much earlier in his life after being released from an unconscionable imprisonment in South Africa. I wish we could name a world for him. What a transformational figure and what a reminder of the tremendous capacity of the human heart for compassion, decency, and quiet dignity. I will never be able to think of him without smiling as I have never seen him through the years in the best and worst times of his life without a smile.

No matter where we live, no matter our station in life, we have been enriched by his life and are poorer for his passing. Heaven is richer, though, and he leaves us a boundless good will that will be his legacy.

A Veterans Day Message

To every man and woman who has worn the uniform with honor in combat, thank you. On this Veteran's Day, we rightfully honor your service and your sacrifice. And we should remember, not just today and on Memorial Day but every day, those who paid the ultimate sacrifice and those who came home wounded and with physical and mental scars that in too many cases will never fully heal.

Some people of conscience may struggle with supporting our military when they disagree with the missions assigned to it by our civilian leaders. The decision to send our troops in harms way should not be made lightly, and a healthy debate on such decisions is something I strongly support. Reasonable people may differ on the wisdom of most every military conflict not only in the last hundred years but from the first time that our cave dwelling ancestors picked up sticks and stones with which to force their will on others whom they did not like, whose property they coveted or who simply opposed their will. If we wish to point fingers at those who commit our forces to unwise wars, those fingers should be pointed at Washington D.C., not at out military whose job is not to question why but simply to do and die.

Idealized notions to the contrary by those who dwell in ivory towers, as I do, freedom is neither free nor the birthright of humanity in the state of nature. Freedom is bought and paid for every day by those willing to put on a uniform and fight--not with words but with ordinance--to gain and maintain it as directed by their civilian commanders. It is paid for in blood and sacrifice by those willing to fight for it against all enemies, foreign and domestic, who wage a perpetual battle to win the hearts and minds of the foolhardy by any means necessary.

For those like me who have lived under dictatorships, freedom is not an abstraction or something to be taken lightly. Words did not prevent the Nazi flag from flying over all of Europe. Our armed forces, and those of our allies, whose sacrifice is no less noteworthy, did. The swastika does not fly over the capitol, nor does the imperial flag of Japan. Russian is not our official language, and it is only our armed forces that may prevent Mandarin or Korean from becoming the official language in the future, or Sharia  Law from replacing the U.S. Constitution. If history teaches us anything, it surely teaches us that.

Gratitude for honorable service should not be tied to one's political philosophy or party affiliation. Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives, Independents, Jews, Muslims, Christians, and members of every other faith have all bled alongside Atheists for our freedom. This Veterans Day, I hope you will join in a collective well-earned thanks for their service and sacrifice. And as the Holidays approach, regardless of faith or lack thereof, if it is within your means, please make a gift to a worthy, vetted charitable organization that looks after our veterans and their families. Think of it as a holiday gift for dear friends who are worthy of our support. Or, if you prefer, think of it as a self-imposed honor tax. And if you can't find a few dollars in these tough economic times to share with those most worthy of our support, please at least share your gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform when you see them at a bus station, airport, coffee shop or on the street. Look them in the eye, offer your hand and say "Thank you for your service." Do this especially for those who wear their uniforms from times gone by on Veterans Day standing a little taller in proud remembrance of their service and personal sacrifice. It is the least we can do for those who have been and remain the guardians of our freedom.

Fed up with endless coverage of terrorists and their deeds. Enough!

In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon terror bombings, I've stopped watching the news altogether. I've tired of changing the channel every time the bombers' photos are plastered on the screen followed by the graphic video of their dastardly deeds--precisely as intended. I no longer bother to simply change the channel every time the faces appear on screen or the video is replayed accompanied attempts to explain, excuse or simply replay the painful scenes for the benefit of a voyeuristic public. I'll return to watching the evening news when sanity returns, if it ever does.

I can't stand the media's penchant for glorifying terrorists and other common criminals by endlessly plastering their photos on TV/newspapers/magazines/online, thus effectively feeding the egos and encouraging further heinous acts from every loser and evil moron all over the planet who wants to push an agenda or take the express lane to hell in a blaze of infamy. Do we need to see those still incredibly painful images from 9/11 any time someone utters the word "terror" on television? Do we need to see the stock footage of the 9/11 murderers along with those images as commentators remind us of their dastardly acts? Do we need to see the face of the surviving Boston terror suspect and hear his mother rail against the FBI over and over again?

I know that bad news sells newspapers and gathers eyeballs for news programs. But give me a break. Every pimply faced loser with delusions of adequacy can find instant celebrity by going to the mall and blowing up people--whether out of some misguided belief system or just for fun. (Here's a clue, Sherlock: God does not tell people to kill women with long hair speaking through a dog and does not want you to go out and murder the innocent of any faith/color/sex/sexual orientation. The devil does. Get that through your thick, troglodyte's skull. There is no devil you say? Perhaps you're right, but look in the mirror for a rough approximation. If you had an I.Q. above that of salt, of course, you'd know that.)

The media needs to tone down the coverage. The Roman idea of pacifying the masses by offering bread and
circus (the arena) is not something we want to emulate, but have. (Welfare and the gore-on-demand round the clock coverage of CNN/FOX/MSNBC. Everybody happy as the empire fall around us and the barbarians storm the gates? We don't even have Hadrian's wall to offer even the appearance of safety.

A modest proposal for denying terrorists the publicity they seek

In a society where the most dysfunctional behavior and/or sheer nastiness can get people (or entire families) reality shows and "celebrity status," if the channel is changed to avoid the constant images of terrorists and suspected terrorists and their evil deeds, it is likely to be to look for a better angle--a close-up of the blood and gore, preferably in HD and slow-motion. The media panders to the lowest common denominator and, in turn, helps to bring the bar of what passes for news reporting ever lower. There is no sense of propriety, of editorial restraint, or of simple common decency evident in news reporting of tragedies.

Satiating the voyeuristic taste of the viewing public is not a journalist's reason for being. Nor is desensitizing the masses from the horrific acts of misguided, demented, or evil people. Showing a burning building is news. Showing people throwing themselves from the rooftop in act of desperation driven by the simple desire to avoid burning to death is unnecessary and cruel. Following the bodies down with a camera until they hit the ground and the aftereffects in glorious 3D would be inexcusable (but such video would be shown were it available with an appropriate disclaimer that viewer discretion is advised). Continually showing the faces of the men responsible for the act for more than a decade at the drop of a hat is free advertising for terror groups, promotes terrorism, and is criminal behavior masquerading as news and hiding behind the 1st Amendment protection.

I have a suggestion for dealing with terrorists and other crazies on the media loosely borrowed from an old science fiction short story whose name and author I simply cannot remember at the moment (please feel free to chime in if you do).

Rather than show us the faces of terrorists and endless footage of the carnage they wreak on the innocent repeatedly, endlessly, ad nauseam, ad infinitum, providing them and their "causes" with free publicity that money can't buy and encouraging an endless stream of like-minded wingnuts to blaze their own trails to hell for the amusement of a voyeuristic public, I'd like to propose a caricature be developed that places terrorists in an appropriate context--say, a skinny, mangy, rabid dog foaming at the mouth. Whenever an act of terror is perpetrated, place ONLY this image on the screen along with whatever description of the act and brief video clip is relevant. Any time thereafter when a terror suspect or convicted/dead terrorist is named, put their name under the mangy, rabid dog as a stand-in for their picture. Use as many mangy, rabid dogs as needed to represent any number of these morons. We can even differentiate domestic and foreign terrorists by using, say, a mangy, rabid dog for a domestic terrorist and a mangy rabid jackal for a foreign terrorist (or hyena, or some other unattractive lesser animal--I'm nothing if not flexible).

I might even watch an entire newscast again if these standards were adopted without an aching thumb from changing channels on my remote any time a glorified punk is shown on TV again, again, again and yet AGAIN.