Tis the season to be PC

Well, it’s that time of year again. Starting with Columbus Day and extending through Thanksgiving to Christmas, the forces of Political Correctness expend an enormous amount of time and energy attacking and villifying a variety of American cultural traditions and holidays. They seem to be never happy, but instead are intent on forging a utopia of eternal tolerance and inclusion (no matter what the cost) where the right to not be offended is the greatest right of all.

School says Thanksgiving is for ‘mourning’ and that the holiday is a ‘bitter reminder of 500 years of ‘betrayal’.

Yes, let us all don our favorite funeral wear and mope around next Thursday. The tolerance mongers and self-loathers around us will not be happy until we are all as unhappy as they are. It’s one thing to take a pot shot or two at an Italian seeking a better trade route and managing to cross a great ocean with three leaky boats. But messing with Thanksgiving? Have they no shame? And does being in mourning directly conflict with my ability to ‘give Thanks’ for the blessings that have been bestowed upon my family, this nation and its people? That is the question that must be asked and the quandry that needs to be addressed.

“With so many holidays approaching we want to again remind you that Thanksgiving can be a particularly difficult time for many of our Native students,” the letter said.

The school letter refers educators to a website, Oyate, run by an outside organization that promotes Indian culture, and recommends teachers explore it.

“Here you will discover ways to help you and your students think critically, and find resources where you can learn about Thanksgiving from a Native American perspective,” the letter said. “Eleven myths are identified about Thanksgiving, take a look at No. 11 and begin your own deconstruction.”

The website’s “Myth No. 11″ is that “Thanksgiving is a happy time.”

And so the PC proponents strike again, and attempt to 'right' the wrongs from five hundred years ago while refighting King Philips War. All this while trying to ruin Thanksgiving for the rest of us.

And if you thought it was too soon for the annual Christmas controversy to begin you are incorrect. In my old stomping ground, the city of Fort Collins, Co, the attempted complete secularization of Christmas is in full swing.

Colored lights likely to stay in city holiday displays

“I have gotten over 200 e-mails damning my soul for what people think is the city banning traditional holiday displays and Christmas and we’re not going to do that, or at least I am not supporting that,” (Fort Collins Mayor) Hutchinson Friday from New Orleans….The holiday display debate went national in recent weeks when media including Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly started following the issue. Hutchinson said he has since been fielding phone calls and e-mails from citizens numbering “more than I can count anymore.”

And not to be outdone the local sheriff waded in with ‘both barrels blazing’.

Ft. Collins Boulderized: the Task Force that denied Christmas by Sheriff Jim Alderdan.

Our Founding Fathers fought in part for the right of citizens to freely express their religious beliefs. Express – not suppress. It seems that government at all levels is more interested in suppressing Christian beliefs. The recommendations of the Holiday Display Task Force are clearly designed to suppress the thanksgiving and joyfulness of Christians for the birth of Jesus Christ.

In the interest of political correctness and cultural diversity, the Ft. Collins’ Holiday Display Task Force caved to the left and denied the faith and heritage of the majority. It’s in vogue.

Larimer County Manager Frank Lancaster is having a coronary over Alderdan’s column on the subject posted on the Sheriff Departments website and the fact that the sheriff is going to put up his own Christmas tree on county property complete with multi-colored lights and an angel on top (gasp, the horror).

“My initial reaction is that it probably violates the Constitution which we are supposed to be upholding. I’ll have to check with our attorney.” - Larimer County Manager Frank Lancaster

Now I must admit I am probably a bit biased when it comes to these two men. When I was exploring a possible bid for city council, Doug Hutchison contacted me and we spent a couple hours together talking politics and drinking a couple of the finest beverages Applebees had to offer. At that time he was not the mayor of Ft. Collins, but was very well known and active in the local political scene. I also served together with Sheriff Alderdan on the Larimer County Republican Executive Board for awhile and was one of the delegates that helped him to unseat the incumbent GOP sheriff at the time during the primaries. He is also the sheriff that issued me my concealed handgun permit right after the events of 9-11.

I feel that I can say with some confidence that both of these men have backbones, intelligence, and concrete principles when it comes to the potential political minefields of the day and I admire their bold stands in this particular ‘controversy’.

Increasingly, anything that might be associated with Christianity or the Caucasian race in any way is systematically undermined, attacked, diluted and maligned at every opportunity. History is rewritten, tradition condemned to the trash heap, and the common threads of American culture are sacrificed on the bloody altar of Political Correctness to appease the triune god of Multiculturalism, Diversity and Tolerance.

The time of playing the role of doormat must end for American Christians, conservatives, Constitutionalists, patriots and traditionalists of all stripes. A few bold men and women taking a stand will make all the difference and set the example that it is ‘ok’ for us not to accept the hand-wringing and cultural gerrymandering of those on the Left. Those who seek to dismantle Western culture may believe they are progressive, but in the end they are merely destructive.

Posted by David M. Huntwork at November 20, 2007 1:03 AM
Comments
Comment #238739

So, David H., are you for the Seattle Schools having local control of education or, do you think the federal government should step in to defend our nation’s name and actions regarding our nation’s treatment of American Indians over the last few hundred years?

When I read your introductory paragraph, I though you were going to write a critical article about the GOP. What you wrote has applied perfectly to the last 7 years:

They seem to be never happy, but instead are intent on forging a utopia of eternal tolerance and inclusion (no matter what the cost) where the right to not be offended is the greatest right of all.

David H. said: “All this while trying to ruin Thanksgiving for the rest of us.”

Interesting, you mean this action in Seattle threatens to ruin your Thanksgiving? Is acknowledging the immorality of our past treatment of indigenous people’s here going to prevent you from being thankful for all the blessings that have been visited upon you by being born and raised in America? (Assuming you were.)

Should the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment simply be ignored when it comes to government? Church, home, private time and property are all available to Christians for the free exercise of their religious observance. Why do you insist that our Government observe their religion too in direct violation of the 1st Amendment? We are a nation of many faiths? Should all faiths have their religious icons and traditions erected on government properties at taxpayer expense?

Do you so revere the marriage of religion and state as in Iran, that you demand we emulate it here?

David H., when you say “anything that might be associated with Christianity or the Caucasian race in any way is systematically undermined, attacked, diluted and maligned at every opportunity.”, are you quoting David Duke directly, or paraphrasing? Just curious.

And you find the terms: “Multiculturalism, Diversity and Tolerance” offensive, socialist, ethnically biased against Caucasions, do you? Seems to me, it is not revisionist history that bothers as much as folks of similar views as yours meeting little success in revising that history.

We are a nation of immigrants of nearly all ethnicity groups. Caucasions brought the Africans and Chinese here for slave labor on the plantations and railroads. Now you decry that our nation is less Politically Correct toward Caucasions and Christians? Caucasions emigrated to Northern Mexico, and when their numbers were sufficient, they fought the Mexicans to take Tejas for themselves away from Mexico. Do you decry the Mexican multicultural nature of the S. West, and its diversity, tolerance for Mexican ethnicity?

I had heard that the KKK no longer wears robes, and that a few of their leaders are now college educated, and can string together hate with a sophisticated use of the English language. I have been waiting for some time for this illegal immigration issue to bring the KKK and Aryan nation spiel out of the woodwork. And I say that as one who has opposed illegal immigration since the 1980’s, and porous borders since 9/11

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 20, 2007 3:55 AM
Comment #238745
Why do you insist that our Government observe their religion too in direct violation of the 1st Amendment?

Because he doesn’t want to know about other religions. He wants Christianity enshrined as the national religion. For the time being, it’s ok for you to practice your religion, as long as he doesn’t have to hear about it.

Really, could it be more obvious?

Posted by: Jeff Seltzer at November 20, 2007 8:46 AM
Comment #238753

Well, it’s that time of year again. Starting with Columbus Day and extending through Thanksgiving to Christmas, the forces of Conservative Christianity expend an enormous amount of time and energy beating their breasts and crying to the heavens that their American cultural traditions and holidays are under attack. They seem to be never happy, but instead are intent on scratching up every goofball story they can find on the Internet to prove that their religion (practiced by 81.1% of the population) is somehow a repressed minority.

Sorry, but try raising your kids as agnostic. Then you might have something to say on this subject. Multiculturalism is only a threat if you think your culture is the only one that’s worthwhile.

L

Posted by: leatherankh at November 20, 2007 11:04 AM
Comment #238754


David H.: Do you know the history of Thanksgiving? Do you know the history of the pagan holliday we call Christmas? Do you know the historical relationship between the KKK and the Protestant church?

Posted by: jlw at November 20, 2007 11:11 AM
Comment #238755

The so-called PC “tolerance” crowd really shows their true colors this time of year.

Proud to be an American? You hate all others.
Don’t feel guilty for being white? You’re a member of the klan or the aryan nation.
Believe even Christians should be allowed to express their freedom of religion? You don’t believe in the 1st Amendment.

It’s so nice how the PC crowd demands everybody respects their views but doesn’t respect the views of others.

leather
Christians may be intent on “scratching up every goofball story” as you say, but there are a lot more of those stories than there are of govt listening in on your personal phone conversations isn’t there.
So “tolerant” and fair of you to be so concerned about things that haven’t happened, and yet, totally dismiss the concerns of others over things that are happening now.

You want the “the forces of Conservative Christianity” to stop all this?
Stop telling them how and where they can worship and leave them alone.

Posted by: kctim at November 20, 2007 11:27 AM
Comment #238756

David,

You’re actually contradicting yourself with this piece…

On one hand you imply that ‘we’ need to make sure ‘we’ take a stand and stop the bad guys from ruining our Christian holidays:

A few bold men and women taking a stand will make all the difference and set the example that it is ‘ok’ for us not to accept the hand-wringing and cultural gerrymandering of those on the Left.

And yet, in this same piece, you bemoan (read: whine) about your perceived rights to celebrate Christian-based holidays in the way you see fit:

Increasingly, anything that might be associated with Christianity or the Caucasian race in any way is systematically undermined, attacked, diluted and maligned at every opportunity.

So which is it, David? Do citizens have the right to celebrate holidays as they see fit? Or are we to only accept your views on the matter?

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at November 20, 2007 11:36 AM
Comment #238759

DR
ALL RIGHT! You are on a roll.


DMH
Yeah. What he said.Denial of the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans is EXACTLY the same as as the Turkish denial of the Armenian Genocide or the Japanese denial of the Rape of Nanking.We do have plenty of things to be thankful for this holiday but purposeful ignorance and denial of history is not one of them.

Posted by: Bills at November 20, 2007 11:59 AM
Comment #238761

BTW Christmas was taken over in a hostile bid by Dysney and Hallmark anyway.

Posted by: BillS at November 20, 2007 12:05 PM
Comment #238763

Can you explain to me why why anyone that doesn’t celebrate Christmas should be required to pay taxes for those decorations? Why not just do this through your churches?

Posted by: Max at November 20, 2007 12:07 PM
Comment #238764

Also, let me get this straight. The mayor is removing Christmas decorations from government buildings…. So what? Why should government buildings have Christmas decorations?

Posted by: Max at November 20, 2007 12:12 PM
Comment #238765

I will celebrate Thanksgiving by giving thanks for all the blessings God has given me. I will not be ashamed nor will I feel guilty in doing so.

I will celebrate Christmas by reverently observing the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ. I will not be ashamed nor will I feel guilty in doing so.

I will not think of American Indians at Thanksgiving nor will I think of pagan Christmas trees while celebrating Christmas.

Also, I will NOT denegrate those who celebrate Kwanzaa, Hanukka or any other cultural or religious celebrations that occur at any time of the year. I may not observe them, but I will not attempt to attach negative humanistic images to them.

As far as you all are concerned, dear readers, if you wish to celebrate Thanksgiving or if you wish to spend the day mourning the fate of American Indians…that is your choice. If you wish to focus on the pagan aspects of Christmas instead of focusing on the birth of the most influential person to ever walk the earth, that also is your choice.

The choices you make are your choices. I will not demean your choice. After all, that’s what this life is all about. Whether you are a devout Christian, Muslim, Jew, Agnostic or Atheist…your choices are your choices. They define who you believe you are.

I will not ridicule your choice of religion (or lack thereof), nor will I attempt to “make you see the light”.

I have made my choice. ‘Nuff said.

Posted by: Jim T at November 20, 2007 12:15 PM
Comment #238772

David, perhaps the whole controversy in Fort Collins could have been avoided had the City Council allowed the Menorah to be displayed when asked to do so by citizens from the Jewish community. See this article:

If you truly believe in the 1st amendment, then should ALL religions be allowed to express their beliefs? Not just the majority? Seems to me it is the Christians at war with anyone else who does not share their beliefs.

Posted by: Steve K at November 20, 2007 12:43 PM
Comment #238775

Jim T., spoken like a person who respects American ideals as laid down in our founding documents. Bravo!

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 20, 2007 12:49 PM
Comment #238779

David,

Thank you. I try very hard to respect the choices others have made that differ from mine.

You see, when the words affirming that all human beings are endowed with certain inalienable rights, including life, liberty and the persuit of happiness were written…I believed it.

When the 1st Amendment says that Congress shall make no law…I believed it.

When the Bible says that we should treat (and respect) others as we would like to be treated (and respected)…I believed it.

I do slip up now and then…more than I would like to admit…but I’m doing my best.

Posted by: Jim T at November 20, 2007 1:14 PM
Comment #238781

The original sense of political correctness was Maoist. The notion was that you would say what was considered to be correct by mao and the party leadership, and you’d be rewarded for that.

And now this flap about the War against Christmas, this flap against secularization and everything.

By it’s original sense, the War on Christmas Rhetoric is a form of political correctness. Isn’t it unfair, they say, that they’re generalizing the holidays to be all inclusive to the citizens? Shouldn’t we be allowed to favor our own religion above all others, despite what the constitution says about government staying out of things like that?

The holidays are, in many ways, fairly secular. We can’t force people to be reverent, and having it become the politically correct religion to follow won’t help things.

The real PC run amok is the de-secularization of politics. The real PC run amok is the politicization of our approach to war. The real PC run amok is the broad attempt to protect the sacred cows of white America, opposing political views that might lead us to think that American isn’t pristine and innocent.

The Republicans have created their own brand of political correctness, one which they’ve had no compunction about trying to enforce on others.

Christmas doesn’t need a bodyguard of religious pundits to survive.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 20, 2007 1:50 PM
Comment #238785

Steve K
From what I have been told on here, it does not matter what the minority want or believe. If the majority of people believe an xmas tree is better for the “community” or “society,” then people with different views should just shut up and be forced to support their decision.

And if they don’t like it, they can always vote for people who think like them.

Posted by: kctim at November 20, 2007 2:09 PM
Comment #238787

kctim, not sure if your comment is meant to be serious or not. But if you are implying the simple majority viewpoint should always prevail, the lots of people ought to shut up and move on (no pun intended). The right to life folks are in the minority. Soon those opposing gay marriage will be in the minority. I think the 1st amendment aims to protect the minority, not the majority as much. It should protect all of us, and indeed if you apply the 1st amendment correctly it would protest all of us by allowing all of us to freely exercise our religion, not just exercise it according to how the majority of folks feel.

Then again, your post may be “sarcastic”. :)

Posted by: Steve K at November 20, 2007 2:33 PM
Comment #238789


According to the History channel, the garden of Eden is no longer a mythological place. It’s where abouts has been discovered. Eden was inundated in the great flood and is now covered by the waters of the Persian Gulf. All Christians, Jews, Muslims and Sumarians should watch the rerun.

Posted by: jlw at November 20, 2007 2:46 PM
Comment #238793

kctim-
You then go from just supporting a religious display by default to enforcing it by diktat.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 20, 2007 3:31 PM
Comment #238794

Steve K, I am not being “sarcastic.”
I have been told time and again that what the majority feels is the best for society is what counts. The personal viewpoints of those in the minority, do not.

So, if 80 or 90% of the people believe Santa and xmas trees are ok, then there is nothing wrong with putting them up on public property.

Posted by: kctim at November 20, 2007 3:33 PM
Comment #238795

kctim, well then the question is “What do you believe?”, not what you have been told on here time and time again.

For me the idea that 51% of the people can dictate what the other 49% must accept wrong. The 49% ought to have a voice too. So if 51% want Christmas trees and Santa, no problem. But if say 10% want a Menorah, then they should be allowed to have that as well. If 10% want dancing Penguins, so be it. Our society should aim to be more inclusive of others, not less, given the assumption that by being more inclusive does not directly harm society. Realize we cannot include everybody and their beliefs in every decision, but when it comes to stuff like this, the answer seems pretty easy to me. As a Christian, seeing a Menorah does not cause me any harm or fear. Now if the neo-nazis want a swastika, then we got a problem. :)

Again, if the Fort Collins city council had just allowed the Menorah to be displayed, then no problem. The Jewish rabbi went and asked if he could add a Menorah and was told, NO. How do you think that made him feel? Like he was part of the community or not? Personally I believe that if you asked folks should a Menorah be displayed, you’d get a solid majority that said “Sure, why not.” Again problem solved.

The problem seems to come in when a few people are deciding, and those few have a strong bias for or against something, and do not take into consideration how others might be affected.

Posted by: Steve K at November 20, 2007 3:44 PM
Comment #238796

jlw
Its right next to Atlantis isn’t it?

Posted by: BillS at November 20, 2007 3:57 PM
Comment #238797

Remer, et al. -

If the government cannot encourage the proper and traditional celebration of Thanksgiving and Christmas (as it has in the past) then it is time for government to stay completely out of those celebrations as well as any other religious celebrations. (And, being non-Christian, you don’t have to participate in those celebrations…there is still religious freedom here [except for Christians] last time I checked. You of course, can participate in whatever religious celebration you think you could enjoy, if any). That Democrat, as well as Republican and Whig, presidents of the past encouraged the celebration of Thanksgiving and proclaimed it as our DUTY as citizens should be of great interest to you and might surprise some. The fact that school systems and other government organizations are attempting to CHANGE the meaning of Thanksgiving (or Christmas) is an affront to all who believe in giving thanks (religious or not). That government celebrates “tree lighting” with no mention of “Christmas” is an affront to Christian believers in the religious holiday of Christmas. Government should stay out of the events entirely or keep the meaning entirely…anything else is PC’ing and intolerable.
Those who don’t like Thanksgiving can spend the day in misery and gloom if they like. Those who don’t believe in the celebration of Christ’s birth can just spend the day being as mean and rude as usual. However, those individuals have no say in how I should spend those days. Nor does what they think about those of us who enjoy those holy days have any meaning or significance.

Posted by: Don at November 20, 2007 3:59 PM
Comment #238798

Don said…

“…those individuals have no say in how I should spend those days.”

Uummm… I don’t believe I have seen anyone suggest otherwise?

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at November 20, 2007 4:09 PM
Comment #238799
there is still religious freedom here [except for Christians] last time I checked

LOL

Christians - the persecuted 81% minority who have all the power. Boo hoo.

As several here have said more elegantly than I’ve even tried, the only limitations placed on Christians and Christianity is the Constitutional requirement that it recognize that it’s not the only religion in a pluralistic society. All other religions have the same constraints, but in America only Christians think that they should be exempt from them.

Posted by: LawnBoy at November 20, 2007 4:11 PM
Comment #238800

Why, if we are strong in our faith and firm in our beliefs, would we be so worried and concerned that someone of different beliefs would want to espouse them as well?

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 20, 2007 4:12 PM
Comment #238801

Steve K.
What do I believe? I believe this whole mess was brought about simply because Christians started to be bigger supporters of Republicans, than Democrats.

I am an atheist. When I drive down main street and see a nativiety scene or menorah or something at city hall, it does not bother me one bit. But, I am sure it would if I had an axe to grind with those who believe in it.

“Our society should aim to be more inclusive of others, not less”

Because we all have different beliefs and it is not govts job to force us to share the same beliefs?
Well guess what, that happens to Americans every payday. So why worry about how others might be affected for one thing, but not for another?

We are now a democracy, majority rules. So if the masses want it, they get it.

Posted by: kctim at November 20, 2007 4:19 PM
Comment #238810

Steve K said: “The 49% ought to have a voice too.”

They do. What they don’t have is 51%, which our founding fathers deemed to be called a majority for political purposes. Being a minority entitles the minority to organize and speak. It does not entitle them to govern. Simple proposition, really. Rather difficult to understand why so many have such a problem with it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 20, 2007 5:20 PM
Comment #238811
So if the masses want it, they get it.

Within the constraints established by the Constitution.

Posted by: LawnBoy at November 20, 2007 5:29 PM
Comment #238814

Stephen D. said: “The original sense of political correctness was Maoist. The notion was that you would say what was considered to be correct by mao and the party leadership, and you’d be rewarded for that.”

Not quite accurate, Stephen. The term was coined by the Marxists Trotskyites, but, the U.S. Supreme Court first acknowledged the concept in 1793, Chisolm v. Georgia, where in the following passage appears:

Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our common, even in our convivial, language. Is a toast asked? ‘The United States,’ instead of the ‘People of the United States,’ is the toast given. This is not politically correct. The toast is meant to present to view the first great object in the Union: It presents only the second: It presents only the artificial person, instead of the natural persons, who spoke it into existence.

And again (ibid):

The mode of expression, which I would substitute in the place of that generally used, is not only politically, but also (for between true liberty and true taste there is a close alliance) classically more correct.

The concept first appears in US Jurisprudence, and therefore, was not originated by Marxists, though certainly embraced as a tool for revisionist history. One The GOP has adopted with great alacrity since 1994.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 20, 2007 5:49 PM
Comment #238815

kctim said: “So if the masses want it, they get it.”

NO. They don’t get it unless there is a majority in Congress, simple or super, to grant it. We are not a direct democracy. The people, even a majority of them, do not legislate. Their representatives are required for that to occur. It is called a Republic, or representative form of democracy.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 20, 2007 5:52 PM
Comment #238818

I worked for a large medical device company for many years. They enforced strict PC regarding many things, including political positions, but the most vociferously enforced was that one could never talk honestly about the shortcomings of the products. Censure and social isolation were the result. But, yes, it’s those liberal guys that have PC. Conservatives are just as open-minded as can be.

Posted by: mental wimp at November 20, 2007 6:02 PM
Comment #238848

Lawnboy -

“Christians - the persecuted 81% minority who have all the power. Boo hoo.”

Wrong on several levels. First, you show your bigotry. Second, percentage of population has nothing to do with it. Third, you haven’t looked around much recently, because Christianity doesn’t have “all the power”, nor anything nearing the 81% of the population you claim.

“All other religions have the same constraints, but in America only Christians think that they should be exempt from them.”

Wrong again. Christians don’t claim exemption. They claim inclusion. They want to be allowed to worship and celebrate as they have in the past. PC and lawsuits have added many restrictions to the public celebration of Christian beliefs. Christians don’t mind that some want to celebrate “Festivus”. Just don’t restrict the public celebration of Christ’s birth for Christian believers, or try to change its meaning.

Posted by: Don at November 20, 2007 11:44 PM
Comment #238851

Don said: “PC and lawsuits have added many restrictions to the public celebration of Christian beliefs.”

That is pure KKK, Aryan nation propaganda, Don. Christians have lost not a single case or had a single restriction imposed upon their public celebration of Christian beliefs. Christians may go Carroling in public, place Christmas ornamentation on their private building exteriors, hold public rallies and assemblies, their celebration can be heard on Radio stations and in TV broadcasts, as can their religious services.

The only restrictions imposed are the same that apply to ALL other religions, that taxpayer money nor government resources may be used to promote their religion as the one sanctioned by the government as the national religion, in any way, shape, or form. It’s in the Constitution, 1st Amendment.

Would you prefer overthrowing this government and Constitution to make the new government a Christian ONLY government, as Iran’s government has made Islam its national religion? Change the channel Don, this propaganda is not appropriate for Americans who wish to protect and defend our Constitution.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 21, 2007 12:07 AM
Comment #238875


The public places in my town are already decorated with candy canes, Christmas trees, raindeer, sleds, and santa’s. The churches have mangers with baby Jesus. Many yards have all of the above. No one is complaining, everyone is in a festive mood. the super walmart will gross a million dollars on friday,

Posted by: jlw at November 21, 2007 4:24 AM
Comment #238876

Bills: Actually no, Eden is not next to Atlantis. The research presented on the program is very compelling.

Posted by: jlw at November 21, 2007 4:52 AM
Comment #238897
First, you show your bigotry.

Disagreeing with you and not being a fan of your overblown sense of entitlement does not make me a bigot.

I am not an anti-Christian bigot. I grew up in a Lutheran home. I married into a family in which half of the men are Lutheran pastors. I attend the oldest Lutheran church west of the Mississippi and am in the bell choir. However, I do not feel that Christianity has a constitutional place in America above other religions. That doesn’t make me a bigot - it’s the exact opposite.

Between redefining “bigot” and redefining “religious freedom”, you’ve either accepted or invented a lot of propaganda.

Third, you haven’t looked around much recently, because Christianity doesn’t have “all the power”, nor anything nearing the 81% of the population you claim.

Let’s see… President: Christian. Vice President: Christian. The entire cabinet: Christian. Over 95% of the nation’s legislature: Christian. All of the current presidential candidates (with the possible exception of the Mormon, depending on your definition): Christian. The list goes on and on.

The levers of power in this country are held by Christians, but you and others complain that those levers are constrained by the Constitution. Again, boo hoo.

Christians don’t claim exemption.

Actually, that’s exactly what you claim. You complain that you are not allowed to worship as you wish because other religions are acknowledged. You complain that your religious holidays are disrespected when a fraction of the level of respect Christmas and Easter receive is extended to the holidays of other religions.

Christians don’t claim exemption.

Really? So how do you explain that Christianity is the only religion in America that tries to replace scientific discovery with its particular religious notions in public school curricula?

They want to be allowed to worship and celebrate as they have in the past.

And no one is stopping you from worshiping and celebrating as you have in the past, within the home, within your places of worship, and within the private sphere. No one is stopping corporations and the media from spending billions of dollars with themed sales, events, and programs based on your chosen religions. The only request is that one religion not be allowed anymore to push all other religions into the realm of irrelevance using public taxpayer funds and power.

Nothing stops you from worshiping as you wish - you’re just prevented from unconstitutionally using everyone else’s taxes to pursue your beliefs.

restrictions to the public celebration of Christian beliefs

Putting Christianity on exactly the same level as all other religions. That’s far from your claim that all religions but Christianity have religions freedom.

Just don’t restrict the public celebration of Christ’s birth for Christian believers, or try to change its meaning.

And just don’t use other people’s tax money to celebrate your religious holiday in the way you want to celebrate it.

The only restrictions imposed are the same that apply to ALL other religions, that taxpayer money nor government resources may be used to promote their religion as the one sanctioned by the government as the national religion, in any way, shape, or form. It’s in the Constitution, 1st Amendment.

I’m repeating David’s accurate statement here in case you missed it the first time.

Posted by: LawnBoy at November 21, 2007 10:32 AM
Comment #238904

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

THAT, is what is “in the Constitution, 1st Amendment.”

Congress cannot pass a law requiring someplace, such as City Hall in San Fran, to display religion.
But it also cannot pass a law prohibiting someplace, such as City Hall in the heartland, from displaying religion.

All this “promoting religion as THE one sanctioned by govt in order to create a national religion” stuff is nothing but perverting what the Constitution actually says for something to push an agenda to deny evil Christians their right to freedom of religion.

Posted by: kctim at November 21, 2007 12:13 PM
Comment #238907

Remer -

“That is pure KKK, Aryan nation propaganda, Don.”

Thanks for this purposeful offensive retort. I believe it truly shows your character.

“Christians have lost not a single case or had a single restriction imposed upon their public celebration of Christian beliefs.”

This is a bold-faced lie and you know it. Public celebration of Christmas has been changed by PC and by lawsuit (or the threat of lawsuit) all over middle America.
If you cannot be honest in this one small area of discussion how can you be trusted on any other issue? Again I question your character.

Character is not normally the issue for discussion here, but when your arguments are filled with purposeful lies and accusing others of association with the KKK and Hitler it becomes the issue.

“The only restrictions imposed are the same that apply to ALL other religions,…”

Another falsehood. Fact is that many public schools this past year have been discovered promoting the understanding of Hinduism and/or Islam while outlawing ANY discussion of Christianity or Judaism. Many local governments have been promoting events favorable to Islamic celebrations while making restrictions to hinder events favorable to Christians. If you would do some reading outside the mainstream and liberal press you would find the truth.

The final character issue is when you purposefully twist the meaning of someone’s words…
“Would you prefer overthrowing this government and Constitution to make the new government a Christian ONLY government, as Iran’s government has made Islam its national religion? Change the channel Don, this propaganda is not appropriate for Americans who wish to protect and defend our Constitution.”

This paragraph has nothing at all to do with what I wrote. I never said anything of the sort, nor did I imply it. You said it (it’s probably your opinion of Christians).

Posted by: Don at November 21, 2007 12:23 PM
Comment #238910

Lawnboy -

“Nothing stops you from worshiping as you wish - you’re just prevented from unconstitutionally using everyone else’s taxes to pursue your beliefs.”

Maybe you didn’t read what I wrote carefully enough. I have no problem with the government getting out of the Christmas celebration.

My issue is with their insistence on CHANGING it and REPLACING it with a PC version. Either do it right or get out.

Posted by: Don at November 21, 2007 12:30 PM
Comment #238913
Maybe you didn’t read what I wrote carefully enough.

Ok, then try again. You said this:

there is still religious freedom here [except for Christians]

How exactly do non-Christians have religious freedom that you don’t? They don’t. You’re just whining that Christianity no longer has unconstitutional benefits that other religions never had.

I have no problem with the government getting out of the Christmas celebration.

My issue is with their insistence on CHANGING it and REPLACING it with a PC version.

So, either they celebrate your religion’s holidays exactly as you wish (which also means no other religions are recognized), or no religion gets any recognition at all. So, you think the Constitution supports a “Christianity or nothing standard”.

Nope.

Posted by: LawnBoy at November 21, 2007 12:42 PM
Comment #238921

Those of you who cry “KKK, Aryan nations, racist, David Duke etc.” everytime someone is ‘un-pc’ should be ashamed of yourselves. Ridiculous name-calling and hysterical characterizations does not help your cause and only strengthens the resolve of those of us who believe in true liberty and freedom and believe the chains of Political Correctness need to be cast off of American culture and debate. The ‘war on Christmas’ is really a ‘war on Christianity’ and those who can’t stand the thought of red Christmas lights on a tree or a candy cane on public property (let alone a plastic stable scene complete with an infant Jesus) because it might make remind someone of ‘the reason for the season’ should be ashamed of yourselves. Castrating your culture in the name of ‘tolerance’ will be ultimately self-destructive.

Posted by: David M. Huntwork at November 21, 2007 1:01 PM
Comment #238925

David H., if your views and words impart the same message as the KKK and Aryan Nation, which they do, then it is fair and honest to note the similarity. I never said you were a member of KKK or the Aryan Nation. I asked if you borrowed from their literature? Me thinks your response doth protest too much, to paraphrase Shakespeare.

Heck, even actual members of the Aryan Nation and KKK will deny it if asked by authorities. Virtual robes and hoods, instead of actual ones.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 21, 2007 1:23 PM
Comment #238927
The ‘war on Christmas’ is really a ‘war on Christianity’

Nah, it’s not even that. It’s just a stupid publicity prank pulled by O’Reilly to whip up his fans with stories taken out of context.

should be ashamed of yourselves

I guess you think I should be ashamed of myself because I recognize that it’s not ok for one religion’s adherents to demand that everyone else’s taxes be spent for recognition of that religion’s holy days (and no other religions’).

Nope. I’m not ashamed of the Constitution. Sorry to disappoint you.

Posted by: LawnBoy at November 21, 2007 1:37 PM
Comment #238930

Don, you reply with a lot of fluff, but, not with one citation or shred of evidence to support your case that Christians have lost anything in the way of religious freedom to observe their religion, outside of the use of taxpayer dollars to promote their religion.

You make accusations and claims like “Another falsehood. Fact is that many public schools this past year have been discovered promoting the understanding of Hinduism and/or Islam while outlawing ANY discussion of Christianity or Judaism. Many local governments have been promoting events favorable to Islamic celebrations while making restrictions to hinder events favorable to Christians.”

But, you offer not a shred of evidence that any of this is true. Surely, if all this has occurred in the last year as you claim, you can provide links to evidence of it. Stating these are facts, does not make them facts. Some Christians have lost cases where public tax dollars were spent on Christian religious displays. But, that neither makes the case that Muslims have won the right to use tax dollars for Islamic displays, nor that Christians have been denied any freedom to private observance without public tax dollar subsidy.

And I do, contrary to your assertion, read many sources outside the MSM. This is from the KKK site for example: She [Clare Booth Luce] told GEO magazine, “Soon there will probably be as many Mexicans in Texas, New Mexico, lower California, and Arizona-and as many Cubans and Latin Americans in Florida-as there are natives…”

Hmmm… Natives, as in American Indians? No, they are referring to Caucasions as natives. Incredible distortion of reality.

Your argument regarding Christians and Muslims receiving differential treatment is of the same hyperbole. If and when Muslims use public tax dollars in observance of their religion, they too will lose their case in our courts.

Your case is so far all hyperbolic projection, without a shred of evidence. Kind of like this on the KKK site: “Christian Books and Things - Your White Heritage Store”. As if to say Christianity is all about White Heritage.

Same twisted distortion as your claims that Christians are losing freedoms to observe their religion in America while government is promoting other religions upon public school children. It just lacks any evidence of truth or fact.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 21, 2007 1:48 PM
Comment #238956

Remer -
If you have read outside of the MSM, as you say, you already know the evidence of the truths I report. Therefore, you lie by insinuating that such evidence does not exist.

If you don’t know about these cases, then you lie about reading outside of MSM.

You cannot prove anything to one who willingly lies.

Calling people, who have a viewpoint other than your own, members of KKK is a perverted way to discredit them, but it does nothing to help your own case. You are a sad man.

I’ve been watching your blogging here for a couple years. I’ve noticed that you have migrated from a man who was willing to discuss issues to one who is further and further on the fringe. I used to enjoy your writing (although I often disagreed), but I can hardly stand reading what you’ve become.

Posted by: Don at November 21, 2007 6:12 PM
Comment #238965

Don,

“many public schools this past year have been discovered promoting the understanding of Hinduism and/or Islam…”

Promoting the understanding….?

And you feel this is a bad thing?

Perhaps if we had “promoted the understanding” prior to Sept.11th, it may not have happened, and we would not have the issues we have “promoting” the war on terror.

Posted by: Rocky at November 21, 2007 7:31 PM
Comment #238968
You cannot prove anything to one who willingly lies.
And nothing can be proved by someone who refuses to provide evidence for his claims. Posted by: LawnBoy at November 21, 2007 7:56 PM
Comment #238970

Don said: “If you have read outside of the MSM, as you say, you already know the evidence of the truths I report.”

Haven’t seen it. But since you insist on attacking the messenger instead of the message, it would be pointless to ask you to provide it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 21, 2007 8:11 PM
Comment #238971

Don, your violation of our rules warrants asking you to no longer post comments here.

Posted by: Watchblog Managing Editor at November 21, 2007 8:18 PM
Comment #238973

What rules did Don violate?

Posted by: pgwarner at November 21, 2007 8:29 PM
Comment #238975

If you are banning Don for, as your rules area puts it…

you may not criticize the person themself

Then please tell me what this is…

I had heard that the KKK no longer wears robes, and that a few of their leaders are now college educated, and can string together hate with a sophisticated use of the English language. I have been waiting for some time for this illegal immigration issue to bring the KKK and Aryan nation spiel out of the woodwork. And I say that as one who has opposed illegal immigration since the 1980’s, and porous borders since 9/11

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 20, 2007 03:55 AM

If I were Mr. Huntwork I would not appreciate being called a Klansman.

Posted by: pgwarner at November 21, 2007 8:48 PM
Comment #238982

pgwarner, NOTHING in what you quoted calls Mr. Huntwork anything. It is a commentary on the KKK, and the fact that their web site is almost entirely dedicated to the illegal immigrant issue.

There’s an old saying, if the shoe fits. If the paragraph you quote fits a person to the point of their feeling it was aimed at them directly, then it is they themselves pointing the finger at themselves. Not the commenter on the general state of the KKK.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 21, 2007 11:13 PM
Comment #238984

pgwarner, calling other participants at WatchBlog liars, is against WatchBlog’s rules. It is a critique of the person, not their commentary. If you have read the Rules, which you agreed to do by virtue of having left a comment here, it should be obvious what rule was violated: Critique the Message, Not the Messenger.

Your comment is not on topic. If you wish to pursue your inquiry about WatchBlog’s rules, please direct your inquiry to managing_editor [at] watchblog.com.

Posted by: Watchblog Managing Editor at November 21, 2007 11:20 PM
Comment #239009

So does this mean that athiests can hang giant banners saying “There is no God” and satanists can hang up large, garish and brilliantly lighted inverted pentagrams at city hall…all at taxpayer expense?

It seems to me that Mr. Huntwork (and Mr. O’Reilly, et al…) should be all for this, given the aspersions cast at those who wish to not be offended. Somehow I doubt that this is the case, though I am more than willing to accept any and all declarations to the contrary.

Perhaps (just maybe) our government has more important things it could be doing with our time and money besides arguing over the hanging up of pretty lights and decorations? Ahh…that’s right, it’s better to keep the people bickering over trivialities and shiny baubles than to have them actually discussing the fact that our country is being driven into insolvency, our currency is rapidly falling into toilet paper status and that the vast majority of the pressing issues this country faces in the real world are marching on ignored year after year.

I can’t tell you how sad it makes me that Americans have allowed the offensive tactic of Divide and Conquer to be used against them by the leadership in this country. Christian vs Atheist, Democrat vs. Republican, Red vs. Blue (you can tell it’s BS when it’s color-coded)…always Us vs. Each Other, when it should be We Citizens vs. the gaggle of out of control, manipulative, corrupt, lying and plundering politicians.

Or we can just repeat the yearly ritual of faux outrage and pretend like a War on Christmas is truly the most important thing going on on this planet we call home.

Hmmm…Rudolph better buy a flak jacket…

Posted by: Liberal Demon at November 22, 2007 8:01 AM
Comment #239018

Liberal Demon, your comment reflects the motives of so very many Democrats and Republicans having left their respective parties in the last 2 decades to become Independent voters.

America’s republic is being tested at this very moment. Though we are not a direct democracy, history teaches many times over that leadership cannot long survive if the following withdraws their support for that leadership. The majority of the citzenry of the U.S. has withdrawn its support for the current leadership.

What happens going forward in the wake of this historic time, could reunite the nation, or undermine its integrity and ability to sustain its future. You are so right. A house divided cannot long remain standing.

69% of Americans now reject the efficacy of the Bush administration. If the next President and Congress are not able to unite at least 51% of those 69% behind a path forward, our nation will not be able to solve the enormous threats to its future. And that would be devastating not only for America, but, the world.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 22, 2007 10:13 AM
Comment #239108

Perhaps David R. should visit a few Communist party sites and then compare them to the ideology and policies of the Democratic Party. I think he’d be surprised at the similarities that he’d find. And yet I don’t broadly smear Democrats or Progressives as Marxists. The fringe copies and mimics the more mainstream all the time in their efforts to appear legitimate. The views here are pretty much stock and barrel conservative views and should not a surprise to anyone. To not address them but only dismiss them as David Duke mutterings is taking the easy way out and is part of the problem when dealing with the PC crowd. I guess when you can’t really debate an issue resorting to smearing with stereotypes is the next resort.

Posted by: David M. Huntwork at November 24, 2007 10:07 AM
Post a comment