How the Left Stole Christmas
By Lowman S. Henry|The Mercury
As surely as silver bells ring and halls get decked the arrival of the Christmas season will reignite controversy over the expression of Christian religious beliefs in the public square. Despite the fact that Christmas is, at its core, a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, there are those who strive mightily to scrub any reference to the son of God from the holiday.
Typically the debate centers on the perceived constitutional right of non-believers to not be subjected to religious themes. In reality what is occurring is an all-out assault on the actual constitutional rights of Christians who are engaging in the “free exercise” of both religion and speech.
The rights of Christians attempting to celebrate a major religious holiday are what are being abridged, not the rights of non-believers. Over the years the debate has been framed exactly backward as atheists and others assumed the mantle of victimhood and played upon misperceptions of what the constitution actually says.
The constitution does not erect a wall of separation between church and state. It does prohibit the “establishment of religion.” That clause was born of the framers desire not to have a government sanctioned church such as existed in the mother country, England, from whom they had just won independence.
Further, the constitution does guarantee the “free exercise” of religion. Here is where those seeking to remove Christ from the celebration of Christmas trample the rights of Christian believers. And, while the constitution does prohibit the establishment of a state religion, it does not guarantee anybody the right to be insulated from those engaged in the free exercise of their religious rights.
In a nation where Christians are constantly exhorted to be tolerant of other faiths, with the emphasis most recently on Islam, stifling the celebration of the Christian religion has become acceptable, even encouraged in many quarters. Thus we are subjected to such actions as renaming Christmas trees holiday trees. The fact is a Christmas tree is no more a holiday tree than a Menorah is a holiday candelabra. It has a religious connotation, and in the case of this symbol, a somewhat secularized one. To deny the display of the tree is to deny a constitutional right.
In recent years, Chester County has been a battleground over the placement of a Christmas tree on the court house grounds. This year commissioners have taken a stand and erected a Christmas tree and a Menorah in celebration of the Christian and Jewish holidays.
Chester County Commissioner Terence Farrell told a Philadelphia television station: “Our decision was to take back the display, do what is traditional, doing what the Supreme Court said we can do.” In fact, they are doing what the constitution says they can do.
In past years commissioners have sought to placate militant atheists by allowing the placement of a “Tree of Knowledge” alongside the religious displays. This year the Tree of Knowledge will not be allowed and, predictably, there are howls of protest. Not only is the Tree of Knowledge not a religious symbol, and therefore not constitutionally protected, but the insistence of erecting it during the celebrations of Christmas and Hanukah is a deliberate attempt to provoke.
Ironically, the term “Tree of Knowledge” has a Biblical basis. In Genesis 2:16-17 God commanded Adam: “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” It seems the atheists cannot escape God no matter how hard they try.
point in fact – our founding fathers OUTLAWED the celebration of christmas seeing it as pagan and papist.
and while the constitution does not erect a separation – the celebration of christmas as a federal holiday is the promotion of all religions that celebrate christmas (which does not include all christians – as some still feel it is pagan and blasphemous).
there’s more . . . but really what is the point when all you nuts seem to assume there are only christians, jews and atheists in the world and furthermore that only one of those groups deserves respect.
[Reply]
MWFH's Reply:
December 29th, 2010 at 11:04 am
We shouldn’t describe Puritans as our founding fathers, despite the fact they arrived long before the Constitution, Bill of Rights,and the Declaration of Independence was conceived. Puritans were religious fundamentalists who adhered to a strict doctrine. We suggest that by the time the founding fathers, authors of America’s fundamental laws, had a definite liberal view toward religion and its practices when America declared its independence. God Bless
[Reply]
Dawn Reply:
December 30th, 2010 at 10:06 am
well they are but even putting that aside – it was not a state recognized holiday until the mid 1800s.
as to “had definite liberal view toward religion . . . independence” — well, there was a well known hatred of catholics at the time and i don’t believe the maryland toleration act had been revised yet so we could argue about that all day.
but if we take the spirit of what you said and assume they were liberal toward religion and its practices . . . well, i am all for that!
goddess bless you
[Reply]