The war over Christmas, or liberal causes about which I do not give one greasy shit, pt. 1
I fear that this post might incur the sorts of comments Austi 5000 received when nonchalantly dismissing the intelligent design cretins. But seriously, the "War on Christmas" is a tired old news story manufactured year after year by the networks. First of all, there is no attack on religion involved--because Christmas is not a spiritual holiday; it's a weekend sale at Talbots. People who really give a shit about the birth of Jesus and Christianity are either not the ones involved in the battle, because their spiritual lives are untouched by the addition or subtraction of a nativity scene from a municipal building, or they are waging a "war" under an illusion.
On the flip side of things, secularists who think they are winning some sort of "church and state" battle by boycotting stores that say "Merry Christmas!" are under the worst sort of misconception. (Here again I think I am [hesitantly] in agreement with Austi about such causes.) While I think that the US is unfairly anti-atheist, as in no openly atheist person could ever be elected to a high position, the whole Christmas debate is not the arena to fight this tendency. Until the government is sodomizing everyone with light-up plastic Jesus dildoes, I will be able to endure the Christmas season without taking up arms against public Christmas trees (or "inter-faith celebration plants," or whatever their new term is). Maybe it would be better to shake up Congress a bit, where 100% of Senators and House Reps are religious. Or to discourage the executive branch from consorting with James Dobson and Jerry Falwell about court appointees. In the meantime, the "War on Christmas" is largely a hoax used to galvanize partisans.
This all sounds very "South Park" method, wherein you take an important topic and make it look vapid and ridiculous before asserting your own position. But I repeat: Christmas is for the majority of people not a religious matter, the fight over church and state should be fought elsewhere, and the entire fight is largely a media concoction. Thoughts?
On the flip side of things, secularists who think they are winning some sort of "church and state" battle by boycotting stores that say "Merry Christmas!" are under the worst sort of misconception. (Here again I think I am [hesitantly] in agreement with Austi about such causes.) While I think that the US is unfairly anti-atheist, as in no openly atheist person could ever be elected to a high position, the whole Christmas debate is not the arena to fight this tendency. Until the government is sodomizing everyone with light-up plastic Jesus dildoes, I will be able to endure the Christmas season without taking up arms against public Christmas trees (or "inter-faith celebration plants," or whatever their new term is). Maybe it would be better to shake up Congress a bit, where 100% of Senators and House Reps are religious. Or to discourage the executive branch from consorting with James Dobson and Jerry Falwell about court appointees. In the meantime, the "War on Christmas" is largely a hoax used to galvanize partisans.
This all sounds very "South Park" method, wherein you take an important topic and make it look vapid and ridiculous before asserting your own position. But I repeat: Christmas is for the majority of people not a religious matter, the fight over church and state should be fought elsewhere, and the entire fight is largely a media concoction. Thoughts?
posted by to scranton at 10:36 PM
3 Comments:
It's a stupid fight to pick based on triviality and ephemerality. I agree the real fight is elsewhere. From the perspetive of mere strategy as well, this is going to be one of those things that makes liberals (or are we supposed to call them progressives now? (as if they were)) look like...
DUM DUM DUM
'HAIR SPLITTERS'
I don't understand how conservatives in this country have been able to criticize the opposition party from opposing them
Sheriff and Scranton -- who are these "liberals"/"secularists" boycotting stores? There's no doubt that the war on christmas is brought up every year, but unless my news sources are so biased that I'm missing something, isn't it being fought entirely by conservatives (O'Reilly being the chief culprit)? I am in complete agreement about not caring about this issue, but only because I think the O'reilly's really aren't representing mainstream opinion. If they are, though, we're in big trouble, and just a short trip over to Media Matters will tell you why: the belief is not that there's a war on Christmas, but a CONSPIRATORIAL war against Christmas, funded by George Soros. Soros is a Jew which makes the "big rich Jew conspiracy theory" undertone against Christians a little creepy for me. It reminds me of a line from an otherwise stupid-looking movie line in an upcoming movie on anti-semitism. The documentarian is interviewing some guy talking about how the Jews rule the media when the interviewer asks him about Rupert Murdoch, owner of the most popular cable news media station, Fox News. "Rupert Murdoch is a Jew!" the man explains.
P.S. This will be my first and last post where I go on a rant about anti-semitism. Perhaps it's the Commentary Magazine rubbing off on me.
So we all agree that its stupid and a fabricated war, just like Korea, right?
Post a Comment
<< Home