Sign-up to receive our free newsletter.
Every Christmas season some demand that it not be celebrated publicly because they find it offensive. Others find their demands offensive, but there is no significant effort to make them refrain from public comment.
Nor should there be. If sincere, however, they should at least
consider taking their own advice.
Here is an article by Ben Stein on Christmas trees and such. He writes,
I am a Jew, and every single one of my ancestors was Jewish. And it does not bother me even a little bit when people call those beautiful lit up, bejewelled trees, Christmas trees. I don’t feel threatened. I don’t feel discriminated against. That’s what they are, Christmas trees.
It doesn’t bother me a bit when people say, ‘Merry Christmas’ to me. I don’t think they are slighting me or getting ready to put me in a ghetto. In fact, I kind of like it. It shows that we are all brothers and sisters celebrating this happy time of year. It doesn’t bother me at all that there is a manger scene on display at a key intersection near my beach house in Malibu. If people want a crèche, it’s just as fine with me as is the Menorah a few hundred yards away.
I don’t like getting pushed around for being a Jew, and I don’t think Christians like getting pushed around for being Christians. I think people who believe in God are sick and tired of getting pushed around, period. I have no idea where the concept came from, that America is an explicitly atheist country. I can’t find it in the Constitution and I don’t like it being shoved down my throat.
Or maybe I can put it another way: where did the idea come from that we should worship celebrities and we aren’t allowed to worship God ? I guess that’s a sign that I’m getting old, too. But there are a lot of us who are wondering where these celebrities came from and where the America we knew went to. (Emphasis added.)
I think Mr. Stein got it just about right. Would I wish a hearty “Merry Christmas” to someone I know finds it offensive? Probably not.
Those in the United States who demand that Christmas not be celebrated publicly seem to have a perverse sense of freedom, an irrational fear of infection (Christianityophobia?) and/or a need to win the approval of their peers; perhaps a bit of hatred is involved as well. While rejecting the First Amendment guarantee of religious free exercise, which they consider offensive, they exercise their own constitutional right of free speech freely. Neither right is more or less important than the other. Strangely, Libruls rarely apply their politically correct but apparently selective view that “offensive” speech should be banned, or at least avoided voluntarily, to their own offensive free speech.
Few if any in the United States who are vocal in their dislike of Christianity appear to have become infected by it. Fortunately, they have not been able to prevent those who wish to celebrate Christmas from doing so privately or, for the most part thus far, in public.
Perhaps now is a good time to reflect upon those elsewhere who physically abuse Christians, Jews and others for their religious beliefs and exercises, public and private. There are many of them in Egypt, Syria and other Islamist lands where freedom is largely rejected but hatred seems to be treasured. I have noticed very few Libruls who take offense at the violently expressed Islamist hatred of others.
First published at Dan Miller’s Blog.