Backtalk
Post Christmas Special
Anti-Christian bigotry is rising and becoming more evident this Christmas
Season. Subtle evidences are indications of the trend to suppress public
display of Christianity in favor of other religions, paganism, or simply
anti-Christian sentiment.
Some larger chain stores are succumbing to the anti-Christian sentiment of
political correctness. I've noticed the decline of Nativity sets and other
decorative items avoiding the meaning of Christmas. At Top Food and Drugs
you can find "holiday wrap" and at Fred Meyers you can find "gift wrap,"
but you do not find "Christmas wrap." The designs of the wrapping paper are
of the pagan and secular aspects that have commercialized Christmas over
the last few decades. It is difficult to find designs that actually depict
the true themes of the origin and true meaning of Christmas.
Our schools remove Christ while promoting other religions. Teachers are
infringing upon copyright laws by changing words to songs removing
references to God. Our government is forced to deny traditions that have
existed since before America was born. Minority groups seek to deny the
display of the Christ child. They win by the majority's failure to speak
out in favor of our American heritage.
Commercialization was the common complaint but now it is that the true
meaning of Christmas is being ignored by the offerings of Christmas
merchandise. Over eighty percent of Americans, of all walks of life and
religions favor, keep Christ in Christmas. Some say to mention the real
meaning of Christmas is to avoid offending other religions. Nonsense,
Christianity has contributed to the civilization and greatness of America.
Christmas is "Christ's mass." To remove Christ from the Christmas season
offends American tradition. Denying American tradition offends the majority
of Americans.
Roger W Hancock Auburn, WA
G.P. comments: Okay, Roger, I'm gonna ignore the line about "Christianity
has contributed to civilization and [the] greatness of America," since Troy
Skeels had an entire essay in the last issue laying out the opposing view.
Though I'm sure some readers will comment, too. There's so many witty
rejoinders to choose from.
You're actually complaining about two different phenomena here--the removal
of specifically Christian references by government and by private retail
corporations. The former is pretty simple. It's called separation of church
and state; more explicitly, that our constitution specifically enjoins
government from promoting one religion rather than another. (I really doubt
you can find any examples of governments instead choosing displays that
promote "other religions [or] paganism.")
As for stores removing references to Christmas, it's called the
marketplace, Roger. Big chain stores figure they'll sell more stuff by not
alienating Christmas-haters or non-Christians.
Now you know how the rest of us feel when those same corporations take any
number of other actions on behalf of their god--profit--at the expense of
our community or environment.
Me, I'm not bothered by religious references to Christmas, both because
they're more palatable than the endless seasonal sermons on behalf of that
even more destructive god, Mammon, and because they often recall aspects of
Christ's legacy most Christians in this country tend to forget the rest of
the year. Prince of Peace, Peace on Earth...it's really just about the only
time "peace" isn't considered a bad thing by a lot of people who claim
Jesus in their lives. Somebody, sometime, has got to remind these folks
that Christ was a pacifist, a rebel, a materialism-hating revolutionary.
Or, as Gandhi is quoted as saying: "The only people in the world that don't
know Christ was a pacifist are Christians." Merry Christmas!
Funding Peace
ETS!
In response to Barbara Tomlinson's letter (Break the Law 2Day!!)
encouraging folks in the activist community to urge US servicemembers to
desert, I would ask her is she going to pay these servicemembers' bills
after they desert? Too many people in the peace movement have tried to
frame military service in a moral framework, when most people who join the
service do it because of bread and butter issues. It is simply a way to
have a steady pay check, health insurance, and the possibility of a
post-high school education (no matter if it's in a trade school, community
college, or four year university). If people like Barbara want working
class young people in this country to stop fighting for GWB's empire, she
(along with the rest of the peace movement) are going to have to stop
organizing for peace, and start organizing for union representation,
universal health care and fully government funded post-high school
education.
Alex Bacon (USCG 2001-03), Seattle
M.T. responds: You're assuming that Barbara and other "people in the peace
movement" aren't working on issues that involve expanding union
representation in the workplace, universal healthcare, and government
funded education. In fact, a visit to any peace demonstration will find
numerous union members, school teachers, nurses, and activists with long
histories working on the very issues you've named.
Also, I'd like to point out an item in our Activist Calendar in this issue
of ETS!: a Sunday, January 25th meeting of the volunteers who run the
Seattle Draft and Military Counseling Center. Some peace activists do
understand why folks join the military, and they put their time and effort
into helping folks transition out of the military and into better jobs.
|