Skip to content

The Banning of Christmas is Wrong, Period

November 29, 2010
I run a local forum called The Voice where people post all manner of things. Mostly centered around Monroe, Ohio, but also state, national and world issues surface. The poster, Tom Birdwell is a local guy who has been an active board member for Monroe Local Schools for nearly a decade.

The conversation was started around the Separation of Church and State and the lack of support for the Christian religion while overwhelmingly supporting the Islamic religion. Here is Tom’s eloquent post:

If you had read the Constitution and Federalist Papers you would know that separation of church and state does not exist in our Constitution and never did. The only reference to it is in the first amendment, which reads:

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

When they wrote that, they were thinking of nations in Europe that literally had an official government religion, or laws prohibiting a specific religion, NOT complete isolation of the two. Our nation made its way from 1776, nearly two hundred years into the 1950’s before a court first bought into the separation of church and state BS beyond the expectations of the Constitution as written.

The “make no law” provision meant EXACTLY that. Every session of the Continental Congress, writing of the Constitution, and every session of Congress to this day is opened with prayer. Prior to the great depression, churches were frequent distributors of the limited federal welfare funding, at least to the limited extent it existed. And the Ten Commandments are inscribed in the Supreme Court building.

Perhaps the greatest stupidity of all was banning of Christmas scenes from public property. It was first argued to be about government spending, but churches immediately , as churches were quite willing to fund them so no public expense was incurred. The court then side-stepped the clear language of the Constitution “Congress shall make no law…” as no law was ever passed. It was a court mandate instead. Creative.

by Tom Birdwell

What awoke me to this post was the comment about Christmas being banned from public places.

The banning of Christmas scenes from public property.
The banning of Christmas scenes in schools – now we have ‘holiday concerts’ in December and the students now take ‘winter break’
The banning of Christmas in government, businesses – we now send ‘holiday cards’ in December and celebrate by having a ‘winter party’
The banning of Christmas in our lives – we don’t say Merry Christmas for fear of offending someone. We say ‘Happy Holidays’

The Attack Against Christmas Continues
“All the Whos down in Whoville liked Christmas a lot, but the Grinch, who lived just north of Whoville, did not. — Dr. Seuss

Supporters of using terms such as “holidays” in place of “Christmas” argue that many of the symbols and behaviors that western societies have come to associate with Christmas were originally from pre-Christian pagan traditions and festivals that predate Jesus. Symbols and behaviors such as caroling*, decorated ever green trees, mistletoe, gift giving, wreaths and yule logs, have pre-Christian origins. (*Source: Wiki)

Christmas Caroling has pre-Christian origins? What Grinch writes this stuff for Wiki?

Christian Love – Jesus’ Commandment
Christians have no defense. Christians have been taught to turn the other cheek. What’s at the heart of Christian love? Jesus said, “By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35). John, inspired by the Holy Spirit, once wrote, “We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love his brother abides in death” (1 John 3:14). And “by this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:2-3).

Will Christianity Vanish?
How many Christians will be left when the single most important celebration for Christians, Christmas, is banned, shunned and stepped on. Christians don’t want to fight. Christians want to live their lives as taught by Jesus Christ.

Say Merry Christmas and Save Christmas
Christians should stand up and say ‘Merry Christmas’ without fear. It’s your holiday too.  Stand up and be counted as a Christian celebrating Christmas. Christians are not condemning any other religion. Christians need to make sure that ‘we the people’ know just how many Christians there are in America. Say Merry Christmas to everyone you meet. You might save Christmas for someone.

Advertisements
17 Comments leave one →
  1. November 29, 2010 3:02 pm

    Great post! Every year at this time I want to shout Merry Christmas to everyone. If you get offended by some stranger wishing you and your family a wonderful Christmas season, then be offended!

    I have had people wish me a happy Kwansa and a Happy Hannukah. It doesn’t offend me one single bit. The reason it doesn’t is that I know they are blessing me in their own way. They could stay “Stick it in your ear!”

    I just thought I would chime in here! Thanks for the post.

    • November 29, 2010 3:14 pm

      Thanks for the comment. I am so sick of not wishing everyone a Merry Christmas. Not any more. Merry Christmas, but I might add, “No offense meant.” lol

  2. Anarcho-capitalist permalink
    December 1, 2010 2:16 pm

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

    When they wrote that, they were thinking of nations in Europe that literally had an official government religion, or laws prohibiting a specific religion, NOT complete isolation of the two. ”

    I’ve got to respectfully disagree. It says Congress shall make no law. Who is Congress? The House and the Senate. It doesn’t say anything about the states establishing official religions or prohibiting them. You see the the states formed the Federal Government and gave it only a few, specific powers, mainly for free-trade among the states and foreign policy reasons. The Federal Government was to be the servants of the states, not their master. In fact, the first draft of the Constitution didn’t say “We, the People,” it said “We, the States of New Jersey, New York, etc” It was explained to the states that they had to change it to “People” because no one knew which states would end up ratifying the proposed Constitution. The states were worried that the word “People” would eventually make people think that it wasn’t the states that formed the Federal Government, but “the People.” Their fear has been realized.

    The idea behind federalism was that people could “vote with their feet.” That way the atheists could have an atheist state, and the same for Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, etc. There could even be cosmopolitan free-for-all states. This also applies to economics. If someone doesn’t like how things are in their state, they can move to a nearby one. Socialists can have a completely socialist state, capitalists can have a completely capitalist state. This solves much contention in the country. Most importantly, it makes it relatively easy to escape a tyrannical state government. Today the Federal Government is in charge of the states so when it becomes tyrannical the only escape will be out of the country, a very difficult and costly thing to do.

    Unfortunately federalism was destroyed with the War of Northern Aggression where the Federal Government consolidated power and became master over all the states, thus destroying the Tenth Amendment, which Jefferson believed was the most important of all the amendments.

    Read LewRockwell.com, the most read libertarian website in the world, which Texas Congressman Ron Paul says that he reads first thing in the morning. And also check out Mises.org for a lifetime of learning.

    • December 1, 2010 2:20 pm

      Thanks for the reply, and the revised history lesson.

      I would like to see a stronger emphasis on States rights rathers than consolidating power in a wasteful national government.

    • Tom Birdwell permalink
      December 9, 2010 12:59 pm

      “I’ve got to respectfully disagree. It says Congress shall make no law. Who is Congress? The House and the Senate. It doesn’t say anything about the states establishing official religions or prohibiting them. You see the the states formed the Federal Government and gave it only a few, specific powers, mainly for free-trade among the states and foreign policy reasons. The Federal Government was to be the servants of the states, not their master. In fact, the first draft of the Constitution didn’t say “We, the People,” it said “We, the States of New Jersey, New York, etc” It was explained to the states that they had to change it to “People” because no one knew which states would end up ratifying the proposed Constitution. The states were worried that the word “People” would eventually make people think that it wasn’t the states that formed the Federal Government, but “the People.” Their fear has been realized.”

      So where do we disagree? The Constitution prohibits Congress from passing such legislation, so the courts sidestepped that, and did it by judicial activism instead. THAT is the point. Activist federal courts have trumped the Constitution as they are the sole rulers of what its meaning is, even when their view of the meaning is completely opposite to that of the language of the document. Congress shall make no laws… that should apply to judicial decrees as well. I agree with your comment on the 10th amendment, but you should throw in the 9th as well.

  3. December 1, 2010 5:54 pm

    “War of Northern Aggression” … OMG!

    • Anarcho-capitalist permalink
      December 2, 2010 3:08 am

      I didn’t use the term Civil War because that is a propaganda term, first used by the Northerners as soon as the first shots were fired in their conquest of the South.

      “A civil war is a phrase properly reserved for the case wherein each side is contending for rule over that which is claimed by both. In sharp contradistinction, the South in the War of Northern Aggression – or, more radically, the First War of Southern Secession – was attempting to achieve a divorce from the North, not a conquest of it.” – Walter Block

      Check out this video I just posted:

      http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods31.html

      http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/lincoln-arch.html

      • Anarcho-capitalist permalink
        December 3, 2010 4:12 am

        Hahaha! Thanks, and I hope you do read it in the morning! Hilarious

    • Tom Birdwell permalink
      December 10, 2010 10:10 pm

      ” arwendt permalink
      December 1, 2010 5:54 pm

      “War of Northern Aggression” … OMG!”

      You would have to be raised in the south to understand that. The hatred that still exists to this day came from Reconstruction however, not the war itself. General Grant and General Lee agreed on a set of actions that would have permitted recovery of the south and peaceful reunification with the North. After Lincoln’s death, Congress, with Johnson’s strong support passed laws that made it impossible for most in the south to earn money, run a business, or pay taxes, and hundreds of thousands lost their life’s holdings, actually generations of holdings. That includes my family. It lasted really into the great depression, and recovery didn’t happen till after WWII when the whole country had sympathy for poverty. My grandfather was a sharecropper, as his father lost his holdings, and they never had slaves or recovered from the events.

  4. December 1, 2010 9:09 pm

    Good post! I am so tired of so-called “tolerant” people who freak out when someone mentions anything about Christianity. If you are truly at peace with yourself and what you believe, you will recognize that other people can believe what they want and celebrate it the way they want without stepping on your rights. I’ve never seen anyone hold a gun to someone’s head and say, “celebrate Christmas because I do.”

    • December 2, 2010 9:26 am

      Thanks Sarah, good to hear from you. And best of all I wish you a MERRY CHRISTMAS!

      • December 2, 2010 6:48 pm

        Merry Christmas to you, too!

  5. Anarcho-capitalist permalink
    December 6, 2010 3:19 am

    I have another topic I’d like to mention that isn’t totally related to this article. I have recently become opposed to the hoax of Santa. When kids are told that Jesus and Santa are real, and then one day are shocked to learn that Santa was phony from the beginning, what do you think that might do to kids belief in Jesus and his trust in his parents? It can be devastating to kids. I’m not opposed to someone telling their kid that Santa is coming to give presents, just the lie that Santa is a real person and is actually doing those things. My church just had a Christmas dinner and the leadership decided to have the kids come up after and receive gifts from the Three Wise Men rather than Santa. It felt sooooo much better! And I didn’t hear any kids complain that the toys were coming from the Three Wise Men rather than Santa. So it will be in my home.

  6. Tom Birdwell permalink
    December 14, 2010 4:23 am

    Seems like a great way to handle a ticklish problem of the ages. For my daughter, now 26, still believes in Santa. The root of the problem was me, the father. For with the greatest sincerity of a father who does not lie, I told her, decades ago, as she oft reminds me with a twinkle in her eye this time of year, that I once said “Sweetheart, so long as you believe, I mean really believe, well Santa will come. And believe she does. And I can live with that. Happily. For she my my daughter, Kitten Kicker, whas this year’s Cincinnati Rollergirls Most Improved New Player

    But your Church’s solution seems to make far more sense, and yikes, could yet bring in a real and historical Christ connection to Christmas celebrations that eludes so many of us. Cheers for the story and its connection to Christmas.

  7. James Kittle permalink
    December 25, 2010 9:25 pm

    Merry Christmas!

  8. Jamie permalink
    November 16, 2011 9:58 pm

    With Christmas nearing us this year, I have been thinking of this very debate. I am a Christian and celebrate the Christmas season. My recent thoughts… (just thoughts here, not making facts, or saying that this is something that everyone should bash and comment that it is totally irrational and such)… but my thoughts have been how could I blame someone that is an unbeliever for not wanting to celebrate Christmas? First, Christmas is suppose to be about our Messiah, our Christ, Jesus and for a person who does not believe in the Christ Jesus, why get offended that they do not want to participate in remembering His coming to save us all (side note: we should be concerned and our hearts should be burdened for them to want them to want to celebrate and be a believer). Second, what I see the majority of the people celebrating in our western culture is not Christmas. Do I even want to call this Christmas… people going into debt to provide their families with way too much junk that they feel they need just because it is December 25th. And getting together and having a bunch of celebrations with family and friends just for the sake of celebration with family and friends. I don’t know, I just feel like what I see around me is not really celebrating the birth of Christ so why blame unbelievers for not seeing the difference. What are your thoughts?

Trackbacks

  1. Pictures Christmas | AllGraphicsOnline.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: