The absurdity of the liberal secular push claiming the Founders intended the First Amendment to bar Christian Christmas images from public places is most evident by the fact that these same Founders actually used the U.S. Capitol as a church week after week from the start of the United States of America.
The liberal secularist argument would indicate the Founders messed up so badly in writing the Bill of Rights that they contradicted themselves in the very first words. The liberal secularist argument would mean that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," contradicts "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
If the early elected officials had required each other to attend the church service in the Capitol, that could be attacked as contradicting the First Amendment by establishing how fellow members of Congress would worship. However, no one was required to attend the 11 a.m. Sunday services—making it easier for Christians to worship and perfectly consistent with a new country founded on Judeo-Christian values, just as allowing Christian displays at Christmastime allows Christians their free exercise of religion.
The basis for a war on Christmas to rid any public place of a Christian scene seems to hinge on the absurd assumption that an American cannot possibly be free to exercise their non-belief if a nativity scene comes into view.
The 26 percent of Americans who oppose public Christmas displays is roughly the same one-quarter of Americans who are agnostic, atheist, or have no religion and hold political views outside the mainstream—such as supporting biological men who identify as women competing in women's sports and being housed in women's prisons, and having an absolutist view on abortion that allows partial birth abortion.
Using the government to make sure there are no signs of religion around Christmas is in fact a war on Christmas.
As author Richard John Neuhaus pointed out four decades ago in The naked public square: Religion and democracy in America, the agnostics using government to erase signs of religion from public places creates the image of an atheistic world without images of God.
No entity, including government, can be neutral—assuring no signs of Christmas creates an image of a world in which the agnostic is correct and the majority of Americans who are Christian are wrong.
The White House Christmas tree is seen in the Blue Room during the media preview for the 2023 Holidays at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 27, 2023.MANDEL NGAN/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
If the calls for diversity were earnest, noon around a public place like the Capitol might include Muslims offering the Zuhr prayer, followed by their good works for the hour, the Catholic looking at a statue of the Virgin Mary and offering the Angelus prayer, another Christian looking at a nativity scene, a Jew looking at a Hanukkah display (or at other times of year recognizing the more important recognition of Yom Kippur or Passover). And that just covers the faiths that believe in the One God of Abraham. If a passerby feels equally strong in their non-belief they should not be threatened by religious images they view as irrelevant.
Sign up for Newsweek’s daily headlines
In essence, the basis for the war on Christmas and push to remove religious images is, "I'm just not free to continue to exercise my agnostic religion with all these images of diverse views that differ from my own around Christmas and Hanukkah."
Yet on this basis, in the thirteenth largest county in America, the King County (surrounding Seattle) Human Rights Commission banned Christmas and Hanukkah displays, even on clothing or in virtual workplaces, because as noted in a memo quoted by The Washington Times, "Some employees may not share your religion, practice any religion, or share your enthusiasm for holiday decorations."
As the Times further noted, if that is the standard, then would this not ban the observance of Pride Month if "not all shared the enthusiasm" for the month? In fact, religious celebrations such as Christmas are being singled out and that is a war on Christmas. It is exactly what the First Amendment was actually supposed to stop.
By John Pudner
Comments