Video: The Cross and the Bookshelf

20 12 2007

Filed under: Christmas, Politics, Conservatism, Huckabee

Should presidential candidates be allowed to wish Americans merry Christmas and remind them to remember the Reason for the season? That’s all that Mike Huckabee did. See if you can see the “cross.”

Then on Tuesday’s Today Show, Meredith Vieira opened the interview with Huckabee saying some are complaining the ad is sending an overt religious appeal to voters because he purposely showed a cross behind him in the ad. As usual, Huckabee shuts down the typical anti-Christianity attacks by simply being honest. I think it went right over Meredith’s head.

The cross was intentional? Are you kidding me? His eyes must have been blinking in some secret code. How absurd.

Meredith simply did not get his answer about the nature of the Christmas holiday. Of course it’s an overtly religious ad. That’s what we celebrate with Christmas. Government as well as businesses shut down on Christmas day to celebrate the holiday.

Contrast that with Hillary’s politically correct “holiday” ad

Whenever liberal Christians try to make an argument justifying their beliefs with their faith, it always returns to the core issue of “wealth distribution.” Notice those “gifts” Hillary was so thoughtfully giving voters? Universal health care, bring the troops home, etc. Each one, a new government program, paid for by using your money. Liberal Christians fail to distinguish between the biblical command to believers to take care of the poor – NOT the government. Certainly, the government is comprised of individuals, but wealth distribution programs, especially Hillary’s costly ideas, are still spending other peoples’ money, not their own individual money. Adding insult to injury, liberals insist on regulating these programs in order to maintain control, which translates to power. Where is the hunt for power in the bible again?

Americans United for Removal of Religion in America, as usual, misunderstands the First Amendment arguing that promotion of one religion over another is a violation:

Public officials should avoid using the holiday season to promote one religion over others, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, said that government officials can recognize the holiday season without trampling the U.S. Constitution.

“If officials decide to put up holiday decorations at Christmas, they must do so in a way that does not give government support to Christianity,” he [Rev. Barry Lynn] continued. “America is an incredibly diverse nation, and government should never send the message that one faith is the officially preferred one.”

Lynn noted, “The federal courts have held that nativity scenes depicting the birth of Jesus may not be displayed on public property in a way that appears to give government approval to Christianity. What is so complicated about that?”

Nothing is complicated about the Constitution. What is complicated is breathingist judges who lack a basic understanding of the wording of the document and use their courts to change the law well beyond the scope of the original intent of the Founders. Simply because a court hands down a decision on a religious freedom case, does not make it right. Especially in the last fifty years when we have seen a flurry of religious freedom cases, most of which were ruled against original intent.

In similarly related news, a NJ town displayed a nativity scene for the first time to go with the usual Menorah and other nine different displays.

After decades without a Nativity scene in his hometown, Hector Ferrer’s persistence finally paid off in Teaneck, New Jersey. For decades the city of Teaneck displayed a Menorah during the holiday season but refused to display a Nativity scene. Throughout Teaneck’s history, until now, there has never been a Nativity scene included with the other Christmas and holiday displays.

In 2005 Hector submitted an application with the city council to have the Nativity scene included with the other decorations. The council immediately rejected his application, claiming the Nativity scene was “too emotional at this time of year.” In 2006 Hector applied once again to the city council and the mayor, asking that the Nativity scene be given equal accommodations to the other secular and religious decorations on display. His request was finally approved with certain conditions that prohibited anyone other than the city to select and purchase the display.

Initially, the nativity was located intentionally behind a large shrub. So this year, he got the display moved, but they conveniently forgot to provide lighting for it. The nativity was the only scene not lit. It took another call from Hector to get the display lit this year. I wouldn’t be surprised if this council will require their hands to be held to turn on the display each night during the Christmas season.




Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: