AU replies to the "War on Christmas"

[USIncognito]

I'm not sure if this is the correct subforum to place this in, but it seems right since the culture warriors strum und drang smells of political motivation. I'm on the Americans United for Seperation of Church and State mailing list and this open letter from Barry Lynn to Jerry Falwell was in my inbox today. I thought I'd share it, and see if there are any comments.

Dear Jerry:

Heres some news: There is no "war on Christmas!"

Ive seen you on various television news shows claiming that there is but, in fact, there simply isnt. Even as I write this, millions of Americans are erecting Christmas trees and nativity scenes at their homes, and thousands of churches are planning special Christmas services.

And, if I might say so, most of them are planning their lives without getting permission or encouragement from you.

I am deeply disappointed that you have chosen a time that Christians observe as a season of peace and good will and turned it into a time of religious divisiveness and community conflict. Your "Friend or Foe" campaign may be great for fund-raising and publicity, but it has sown discord unnecessarily.

Contrary to your wild allegations, Jerry, neither Americans United, nor any other civil liberties organization that I know of, is waging any kind of war on Christmas. The First Amendment of our Constitution ensures every Americans right to observe religious holidays or to refrain from doing so. We can wish each other a "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays," and its really none of your business which term we choose. We can call our decorated tree a "Christmas tree" or a "holiday tree," and thats our right. (We can observe the holidays of other traditions as well.)

I think we all know whats really going on with your campaign. You want an America where there is no separation of church and state and where your rather narrow interpretation of Christianity is forced on everyone. If you can convince Americans that their cherished Christmas traditions are under fire, you think maybe they will join your nefarious crusade to tear down the protective church-state wall that guarantees our freedoms.

Well, it wont work, Jerry. Americans are, by and large, a tolerant lot, and they are quite unlikely to join forces with someone like you who is so far out on the political and religious fringes. Many people remember the outrageous comments you made after the 9/11 terrorist assaults, suggesting that America had it coming because of our (in your opinion) sinful ways. They also remember your dire warning that Tinky Winky, a kids TV character, was brainwashing our children into homosexuality! You cant rehabilitate an image like that by trying to depict yourself as Father Christmas.

I am particularly outraged that you are attacking our public schools as part of your misguided project. Our public schools serve children from 2,000 different faith traditions and some who follow no spiritual path at all. They generally do a tremendous job of helping each of these students without imposing any particular religious viewpoint. They steer a careful course, broadly allowing student religious _expression while trying to avoid school endorsement of specific faiths. That means there are sometimes disagreements about what songs should be sung in the winter concert or what decorations should go in the hall. We can work through those decisions by applying common sense, the Constitution and plain old civility.

Thanks to the crusade by you and your allies, however, some of these schools are being targeted for venomous attacks. After the Alliance Defense Fund unfairly maligned a public school in New York for its holiday observance policies, education officials there received hateful mail of all sorts. One e-mail said "You are either bigoted Jews who hate Christians or mindless secularists."

Since I debated you about the Christmas issue on Fox News Channels "OReilly Factor," I have received 66 nasty e-mails, including two death threats. Observed one of my correspondents, "Hope you die soon. Merry Christmas."

Jerry, this is the kind of interfaith and community hostility that you are stirring up, and I implore you to stop it now. You are polluting the public square with animosity and anger. And at Christmas, of all times!! Have you no decency?

Youve dubbed your latest round of antics a "Friend or Foe" campaign. Well, Jerry, I am a friend of the Constitution and a foe of intolerance. You should be too.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays,

The Rev. Barry W. Lynn
Executive Director

PS: I saw on a couple of the news shows that you are again questioning my ministerial credentials. I believe the _expression that you used on Fox News Channels "The Big Story with John Gibson" is that I am "about as reverend as an oak tree" and that I never "preached in" a church. Drop me a line, Jerry, and Ill send you (again) a copy of my ministerial credentials from the United Church of Christ. And by the way, Id be happy to come to Thomas Road Baptist Church and deliver the sermon on the Sunday of your choice. Your congregation might like a change of perspective every now and then.

[melikio]

I respond with Scripture. This is a debate about what AU is doing against Christians, by its attack on wiping away Christmas from public view!

John, I apologize for the inadvertent offenses you may attribute to my responses. But the last thing I'm going to do, is declare YOUR responses "correct", merely because you put some "Scripture" into your answers. I don't know you and don't condemn you (although we may strongly disagree).

That may seem offensive (just as your interpretation of Christianity may seem to me at times); but I'm only sharing my opinions here (just as you do readily).

DO you really THINK all Christians see the issues as YOU do?

Again, I regret any offenses you have suffered as a result of my comments, but you cannot EXPECT me to agree with the Bible, your interpretation of it, or the sets of values you have developed a a result of what you may view as "Christian". I respect your personal "RIGHT" to embrace any thoughts and/or beliefs you do, but cannot guarantee that those views will not be criticized to some various ways or degrees.

You are biased, I'm biased... but I'm not going to morally or intellectually beat you over the head intentionally. In effect, you have said "Ow!#%!!! Stop it!!" And I'm saying that I don't intend to step upon your toes...etc. But there is ALWAYS the risk of getting nudged or pricked within topics such as these, because people feel very strongly (at least) about them.

If I had INTENDED to offend you (or anyone else), you would be able to show me a trend, pattern or method over SEVERAL posts. I may oppose you, but it's not my intent to OFFEND you. Now, you may NOT accept that, but it is really all that I can offer here.

BTW, I haven't seen any "WAR" on Christmas. And as I implied several posts back, I believe the existence of the AU and organizations like it, serve as checks and/or balances in a nation where any so-called "Christian" viewpoint might indeed seek to infringe upon the freedom or liberty of those who oppose it.

Really, I do not see Falwell or Robertson speaking up for those who are being crushed (socially/morally) by extreme "Christian" views and goals. Do you think that God necessarily agrees with people like Robertson, Dobson or Falwell and all of their views? Well, He might, but I and many others reasonably DOUBT that is the actual case.

No, I'm not out to oppose "Christianity" (Jesus), and I enjoy most everything about "Christmas", but I also agree that there is a PUSHINESS (or in-your-faceness) that some Christians don't believe they must keep in check. Organizations ALL have agendas, but they aren't necessarily "sinister" as some who oppose them so often wish to claim.

Unbelievers or Christians can disagree with Christian-fundamentalists, without being anti-God, anti-Christian or anti-Bible. And as long as no one actually restricts another from holding or expressing what they believe, I do not see a problem or "offense" that cannot be overcome through love, which for Christians should be the primary mode and method of spreading the Gospel as they understand it. People are "human", that is a sometimes troublesome "constant", that cannot be wantonly thrown out because it opposes someone's "religion". (Jesus certainly didn't blow that off.)

Love points primarily to self-control, not controlling others. If we "Christians" don't understand that, then we are missing so much of what being a "Christian" really is. People who expect religious and moral perfection, expect too much (IMHO).

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

Scripture about what it means NOT to love:

[quote]1 John 2
1My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defenseJesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for[a] the sins of the whole world.

3We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. 4The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: 6Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.

7Dear friends, I am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning. This old command is the message you have heard. 8Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining.

9Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. 10Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him to make him stumble. 11But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him.[/quote]

[melikio]

Scripture about what it means to LOVE:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... version=31

1If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.
4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

But Mel,

How much "love" is there in someone that would support the redefinition of Jesus?

AND, Christianity, marriage, family, life, divorce, sexual promiscuity, the creation, schools, etc., etc.?

If you want to use scripture I assure you; it will lead to a narrow road and a very, very, very wide road.

In love, I urge the narrow be "chosen."

[melikio]

But Mel,

How much "love" is there in someone that would support the redefinition of Jesus?

AND, Christianity, marriage, family, life, divorce, sexual promiscuity, the creation, schools, etc., etc.?

If you want to use scripture I assure you; it will lead to a narrow road and a very, very, very wide road.

In love, I urge the narrow be "chosen."

John,

You have your views (right or wrong); so be it. There is nothing more important to me right now, than allowing you to be affected by God in the ways that matter to Him. I'm not here to control you in any way.

This discussion (as far as I'm concerned) has reached a point where God will shape people's thoughts according to His will (in due time).

I can't understand why I need to say anything else about any of this to you. If I discover any new reasons to continue this, I'll say something.

Thanks for the exchange.

Peace,

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

It's approaching mid-January.

This thread makes no more sense to continue.