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.

[micatala]

In scanning over this whole last page of posts, nearly all of it has nothing to do with the OP and thread topic. If debaters wish to get into other areas, I would suggest taking the debate to other threads.

We have quite a number of threads on homosexuality in both the Politics and Religion Forum and I believe in the Christianity Forum.

As far as the general godliness or un-godliness of liberals, there are threads on Liberal Christians only believe some fundamentalism and
God and the U.S. Political Parties.

There are also threads discussing the godliness or ungodliness of evolution. For example
Is it possible for evolution and religion to coexist?

Again, let's stay on topic, as per the rules.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

John, name me one theocracy in the vast extent of recorded human history that has not completely oppressed it's citizens and eventually come to ruin. Just one. And don't make your claim of Liberal "oppression", you do not know the true meaning of the word until you have experienced the middle east or medieval Europe. I don't recall ever hearing about our government stoning people to death for holding fast to a certain belief.

So much for your previous defence of secularization. Why the sudden change of attitude? So It is okay for Christians to practice and believe what they want, but not adherents of other worldviews? It just does not work that way.

Also, I am still waiting for that scriptural evidence commanding Christians to coerce others into compliance.

Just two requests. Find a successful theocracy. Demonstrate the mythical dictatorial Jesus. Until you do this your points are mute.


But I agree with micatala. Let's keep this discussion in your Jerry Falwell topic. The two debates have transcended into the same exact argument anyway.

[melikio]

Just two requests. Find a successful theocracy. Demonstrate the mythical dictatorial Jesus. Until you do this your points are mute.

Amen and so be it.

To many, this is where the battle between extreme and moderate "believers" exists.

One thing I KNOW for a fact: Jesus was not a MEAN and PUSHY as most "Christians" I've encountered in the flesh (or on the net); not according to the Bible/s I've been taught and read from myself.

Jesus was God (to me) and certainly not the whirling dervishes of egocentric obnoxion, which some Christian and other relgious people tend to be.

And.... I don't see any "war" on Christmas; I don't see any real evidence of it.

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

John, name me one theocracy in the vast extent of recorded human history that has not completely oppressed it's citizens and eventually come to ruin. Just one.

Pentecost. The Church is the only voice for moral beauty still.

And don't make your claim of Liberal "oppression", you do not know the true meaning of the word until you have experienced the middle east or medieval Europe.

You cannot dismiss the abomination supported by Liberals that easy.

I don't recall ever hearing about our government stoning people to death for holding fast to a certain belief.

Secularist societies like China, Cuba, North Korea and/or soviet countries imprison, shoot or hang dissenters.

So much for your previous defence of secularization. Why the sudden change of attitude? So It is okay for Christians to practice and believe what they want, but not adherents of other worldviews? It just does not work that way.

Christians embracing abominations and satanic practices and claiming to be Christians, it does not work that way.

Also, I am still waiting for that scriptural evidence commanding Christians to coerce others into compliance.

There is none. Christ and His way is comepletely a free choice but your spin is well employed!!!! Prove that a Christian can support and celebrate what is completely taught against in the New Testament? Even if they are coerced, Christians are to take the martyrdom as peacefully as well. But notice something? Martyrs are very rarely ever quiet.

Just two requests. Find a successful theocracy. The one Jesus spoke about is the one I await. No liberal ideology need pervert that. It is easy to see that perversion and attack at Christmas time.

Demonstrate the mythical dictatorial Jesus.

Jesus dictatorial? He is found in the Gospels.

Until you do this your points are mute.

Silenced by liberal theology, ideology and politics.

But I agree with micatala. Let's keep this discussion in your Jerry Falwell topic. The two debates have transcended into the same exact argument anyway.

Whenever liberalism and conservatism is discussed the underlying goal of liberalism is to loose sexual abomination and relativism on every person no matter the age or income. We could condense a plethora of threads into that one goal and debate but, the odds of Christians that believe the Bible to people that are trying to relegate it to the trash heap is about 98% liberal-attackers to 2% frightened sheep thinking they can make a difference to the deafened and insensitized morality of promoters of relativism.

[melikio]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_absolutism

Whenever liberalism and conservatism is discussed the underlying goal of liberalism is to loose sexual abomination and relativism on every person no matter the age or income. We could condense a plethora of threads into that one goal and debate but, the odds of Christians that believe the Bible to people that are trying to relegate it to the trash heap is about 98% liberal-attackers to 2% frightened sheep thinking they can make a difference to the deafened and insensitized morality of promoters of relativism.

Many people like to talk as if they not only "know of" absolute morality, but unfortunately attempt to give the impression they actually adhere to such. I respect and am sensitive the moral sensibilities of Christian people, but I have little patience for those who coerce and/or compel others to adhere to things that they (absolutely) do not honor perfectly themselves.

I think relativism or absolutism to the extreme (in any case), is an arrogant JOKE. Human beings aren't "absolutely" anything when it comes to morals. There isn't one "rule" I haven't seen broken (numerous times).

And being a Christian controls the external symptoms of mankind's sinful nature to varying degrees. I know better, than to believe that someone who claims or speaks of moral superiority (and absolutes), is actually moral themselves. Often, people who speak of morality (and are PUSHING IT), are corrupt themselves (usually in some "hidden" way). At the very least, I'm sure that they likely need to place more attention upon themselves (morally), than they are so typically WILLING to place upon others.

It's easy enough to find hypocrites, in a crowd of people who are always screaming loudly about "morality". Groups that exude LOVE as their primary quality, simply do not appeal to those who put control and power above the importance of charity, grace, hope and faith.

You cannot compel PEOPLE to be "Christian"; that is the mistake of many and represents a LOT of wasted energy, in a world that's wired primarily for the effects of "love". Few people remind me of the "Jesus" I have read about; I expect that. I know from experience that the BEST people fail to be absolutely moral, or believe in ALL the right things.

Meanwhile, there are those who think they have it "right" for everyone. In the end, they usually end up showing what arrogant hypocrites they are (by their very nature).

Wow!! That guy is so HOLY, he probably doesn't need "grace" to make it into heaven.

Although few moral-absolutists admit to thinking this kind of thing consciously (or saying it unintentionally), that is the message they so often bring to the table. THEY believe they are "right" to back people into a "moral" corner, but they likely aren't exuding the essence of Jesus' message by doing so. The kind of "perfection" some people expect due to Christian moral standards, upbringing or affiliation is often ridiculously UNREAL. I've never seen people who are perfect like that; I only KNOW OF ONE person who was so perfect (Jesus).

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

Although few moral-absolutists admit to thinking this kind of thing consciously (or saying it unintentionally), that is the message they so often bring to the table. THEY believe they are "right" to back people into a "moral" corner, but they likely aren't exuding the essence of Jesus' message by doing so. The kind of "perfection" some people expect due to Christian moral standards, upbringing or affiliation is often ridiculously UNREAL. I've never seen people who are perfect like that; I only KNOW OF ONE person who was so perfect (Jesus).

AU and others want Christians eliminated. There are no dissenters allowed, no diversity that includes them. The lines are drawn.

From the Age of Reason website, about an article by good 'ol Bill Moyers:

http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/AORForum06.htm

an excerpt from

"There Is No Tomorrow" by Bill Moyers


One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington.
Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a worldview despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad, but they are always blind. And there is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.
Remember James Watt, President Ronald Reagan's first secretary of the interior? My favorite online environmental journal, the ever-engaging Grist, reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said: "After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."
Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally trueone-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is accurate. In this past election, several million good and decent citiziens went to the polls believing in the rapture index.
That's rightthe rapture index. Google it and you will find that the best-selling books in America today are the twelve volumes of the Left Behind series written by the Christian fundamentalist and Religious Right warrior Timothy LaHaye. These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in the nineteenth century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captured the imagination of millions of Americans.
Its outline is rather simple, if bizarre...: Once Israel has occupied the rest of its "biblical lands," legions of the Antichrist will attack it, triggering a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon.
As the Jews who have not been converted are burned, the Messiah will return for the rapture. True believers will be lifted out of their clothes and transported to Heaven, where, seated next to the right hand of God, they will watch their political and religious opponents suffer plagues of boils, sores, locusts, and frogs during the several years of tribulation that follow.
I'm not making this up. ...I've read the literature. I've reported on these people, following some of them from Texas to the West Bank. They are sincere, serious, and polite as they tell you they feel called to help bring the rapture on as fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
That's why they have declared solidarity with Israel and the Jewish settlements and back up their support with money and volunteers. It's why the invasion of Iraq for them was a warm-up act, predicted in the Book of Revelations where four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates will be released to slay the third part of man." A war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared but welcomedan essential conflagration on the road to redemption. The last time I Googled it, the rapture index stood at 144just one point below the critical threshold when the whole thing will blow, the son of God will return, the righteous will enter heaven and sinners will be condemned to eternal hellfire.
So what does this mean for public policy and the environment? Go to Grist and read a remarkable work of reporting by the journalist Glenn Scherer"The Road to Environmental Apocalypse." Read it and you will see how millions of Christian fundamentalists may believe that environmental destruction is not only to be disregarded but actually welcomedeven hastenedas a sign of the coming apocalypse.
As Grist makes clear, we're not talking about a handful of fringe lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. Nearly half the U.S. Congress before the recent election231 legislators in total and more since the electionare backed by the Religious Right.
...The only Democrat to score 100 percent with the Christian coalition was Senator Zell Miller of Georgia, who recently quoted from the biblical book of Amos on the Senate floor: "The days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that I will send a famine to the land." He seemed to be relishing the thought.
And why not? There's a constituency for it. A 2002 Time-CNN poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in the Book of Revelations are going to come true. Nearly one-quarter think the Bible predicted the 9/11 attacks. Drive across the country with your radio tuned to the more than 1,600 Christian radio stations, or in the motel turn on some of the 250 Christian TV stations, and you can hear some of this end-time gospel. And you will come to understand why people under the spell of such potent prophecies cannot be expected, as Grist puts it, "to worry about the environment. Why care about the earth, when the droughts, floods, famine, and pestilence brought by ecological collapse are signs of the apocalypse foretold in the Bible? Why care about global climate change when you and yours will be rescued in the rapture? And why care about converting from oil to solar when the same God who performed the miracle of the loaves and fishes can whip up a few billion barrels of light crude with a word?"
.... [Moyers details several initiatives by the Bush administration, such as rewriting the Clean Air and Water Acts to lessen protection for the environment, relax pollution limits for ozone, ease pollution standards for cars, SUVs, trucks, etc., make certain information about environmental problems secret, and so on.]
I read the news just last night and learned that the administration's friends at the International Policy Network, which is supported by Exxon Mobil and others of like mind, have issued a new report that climate change is "a myth, sea levels are not rising" [and] scientists who believe catastrophe is possible are "an embarrassment."
....I read all this and look up at the pictures on my desk, next to the computerpictures of my grandchildren. I see the future looking back at me from those photographs, and I say, "Father, forgive us, for we know not what we do." And then I am stopped short by the thought: "That's not right. We do know what we are doing. We are stealing their future. Betraying their trust. Despoiling their world."
And I ask myself: Why? Is it because we don't care? Because we are greedy? Because we have lost our capacity for outrage, our ability to sustain indignation at injustice?
What has happened to our moral imagination?....

Greed, of course, has a lot to do with it. And it is significant that the heads of corporations who are motivated by greed certainly include Christians, indicating that religious belief is no particular motivator of a higher standard of morality, altruism or concern for the planet's welfare. It can be no coincidence that the most religious, even fundamentalist, government in U.S. history is also responsible for the greatest depradation and disregard for the world's environment at a time when all the signs point to a looming crisis. It is hard not to make the link which Moyers suggests, that in all halls of government the delusional mentality is growing and is helping to determine everything from foreign policy to environmental protectionor lack of it.

The insanity of the widespread religious views and expectations that have gripped so many in our society is not a private affair, it is not a right of belief which the more rational of us ought to allow to them, much less refrain from raising our voices against, it is a direct threat to the survival of us all.

This is a group that devotes seemingly boundless energy to a maniacal demonization of abortion and the "killing" of those who have "a right to life," and yet they merrily concur and even aid in the destruction of the very world we all have to live that life in.

Those "pro-lifers" oppose stem-cell research and other scientific undertakings which promise to improve the health and longevity of our lives, because they are seen as contravening the will of their God, a consideration which overrides everything else. The lives of a sizeable portion of humanity are to be condemned as substandard, and rendered as such by the nation's laws, since gays and lesbians have made evil "choices." They know this, in the face of modern scientific understanding of human sexuality and its expressions, because an obscure passage in a primitive piece of ancient writing says so. Catholics and evangelicals alike largely support or ally themselves with a Papacy which has passed and continues to promote through international pressure and interference a disastrous no-contraception policy which is also helping to dig the grave of the planet through overpopulation and pollution. Those anti-abortion and anti-contraception views have led the U.S. administration to curtail foreign aid to nations and agencies perceived as not being as fundamentalist as themselves, with terrible effects on third-world "lives." And yet the media by and large will not raise a murmur against these sorts of views and actions.
The majority religious segment cannot understand or accept any questioning of their convictions, any challenge of their right to impose them on all of society, and so we in the secular community are regarded as forces of evil, minions of Satan and destined for Hell, these being further insane companion pieces to the Rapture that have blighted the minds of too many of our fellow-citizens.
How did we get ourselves into this mess, and more important, how do we get ourselves out of it?

[melikio]

AU and others want Christians eliminated. There are no dissenters allowed, no diversity that includes them. The lines are drawn.

So you believe. (Fine.)

Even so, I know that the people who are "spiritual", use spiritual weapons; not this JUNK that so many arrogantly people continually hurl about reality AT sinners and unbelievers.

If you are ABOUT love, then you are about ZIP; nothing you say means what it could, if love in not fueling your efforts. People are recognizing the DIFFERENCE between those who wish to worship and honor their "God", and those who seek to gain CONTROL of nations and societies via relgious enforcement and/or oppression.

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

Love is something that Paul practiced and wrote about extensively. But love is trying to snatch people from the fire and bringing them OUT of their sins.

AU takes the side of people that deny thye Bible and its truth. Where is the love in that?


1 Corinthians 6
Lawsuits Among Believers
1If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? 2Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! 5I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6But instead, one brother goes to law against anotherand this in front of unbelievers!
7The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Sexual Immorality
12"Everything is permissible for me"but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"but I will not be mastered by anything. 13"Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also.

15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh." 17But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit.

18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. 19Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.

[melikio]

1J226,

Thanks for all the typical biblical threats and poor interpretation of "Christianity". To me, the verses you shared and the context of them is just stupid stuff.

I can see that many are so focused upon what they think is sexual sin, that most of this stuff is hardly worth discussing anymore.

So many of the "biblical" interpretations that have been put out here in this era, make so little sense to me anymore. It just seems contradictory and crazy to me, in most cases. And agape is the ONLY thing that right-wing extremists haven't been able to taint really. Many so-called Christians talk about love as if they always experience it in 3rd person; that's NUTZ and meaningless to me. It's like they are trying to say something to someone, but can only manage to write it on a chalk-board; so impotent and uninspiring overall.

What YOU say is love, amounts to CRAP (IMO)! And your last post proves it well enough (the tone of it disconnects you from having to deal with people who are less than morally "perfect"); very convenient, but not unusual to witness in many "Christians".

You throw out that very Scripture, as if it wouldn't apply to you or anyone near you. I sense that it is as hateful as anything someone can say WITHOUT the Bible; it just "seems" better, because it uses words that people associate with righteousness and justice...etc. It may be the right words for something God is saying, but it surely isn't a "decent" response to the majority of what I've previously pointed out. At the very least, I know people are dealing with a lot more than many Christians seem willing to admit; they have blinders on, as far as I can tell.

BTW, there is no WAR on "Christmas".

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

1J226,

Thanks for all the typical biblical threats and poor interpretation of "Christianity". To me, the verses you shared and the context of them is just stupid stuff.

I can see that many are so focused upon what they think is sexual sin, that most of this stuff is hardly worth discussing anymore.

So many of the "biblical" interpretations that have been put out here in this era, make so little sense to me anymore. It just seems contradictory and crazy to me, in most cases. And agape is the ONLY thing that right-wing extremists haven't been able to taint really. Many so-called Christians talk about love as if they always experience it in 3rd person; that's NUTZ and meaningless to me. It's like they are trying to say something to someone, but can only manage to write it on a chalk-board; so impotent and uninspiring overall.

What YOU say is love, amounts to CRAP (IMO)! And your last post proves it well enough (the tone of it disconnects you from having to deal with people who are less than morally "perfect"); very convenient, but not unusual to witness in many "Christians".

You throw out that very Scripture, as if it wouldn't apply to you or anyone near you. I sense that it is as hateful as anything someone can say WITHOUT the Bible; it just "seems" better, because it uses words that people associate with righteousness and justice...etc. It may be the right words for something God is saying, but it surely isn't a "decent" response to the majority of what I've previously pointed out. At the very least, I know people are dealing with a lot more than many Christians seem willing to admit; they have blinders on, as far as I can tell.

BTW, there is no WAR on "Christmas".

You know Meliko, aside from your judgmental decrees pronounced on anyone that will not see your personal views, you respond with persoal opinion and personal feelings with nothing to debate against. 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!

No one is going to let anti-Christians hide in politics any more than the leftists will let Christians use the political tools supplied to both sides in our democracy.

Start a thread and prove your Biblical views are orthodox and acceptable to the Gospel of Jesus. This is debating Christianity dot com.

I have many personal experiences to think that sexual deviants and liberals and conservatives are less than honest, noble or Christian. But I don't interject personal views without backing them up with scripture.

You throw out that very Scripture, as if it wouldn't apply to you or anyone near you.[/quote]

Please prove this vicious personal insult? Couch it in your "opinion" if you want. I will show you how you are wrong and will ask you to desist in putting your persoanl opinions into judgmental assertions without support.