December 29, 2003

As we celebrate another Yuletide season, it’s hard not to notice that Christmas in America simply doesn’t feel the same anymore. Although an overwhelming majority of Americans celebrate Christmas, and those who don’t celebrate it overwhelmingly accept and respect our nation’s Christmas traditions, a certain shared public sentiment slowly has disappeared. The Christmas spirit, marked by a wonderful feeling of goodwill among men, is in danger of being lost in the ongoing war against religion.

Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity.

This growing bias explains why many of our wonderful Christmas traditions have been lost. Christmas pageants and plays, including Handel’s Messiah, have been banned from schools and community halls. Nativity scenes have been ordered removed from town squares, and even criticized as offensive when placed on private church lawns. Office Christmas parties have become taboo, replaced by colorless seasonal parties to ensure no employees feel threatened by a "hostile environment." Even wholly non-religious decorations featuring Santa Claus, snowmen, and the like have been called into question as Christmas symbols that might cause discomfort.

Earlier this month, firemen near Chicago reluctantly removed Christmas decorations from their firehouse after a complaint by some embittered busybody. Most noticeably, however, the once commonplace refrain of "Merry Christmas" has been replaced by the vague, ubiquitous "Happy Holidays." But what holiday? Is Christmas some kind of secret, a word that cannot be uttered in public? Why have we allowed the secularists to intimidate us into downplaying our most cherished and meaningful Christian celebration?

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation’s history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people’s allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation’s Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

--------

Congressman Ron Paul, a Republican, represents the 14th Congressional District of Texas in the U.S. House of Representatives.

...and the reason for its celebration, the birth of Christ, when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.

The oh-so-tolerant and accepting Left is anything but.

nonanarchist

The notion that the left is against religion is absurd. Just consider:

MLK

Malcolm X

Oscar Romero, Liberation Theology

the idea of Social Democracy

Catholic Worker

Even the anarchists are spiritual. There are a lot of pagans in it.

Most of the Founding Fathers were not Christians but Deists, which isn't really a religion in the traditional sense.

This article is just yet another Ron Paul defection from the Libertarians to the Republicans. I think the Libertarian Party is a joke.

I'm sick and tired of the ACLU removing anything offensive to the smallest minority. I say let the nativity scenes be placed wherever and whenever people whish then to be. Over 80% of americans do not find religeous symbols placed on public property offensive. Why is it a school teacher can teach the children all about quanza, and even Chanaka sp?, but cannot mention the Christ Child near x-mas day? I think it is absurd that a vast majority of americans are being dissed by the leagle system. Then we wonder why our once great democratic party is bleeding more seats in congress and gubentorial races in every election since 1996. The democrats have sold out to the ACLU types who think a plastic nativity scene is as bad as the Patriot Act. I think priorities are messed up and let us Christians have our Christmas and lets get to the important issues of real civil liberties being threatened.

Nativity scenes can be placed anywhere accept Governement owned property.

That means Nativity Scenes can be placed in front of your home or anywhere else on your private property. They can be placed on Chruch grounds and Religous school too. Commercial property owners are also free to display Nativity scenes as they wish.

I should point out that the ban on Nativity Scenes on Government property also extends to decorations that celebrate the Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and the rest of the faiths practiced by America's 300 million diverse, multi-cultural human beings.

Texas Congressman Ron Paul

Rep. Paul not only makes this list, he is this list. He’s the most consistent defender of freedom elected to federal office in about 200 years. For Rep. Paul, such devotion to principle is easy. When a bill comes up for a vote, he merely asks himself whether or not the U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to do what the bill asks. If the answer is “no,” -- and it almost always is -- he votes no. He is reliably the “1” when the House passes a bill 434-1. The Washington Post once dubbed him “Congressman ‘No.’”

Sad -- isn’t it? -- that the simple act of upholding the Constitution occurs so rarely in Washington that when it does, it merits a nickname for the politician who does it?

See: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107014,00.html