De­spite lib­eral grinches, Christ­mas cheer per­sists

The Washington Times Weekly - - Commentary - Bill O’Reilly

Well, the Supreme Court punted. The jus­tices were sup­posed to de­cide weeks ago whether or not to hear a bla­tant ex­am­ple of anti-Chris­tian bias in New York City. But still no de­ci­sion.

The case con­cerns a pol­icy by the New York City pub­lic schools to al­low dis­plays of the star and cres­cent flag for Ra­madan and the meno­rah for Hanukkah, but to ban the Na­tiv­ity scene at Christ­mas­time. The de­ci­sion makes no le­gal sense as the fed­eral courts have pre­vi­ously ruled that so-called “re­li­gious” dis­plays can ap­pear on pub­lic prop­erty as long as there is no pref­er­ence given to one re­li­gion over an­other.

As one of the lead play­ers in de­fend­ing the tra­di­tions of Christ­mas in the pub­lic arena, I must say that I am tired of it all. It’s just so dumb. There is no need to deny stu­dents a Na­tiv­ity dis­play. Don’t they get enough bad stuff? How about some nice stuff? I mean how threat­en­ing and of­fen­sive can a baby, two lov- ing par­ents, and three wise men re­ally be?

All the polls say that most Amer­i­cans be­lieve as I do: that the tra­di­tional signs of Christ­mas are good things. So leave them alone, OK?

The Supreme Court, of course, could have made things a lot eas­ier by tak­ing the case, dis­cussing it for 10 min­utes, then rul­ing that New York City school of­fi­cials are crazy. Would that be so hard to do?

But no, the Supremes are now on their CHRIST­MAS break and have left the coun­try adrift once again. The anti-Christ­mas forces are still cling­ing to the bo­gus sep­a­ra­tion of church and state ar­gu­ment, which does not ap­pear any­where in the Con­sti­tu­tion. If Thomas Jef­fer­son were alive to­day, he would mock th­ese secu- lar fools and then re­tire to his Vir­ginia es­tate for Christ­mas din­ner.

The good news is that de­spite the cow­ardice of many pub­lic of­fi­cials and the anti-Chris­tian bias of many in the me­dia, the forces of Christ­mas cheer are win­ning in Amer­ica. Most re­tail stores are say­ing “Merry Christ­mas” again, and the ACLU can’t stop them.

Again, all of this is so stupid it hurts. With so much strife and evil in the world, why can’t we have a cel­e­bra­tion that hon­ors a baby who grew up to es­pouse “love your neigh­bor as your­self”? So what if it has spir­i­tual over­tones? Why can’t we in­tro­duce chil­dren to Judeo-Chris­tian phi­los­o­phy in a joy­ful way? Ev­ery­thing about Christ­mas is pos­i­tive ex­cept the com­mer­cial­ism. And even that can be ben­e­fi­cial if re­sources are redi­rected to the poor.

Here’s the bot­tom line: If you’re of­fended by Christ­mas, you have a prob­lem. See some­body, or tough it out. But enough with the petty non­sense. When Christ­mas images have to be de­cided by the Supreme Court, you know things are out of con­trol.

So give Je­sus a break, en­joy the sea­son no mat­ter how you cel­e­brate it, and be thank­ful you live in a coun­try where the phi­los­o­phy of peace on earth, good­will to­ward all peo­ple is hon­ored with a fed­eral hol­i­day.

Bill O’Reilly is a na­tion­ally syn­di­cated colum­nist.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.