Christian supremacists
PJdude1219 said:
there is no war on christmas. plus christmas was nothing more than a marketing ploy easter too. the were modeled after pagan relionous holidays to get them to convert.
The so-called "war on Christmas" is just another ploy by certain Christians to remind us how repugnant they find the notion that they are equal to their neighbors. Equality, as such, is a violation of Christians' equal rights and equal protection under the law.
("Oh, dear Jesus! We have to be
equal?")
• • •
Remarks revised and extended:
Sandy said:
Nine Democrats voted no marking a House resolution on Christmas, but all but one voted yes on the Ramadan resolution in October. The atheist who thinks Bush gets off by blowing up Iraqis is among the 9. What a POS.
Spidergoat said:
They should not have voted to endorse any particular religion or religious holiday.
Sandy said:
They HAD to say ok to Ramadan. You see what happens when anyone p!sses off some of the Muslims, don't you?
The issue has been misrepresented, and apparently in order to call someone a piece of shit.
Let's start with the resolution's sponsor:
"I think there's an anti-Christian bias," King said. "I would not have thought that five or 10 years ago that we'd need to make a statement (affirming Christmas and Christianity). I've watched Christ be eradicated by ACLU lawsuits and people be afraid of confrontations. They wish (people) 'happy holidays' but not 'Merry Christmas' because they might be offended."
"I think there's an anti-Christian bias," King said. "I would not have thought that five or 10 years ago that we'd need to make a statement (affirming Christmas and Christianity). I've watched Christ be eradicated by ACLU lawsuits and people be afraid of confrontations. They wish (people) 'happy holidays' but not 'Merry Christmas' because they might be offended."
Ten representatives -- nine Democrats and one Republican -- voted "present" on King's resolution, meaning they did not take a position.
Forty representatives did not vote, including Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash. Dicks, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, missed the vote. Dicks was engaged in a heated discussion on spending in the committee's nearby offices, chief of staff George Behan said.
Dicks had "no reason to vote against" the resolution, which paled in importance "as we're trying to pass the appropriations bill to fund the entire federal government," Behan said.
King missed the vote, too, after being stranded by an ice storm in Iowa, but said his point was made.
"The people who voted 'no' and voted 'present' will also take Christmas Day off, and so will their staff," King said. "They'll take a paycheck while they deny the very reason for the day they do not have to work."
(
Iwasaki)
Iwasaki's article examines the no vote of local (Seattle) Democrat Jim McDermott. As one staffer explained, "[If] you know the congressman, you'd know why." Of course, that answer simply doesn't satisfy Christian supremacists or "reporters" who editorialize at the outset°.
What nobody cares about is
what the resolutions in question said, and
why people voted against the Christmas resolution.
Rep. Jim McDermott says he's no Grinch, even though he voted against Christmas.
The veteran Seattle Democrat voted against a House resolution recognizing the importance of Christmas, but called it a protest against President Bush's veto of a children's health care bill.
"While the Republicans are passing a resolution celebrating Christmas, the president was vetoing health care for children. There's a little bit of irony going on around here," McDermott said today.
Earlier this year, McDermott voted in favor of resolutions honoring Ramadan and Diwali. Ramadan is an Islamic holiday, while Diwali is celebrated by Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and others.
"There's 10,000 kids in my state that won't have a health care plan" because Bush vetoed a bill Wednesday that would have expanded government-provided health insurance for children, McDermott said. The veto was the second time Bush rejected a bipartisan effort in Congress to dramatically increase funding for the popular program.
"I guess I'm the only guy left in Congress who still gets angry, but there are some things that are just not right," McDermott said.
(
Daly)
I do understand, however, why American conservatives—so influenced as they are by Christianity—are upset at opposition to a supremacist resolution about Christmas: the one time of year they actually feel compelled to "be nice" (as, opposed, say, to reflecting that Christian influence year-round), and some Democrats actually oppose their effort.
The problem with HR 847 is that it is dressed up to resemble resolutions 635 and 747, but also attempts to reinforce Christian supremacism in American society. The
Ramadan resolution (635) does the following:
• Notes 1.5b Muslims worldwide.
• Acknowledges 9/11 and other threats and attacks against "law-abiding, patriotic Americans" of diverse heritages, particularly members of the Islamic Faith.
• Notes September 14, 2001 condemnation by House of Representatives of bigotry and violence against Arab-Americans, American Muslims, and Americans of South-Asian descent.
• Acknowledges Muslims who reject violence, hatred, and terror; and praises those who encourage democracy, tolerance, and civil/political rights.
• Acknowledges Ramadan as a holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal.
• Notes the period of Ramadan.
• Recognizes Islam as one of the "great religions of the world".
• Expresses friendship and support for Muslims.
• Acknowledges Ramadan, conveys the House of Representatives' respect to Muslims worldwide.
• Rejects hatred, bigotry, and violence against Muslims.
• Commends Muslims who have opposed terrorism.
The
Diwali resolution (747):
• Notes the significance of Diwali to persons of Indian descent, and that the festival is celebrated by Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jains around the world.
• Notes over 2b Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jains worldwide.
• Notes the word "Diwali" is a contraction.
• Acknowledges Diwali as a festival of lights, gives very basic explanation of holiday.
• Notes symbolic beliefs of Diwali celebrants.
• Notes occasion (day) of Diwali.
• Notes Hindu interpretation of Diwali.
• Notes Sikh interpretation of Diwali.
• Notes Jain interpretation of Diwali.
• Recognizes Diwali as an important festival in order to demonstrate support for Indian Americans and internationals of Indian heritage.
• Acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Diwali.
• Recognizes and appreciates religious diversity.
• Acknowledges new relations and dialogue between U.S. and India.
• Acknowledges onset of Diwali and expresses respect to Indian Americans and internationals of Indian heritage.
The
Christmas resolution (847) is markedly different:
• Notes Christmas as holiday of great significance.
• Notes approximate 3:1 Christian majority in the United States.
• Notes 2b Christians around the world, that Christianity is the largest religion in the world.
• Notes Christian contributions to western civilization.
• Recognizes Judeo-Christian roots in American history.
• Notes occasion (day) of Christmas in the U.S.
• Recognizes Christmas as recognition of God's redemption, mercy, and Grace.
• Notes widespread recognition of Christmas as a time to serve others.
• Recognizes Christianity as one of the great religions of the world.
• Expresses support for Christians in U.S. and around the world.
• Acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and Christianity.
• Rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians.
• Expresses deepest respect to Christians.
Where the Ramadan and Diwali resolutions seemed to be respectful acknowledgments of minority communities, the Christmas resolution just seems to be more chest-beating by Christians. None of these resolutions are without their problems; the Ramadan resolution seems deliberate; the Diwali resolution is almost comically simplistic, as if it wasn't worth the kind of effort as the Ramadan bill; the Christmas resolution, as I noted, is about getting Congress to recognize the supremacy of Christian faith. Also, note the bill titles:
• HR 635: "Recognizing the commencement of Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal, and expressing respect to Muslims in the United States and throughout the world on this occasion, and for other purposes"
• HR 747: "Recognizing the religious and historical significance of the festival of Diwali".
• HR 847: "Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith".
Commencement of Ramadan, holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal, expressing respect. Significance of Diwali. Importance of Christmas and
Christian faith. There's a bit of a difference. Rep. King's Christmas bill seems disingenuous for its supremacist notions.
And on the supremacy issue itself, the Christmas resolution should have been rejected. I have no significant problem with the idea of Congress sending holiday greetings to whomever, but this resolution looks to be deliberately crafted for other purposes. There is no need for the House of Representatives to kowtow to Christianity, and it is significant that some think it should.
McDermott's opposition highlights an irony. The President of the United States will bring his born-again, evangelical Christianity to the people to the point that he has, in the past, said that God told him to invade Iraq. And yet, as HR 847 points out, "many Christians and non-Christians throughout the United States and the rest of the world, celebrate Christmas as a time to serve others". I would assert that this is, in fact, one of the problems with Christmas. So many people talk about it being the time of year to be good and decent and helpful to others. As I understood it from my Lutheran indoctrination as a child, my preparation for "adulthood" in the church, and my education at a Jesuit high school (as well as years of general discussion with Christians),
every day is the day to be good and decent and helpful to others. So, yeah ... Merry freakin' Christmas to all the kids Bush vetoed, eh? At least you know you'll be (abstractly) in the President's prayers on Christmas. After all, it's the one time of year he should be good and decent and helpful to other people.
If people decrying the "War on Christmas" should treat such issues so simplistically, what are the rest of us to think?
____________________
Notes:
° "reporters" who editorialize at the outset — Ironically, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is openly acknowledged as the "liberal" daily newspaper in Seattle; Iwasaki opens by blasting McDermott as "Congressman McGrinch", and tells the story according to Christian presuppositions. Now, I personally am not offended by Iwasaki's article, but I thought it worth mentioning—since there is constantly chatter about "liberal media bias"—that Seattle's liberal daily is taking the supremacist view. Even Iwasaki's excerpts of the bills in question suggest there is a difference, but he does not make any specific note of it. (The AP article posted by Seattle's allegedly more-conservative newspaper, the Times, acknowledges McDermott's perspective. So much for our local classifications, eh?)
Works Cited:
Iwasaki, John. "Ho-ho-no: McDermott votes against Christmas". SeattlePI.com. December 12, 2007. See http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/343335_mcdermott13.html
Daly, Matthew. "McDermott votes against Christmas resolution to protest Bush veto". SeattleTimes.com. December 13, 2007. See http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004069327_webmcdermott13m.html
House Resolution 635. "Recognizing the commencement of Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal, and expressing respect to Muslims in the United States and throughout the world on this occasion, and for other purposes". See http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr110-635&show-changes=0
House Resolution 747. "Recognizing the religious and historical significance of the festival of Diwali". See http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:2:./temp/~c110yybZEA::
House Resolution 847. "Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith". See http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr110-847&show-changes=0
