Atheists, not Muslims, are anti-Christmas

The Australian ^ | 7th December 2004 | Waleed Aly

[naturalman1975]

IT was one of those extremely rare moments when I found myself agreeing with John Howard. Asked what he thought of Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore's reported plans to make Sydney's Christmas celebrations low-key and generic, the Prime Minister slammed them as "silly", "ridiculous" and "political correctness from central casting".

Out of sensitivity for a multicultural society, Moore was reported to have said she did not want the celebrations "to push any one religious belief".

In fact, Moore had said nothing of the sort. Quite the contrary: the council is increasing its Christmas celebration spending this year by 50per cent. The words were spoken by Jeff Fisher, chief executive of fast-food chain Oporto following news that the chain had banned a nativity display from its franchise in Hornsby in northern Sydney. Media had put the words in the wrong mouth, but Howard's assessment of them remained true.

Every Christmas it seems we go through this farce. Last year, Stonnington Council in Melbourne removed the word Christmas from its celebrations and prevented speakers at a carols night from quoting the Bible. Some kindergartens and daycare centres have stopped having Christmas parties, instead having end-of-year or fairy parties.

All this, it seems, is being done to include Australia's religious and cultural minorities. This is supposed to foster social harmony and tolerance.

But it doesn't. It does exactly the opposite. When Channel Seven's Sunrise recently ran an interactive segment on the issue, a common theme in the responses of viewers legitimately aggrieved by this emasculation of Christmas was anger towards minority groups -- especially Muslims -- who were cast as cultural warriors against the majority.

Muslims may not celebrate Christmas but it is ridiculous to suspect they are behind this absurd trend. Jesus is a revered, prophetic figure in Islam and, accordingly, we are the least likely to be offended by other religious groups celebrating his birth. An anti-Christmas campaign is more consistent with aggressive atheism than any Islamic imperative.

In fact, I know no member of any religious minority, Muslim or otherwise, who asked for or even wants this. In my experience, religious minorities are far more concerned that their right to religious expression is respected and protected. That, surely, is a right belonging no less to the majority than to minorities.

Driving Christmas underground only erodes this treasured Australian norm and that is far more troubling to me than any Christmas celebration. I find the idea of restraining religious expression substantially more offensive than I find any nativity display. The impoverishment of Christmas is done more on behalf of religious minorities than by them.

This is where political correctness loses the plot; what purports to inspire tolerance instead inspires hostility and intolerance. Diverse, vibrant and tolerant societies are created by allowing eclectic cultural and religious expressions, celebrations included, to flourish. You don't achieve that by surrendering a culture, replacing it with bland meaninglessness.

Denying the Christianity in Christmas or, worse, doing away with it altogether helps no one. This is not multiculturalism. It is anti-culturalism.

Waleed Aly, a Melbourne lawyer, is a member of the Islamic Council of Victoria executive.

[Chemist_Geek]

Religious extremism of any stripe is a threat to a free society. Both the Taliban and the Talibornagain ought to be rejected.

"...nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Funny, I don't see "(Except for those dirty Mohammedans)" in there. Neither do I see that in the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Promoting religious bigotry is unAmerican.

[broadsword]

Fulton Sheen, Pope John Paul II, St. Francis and Mother Theresa are classic Christian extremists. How are they "a threat to a free society"? Please tell us specifically.

[dsc]

"There are fanatic Christians today... the people who have bombed abortion clinics and shot doctors who perform abortions, for instance, are religious terrorists are they not? What about Fred Phelps?...Religious extremism of any stripe is a threat to a free society. Both the Taliban and the Talibornagain ought to be rejected."

There is really no excuse for drawing that kind of false moral equivalence.

The unbalanced individuals who have violated the tenets of Christianity by murdering people associated with abortuaries are deplored by the vast majority of Christians. They are not praised, nor encouraged, nor protected by Christians.

Further, rather few of these individuals have emerged, giving the lie to the proposition that Christianity fosters them.

In contrast, Islam has engaged in terrorism and depredations for the past 1400 years, at times overrunning significant portions of Europe. This latest escalation is in its 4th decade. The number of victims is huge and growing. And Muslims not only praise, encourage, and protect terrorists, they fund them.

You look at the faithful practice of an evil religion on the one hand, and aberrent behavior that violates the tenet of a good religion on the other, and somehow arrive at the conlusion that the two religions are morally equivalent.

Nothing that Christian "fundamentalists" believe or advocate is half so dangerous to a free society as the false moral equivalence.

[velocityguy]

Excellent, atleast some one is thinking with brains!!! Glad to see Americans finally realizing the threat they are facing.

Be careful with the muzzies. They act all nice, civilized and truly patriotic. But they will NEVER submit to the law or the governments that are not Islamic. This is what they call proudly, the art of deceitfulness. Som branches of Islam also call this Taqiyah aka Taqiyyah.

The biggest example of Taqiyyah is CAIR. Just search on the web about the Anti-Infidel comments and Anti-American comments these CAIR founders made and compare it to their activities now....In private they show their anger and hate for the infidel and the infidel governments and in public they are a Muslim Civil Liberties Union!!!!

They also have training materials for their fellow Muslims on how to interact (more meaningfully, how to deceive) non-Muslims in the non-Muslim countries.

So when nuconvert, assuming he is a practicing Muslim, is talking all nice and sweet, myself being in India and seeing all this sweet talk by Muslims, I can tell what he thinks inside is NOT nice and sweet about infidels.

We in India have seen all this deception of Muslims. That is why, now we keep them in check. When they kill non-Muslims, we identify those Muslims who participated in such killings and pay them back in kind. That is why, although Muslims are all over in India, they do not pull stupid stunts unless they want to get 72 virgins with a couple of young boys thrown in of course in paradise.

[Chemist_Geek]

You ought to check with Benjamin Rush, if you want to talk about equivalence.

"Such is my veneration for every religion that reveals the attributes of the Deity, or a future state of rewards and punishments, that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mohammed inculcated upon our youth than see them grow up wholly devoid of a system of religious principles. But the religion I mean to recommend in this place is the religion of JESUS CHRIST." 1786

Dr. Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration, and delegate at the Constitutional Convention.

Advocating that a government have the power to say which religions are allowed and which are not is very dangerous and un-American political territory.

Alles klar, Herr Kommissar?

[dsc]

"You ought to check with Benjamin Rush, if you want to talk about equivalence."

Dr. Benjamin Rush has a very good point in that most religions have a part of Revelation, and, mutatis mutandis, it is better to have a part of Revelation than none at all.

However, it is extremely unlikely that Dr. Rush would have extended his tolerance to the religion of the Aztecs, centered as it was on human sacrifice, to the religion of Carthage, centered as it was on burning babies alive, to the Hindu practice of suttee, or even to the early Mormons, who practiced polygyny.

I would also assert that he'd have chosen a different example for this oft quoted passage if he'd known as much about Muhammedism as we know now.

"Advocating that a government have the power to say which religions are allowed and which are not is very dangerous and un-American political territory."

Not nearly as dangerous and un-American as abdicating our moral duty to sort the wheat from the chaff, the legitimate religions from the murderous cults.

"Alles klar, Herr Kommissar?"

How...piquant...it is, that the avatars of "tolerance" are forever unable to discuss an issue with civility.

[Protagoras]

If you want we can swap verses until the cows come home.I didn't post any verses.

Are you saying the verses that others have posted don't exist, or alternately don't mean what they say?

Are you saying that if it says some things like the stuff you posted that the rest don't matter?

Maybe you ought to testify at Scott Peterson trial. "he was a good guy,,,a good golfer,,,he liked animals,,,oh yeah, that was before he murdered his wife and child".

[ariamne]

Are you saying that Jews are leading the anti-Christmas jihad because a majority of the ACLU members are Jewish?

First of all, please cite stats that prove the majority of the ACLU are jews.

My daughter's grade school principal told me that it was the influx of muslims into our community that prompted the inclusion of Ramadan into the Winter Concert, and the downplay of Christmas, as well as "an increased sensitivity to muslims as a result of 9/11". Not Jews, who have always lived peacefully with the Christians in our community and had no problem with the Christmas concert. In fact, the Christmas concert had always included a couple of Hannaka songs too, and no one complained. You seem to be blaming the jews for this PC nonsense, and that is just wrong.

[ariamne]

LOL! What "news" reports? Cite links, please. Jews are NOT leading the anti-Christmas crusade in America today. The PC left crowd is, and that crowd is represented by a aetheists, Jews, Christians, Muslims, probably a few Wiccans as well. You obviously have a problem with Jews.

[ariamne]

Thanks. Part of what drew me to FR was the concept that we need not walk in lockstep, and that free thought and free speech are not only welcome, but encouraged. If you diverged from the party line on the left, you were immediately branded as a fascist or a racist. It is very liberating to be able to express yourself without that response. I don't expect to agree with all of you all the time. That's the beauty of it. By the way, your comments about bigotry are very timely--churchillbuff should take note!

[texasbluebell]

"There are fanatic Christians today..."

Let's see, how many abortion clinic bombers are there running around? A handful.

In mohammedanism, the percentage of fanatics is put at about 10%. In the US alone, that puts the figure at around, oh, 300,000 who adhere to the jihadi way of thought.

Just in the US.

If you think there is anywhere near that percentage of fanatics in Christianity, I've got news for you.

[Chemist_Geek]

If you think there is anywhere near that percentage of fanatics in Christianity, I've got news for you.

That's totally irrelevant. If the terrorist acts of a few can be used to call for roundups, deportations, and vaporizations in a nuclear fireball of all members of a religion, as they have been here, then the same standard can be applied to any other religion's nutcases.

Besides, then, what's the standard? 10%? 5%? 1%? 0.01%?

No. I'm sorry that you fail to see the distinction. Individual responsibility is a conservative value. Group-guilt thinking is a liberal vice. Those who would seek for government to destroy a religion are anti-American and are more closely aligned with Taliban and Nazi policies.

[Old Student]

"You and I have different views on the proper way to evangelize. Let me ask you if you are making the point that the reason for wishing atheists and Jews and Muslims a Merry Christmas is to set them up for conversion?"

More or less, yes. It took something like 30 years for me to finally get the message. I had religion rammed down my throat as a pre-teen, by a hypocritical Southern Baptist minister stepfather. (this is not to say that all Southern Baptists are like him, but that all groups have people who do not follow even their own religion's rules.)He'd have a cow, these day, if he found out, because one of the GOOD things he told me was "don't take my word for it, pray about it, and read about it, and make up your own mind." I did. Took a while to get into the mood to even try, but when I did, I found out that God does, indeed, exist, and for some strange reason, loves me. Enough to send his Son to die for me. I also found out that his Son loved me enough to not only die for me, but to rise from the dead for me, as well, and shield me from my own sins. Can't get any more powerful than that, message-wise.

I have found that if you respect other's beliefs, and try to learn about them, that they are more likely to respect yours. I used to be an athiest. Didn't last long, as it takes as much faith as any other religion. I spent far too long as an agnostic, but I also investigated many religions. Islam among them. As I've pointed out on many a thread, not all Muslims are bad. Some are, no doubt about it. Blaming all for the actions of a few, whether they be Baptists or Muslims, makes no sense.

I was actually raised, partly, in the church I eventually joined, because my grandmother was a member, and I attended with her when I was visiting her. I supposedly knew about it, and I did reject it. I rejected my step-dad's church, too. And every other church, Christian or not, that I looked into. Eventually, by the persistance and love of many members of that church, over 3 decades, I found what I was missing. My kids attend a Lutheran school, even though we aren't Lutherans, because the folks there Love God and His Son, and do their best. We have disagreements on doctrine, but the center of our faith is Jesus, so we get along. I'll never be a Lutheran, but I don't mind my kids knowing that there are others out there trying to do their best, even if they lack all that we have. I know many, many, churches that feel that everyone not of THEIR church is damned, but I believe that God will only hold us responsible for what we KNOW is right, and fail to do.

That said, I happen to know that there are Muslims who are just as good a people as my people, and the Lutherans I know. I even know there are some Southern Baptists that are good and true disciples of Christ, to the best of their knowledge and ability. "It don't take all kinds, we just got all kinds." There are some folks out there who will hate me just because I'm LDS. Some will hate me because I'm military. Some who will hate me because I'm American. I can ignore all of them as long as they don't get too froggy in their hatred. Keep exposing them to the polite and respectful, God-loving, decent people, and some of them will decide they need what we have. Some will decide to live and let live. Some will force us to kill them to protect ourselves. Lumping any group all into one category is wrong, however. If God had done that, all we would have to look forward to would be hellfire.

[texasbluebell]

Once again, I must disagree. I know you keep harping on this individual responsibility theme. In a perfect world that would happen.

Never will you have an entire population take individual responsibility among all its members, not in any system of govt. If we can't get to that point in the US, then there is no chance of that happening anywhere else.

There actually is a standard as you call it, or a boiling point as I like to think of it.

When the proportion of trouble-makers gets too high, the boiling point has been reached and it's time to intervene.

Apparently that point is being approached again in islam, as happens periodically over the centuries.

If moslems cannot stop their own fanatics, then they will have to be assisted by intervention from without.

Otherwise we have chaos and anarchy, though I know that's what the left is hoping for.

[Valin]

Are you saying the verses that others have posted don't exist, or alternately don't mean what they say?

Short answer..NO

Are you saying that if it says some things like the stuff you posted that the rest don't matter?

Short answer..NO


What I am saying is you can find pretty much what ever you what to find in the Koran. Some here take the most violent bloodthirsty verses and say this is Islam, what I attempt to do by quoteing other verses is to say well that's not the whole story. Maybe we are not in fact at war (in the traditional sense) with Islam, maybe the President is correct and we are at war with a small sect of Islam, maybe the world is just a bit more complicated than some seem to think it is, maybe judging by the group (like the left loves to do) is not the best way to fight this war, maybe going to war with 1+ Billion people is not such a good idea.

As for your last comment, you're being silly. Stop it.

[Old Student]

"All chimpanzees will then be allowed to evolve into the next dominant species and replenish the Earth's population."

Nope, Chimps are too much like humans. I vote for Dolphins. (of course, it's more likely to be rats, the way things seem to work.)

[Protagoras]

I had religion rammed down my throat as a pre-teen,

Kinda like saying "Merry Christmas" to someone opposed to it? Or who doesn't believe?

I haven't read the rest of your post yet, but I'll get to it as time permits. (long, long posts are low on my list of things to do)

[Chemist_Geek]

I'm not goign to say that Islam is correct; I am going to say that government ought not to dictate what faiths people may or may not have.

This is distinct from punishing or preventing acts...

[Protagoras]

As for your last comment, you're being silly. Stop it.

Silly concepts deserve the kind of silly analogy I made. Stop being silly and I would be happy to stop highlighting it.

Any religion that advocates murder for non believers or people who have changed religions, is wrong, and evil, and INDEFENSIBLE. But hey, keep defending it if you want. I've got all kinds of "conservatives" on here defending all sorts of goofy things. I've been exchanging with another poster on another thread who defends Social security. Go figure.

[Old Student]

"Kinda like saying "Merry Christmas" to someone opposed to it? Or who doesn't believe?"

Nope, kinda like "YOU are going to be a good Baptist Christian boy because I am, and I'm a minister, the head of this household, and you WILL do what I SAY!" I was supposed to have a conversion experience on command. I also learned to use a .45 automatic at the age of 12 because he wasn't going to beat my mother one more time. Like I said, not everyone is a GOOD example of the religion they claim to belong to.

as for list of priorities, I've got homework I should be doing, and finals next week, so I'll let you get to what you need to do. Have a good one. Merry Christmas, too.