Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Christmas is Racist

Below is a provocative post lifted from Majority Rights. I should perhaps point out that the writer shares the view of racism that is now usual among social scientists: That racism is normal and natural

People get emotional about the public display of the Nativity Scene. Maybe the real reason it is so emotionally charged is not that it is sectarian but racist.

7000 years ago the largest free standing structures in the world were the longhouses of the LBK culture of the Danube basin. This was temporally and spatially in close proximity to the Black Sea flood, which may have caused the Indoeuropean dispersion.

During winter, families lived in these longhouse structures with their cattle for mutual warmth. Children born during the winter months would literally have been born in a barn because there was no distinction between the barn and the house.

The cattle would have been an essential part of the scene providing, as they did, milk for the entire family convtering precious food calories in the form of grasses otherwise not consumable by humans, into a human consumable form. This gave rise to the genetic adaptation for lactose tolerance which rarely occurs outside of regions population by those descended from north Western Europe but predominates within those areas.

Strong feelings toward ancestral scenes-scenes so ancient and vital that they resulted in genetic adaptation-is racist. This is why the scene and song where "cattle are lowing, the poor baby wakes" is so emotive for us all. Christmas is racist.


The jail preparing to give a London bomb suspect slap-up grub over Christmas was compared to a country club last night - by one of its guards. He spoke amid growing anger at plans to pamper inmates with a range of delicious dishes. Bosses at Category A Woodhill Prison will even give gifts of œ2 worth of phone card credits to cons. A prison officer working there said: "We couldn't believe it when we saw the prisoners' menu. It's supposed to be a Category A nick, not a country club."

As it was learned the lags were to get the treats, it was revealed some NHS workers have had their Christmas Day meals AXED. Scrooge hospital chiefs said they could not afford the usual annual blow-out.

Meanwhile Woodhill - dubbed Britain's Alcatraz - will be serving roast turkey with all the trimmings and traditional pud soaked in brandy sauce. Inmates will also be able to choose a veggie option of chestnut, apple and cranberry grill. Muslims, including July 21 London bomb plot suspect Hussein Osman, 27, can opt for a halal meal of roast beef. Dinner later in the day will include baked gammon, chicken fillets, mini vegetable savouries with a tossed salad and coleslaw. There is also a desert of Christmas cake and chocolate eclairs. There are equally lavish meals promised for Boxing Day and New Year's Day.

Woodhill, which has housed Soham killer Ian Huntley and armed robber Charles Bronson, contains terror suspects, murderers and other violent cons. The lock-up, near Milton Keynes, Bucks, has around 750 inmates. Norman Brennan, of the Victims of Crime Trust, said of the meals: "This reads like something from a country club menu." But a Prison Service spokesman said: "Prisoners are fed on just œ1.43 a day and the food is not sumptuous."

The hospital workers who had their traditional free meal scrapped work at North Devon District Hospital, Barnstaple. Bosses said they could not spend œ2,000 on the 180 staff - despite having a œ60million annual budget. One nurse said: "This does nothing for morale."



Projection, denial, you name it. Leftists use all the Freudian defence mechanisms

There has been a backlash by some conservative pundits and commentators against the trend to eliminate Christmas from the holiday lexicon. Their campaign is having an effect as people - who realized there was this trend to eliminate Christmas yet thought that they were being too dogmatic or fanatical - now realize it is those who want to eliminate Christmas who are the fanatics.

The campaign to eliminate religion from public life is not new. It is a doctrine that has been propagated by the liberal bien pensants for years. They use the pretext that America is a secular nation, as such, one cannot - and should not - mention Christmas in the public square.

This campaign, initially, was limited to ensuring government entities prevent the free exercise of religion. It has now expanded to include nongovernmental organizations and private industry.

However, there is now a backlash against the backlash. Liberal pundits and commentators denied there was a campaign against the expression of Christmas or religion. Some qualified it, the Philadelphia Inquirer for one, by claiming that only a few "fringe" organizations were complaining.

Who is correct? Are conservatives legitimately concerned about a real threat to the free exercise of religion? Are the liberal deniers correct by saying that conservatives are being irrational alarmists?

Let's go to the videotape - as they say. These are just some examples of the attempt to bowdlerize Christmas from public and private arenas:

* A woman complained to McDonald's restaurants' corporate office about a sign at a Raleigh, NC McDonald's that says: "Merry Christmas, Jesus is the Reason for the Season." The woman was quoted by the website of WRAL-TV, Raleigh NC as saying: "I care because I'm Jewish, and the reason for the season is upsetting to me,..It offends me because it specifically talks about Jesus, Merry Christmas. It doesn't give credit to anyone else.". The woman requested that the sign be changed to the politically correct Happy Holidays. The response from McDonald's HQ was the owner has the right to do what she wants with the sign.

* The Samona family of Novi, Michigan, was threatened with fines from their development's management company if they did not remove a nativity scene from their front lawn.

* New York City public school system's written policy permits students to display the Jewish menorah and Islamic star and crescent in school, but specifically prohibits students from displaying Christian nativity scenes.

* Maplewood Public School District, New Jersey banned all religious music, including instrumentals, from public schools in the district.[4]

* a New Jersey elementary school, a class trip to see a Broadway performance of the Charles Dickens classic "A Christmas Carol" was canceled owing to the threat of a lawsuit

* Plano, Texas, school parents were prohibited from using red and green plates and napkins - they could bring only white decorations for "winter" parties.

* Palm Beach Florida schools warned teachers not to allow any Christmas decorations to be displayed.

* In a Texas classroom, children were told to draw a tracing of their foot, and then put a message on the drawing. One little girl wrote "Jesus Loves Me" on hers. The kid's teacher ripped the tracing off the board. "Don't you ever do this again," she said. The little girl burst into tears. When her outraged father called the school, nervous officials told the child to make another tracing. She did so-but this time, instead of scrawling "Jesus Loves Me," she drew a tiny cross that was so small it was almost invisible

Apparently, none of these incidents constitute a threat to the "free exercise " clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution, as far as liberals are concerned. It does not, because liberals think the aforementioned incidents to be perfectly normal and satisfactory behavior.

Religion seems to be a threat to the state according to the statists. This shows how far they have progressed. They used to think religion was the "opiate of the people."

For my own part, I would welcome more education about different religions in public schools. I would welcome more acknowledgements of religious holidays. It is impossible to teach human history and science without including religion. Yet, public schools seem to make a concerted effort to do so.

This is a problem for several reasons - prohibiting the free exercise of religion is only one of them. By excluding the mentioning of religion in general or specifically discriminating against Christianity, public and private organizations are making Americans even more culturally ignorant than we already are.

There is no question this happens when schools prohibit religious expression. Most of the world's people are religious. How can they not teach about religion? How can schools in good conscience not mention Christmas?

Denying Christmas exists by staging concerts at Christmas time and calling them "Winter Festivals" is to deny reality. Denying reality makes the educational experience unrealistic. Making the educational experience unrealistic is not educational at all.

Those liberals who want to deny that the bowdlerization of religion from American is not occurring are being "parochial." They are either ignorant of what is occurring around them or they are being disingenuous.

The aforementioned examples perfectly illustrate that there is no room at the inn for "Christmas." The only room at the inn is for "Holiday"


No comments: