Extinguishing Christianity one bit at a time

Two stories posted for Grace who had to run:

Two bits of tradition and indications of western civilization’s extinction on the way out. It becomes more and more obvious, that multiculturalism at best means no culture and much more likely, means the extinction of Western cultures and traditions to be replaced by ones hostile to it.

AshtrayBoth British and Americans keep finding new and clever ways of extinguishing each and every last bit of our heritage as Western people. Here are two stories where while a rationale for each can certainly be found and explained, it remains sad nonetheless. Remember, these kinds of reasoning never get applied to Islam. Much like how Belgium banned all religious symbols and clothing from employees in government buildings then made an exception for Islam as it was discriminatory. No Christmas carols in England? OK. But that wont make it possible for you to complain about the whine coming from the minarets the British will become increasingly familiar with in the coming decade.

From The Telegraph:

Signs warn Christmas carol singers away

They bring a message of “peace on Earth and goodwill to all men” but carol singers are to be warned away from doorsteps this Christmas in case they appear threatening.

By John Bingham
Published: 2:02PM GMT 11 Nov 2009

Carol singers: Signs warn Christmas carol singers away

Carol singers: Some church leaders said that the suggestion that people are now afraid of carol singers represented an alarming reflection on modern Britain. Photo: GETTY

Police and neighbourhood watch organisers in one area of Lancashire have produced official notices for nervous residents to place in their windows telling the festive singers not to call.

The yellow postcard-sized signs, which are also being handed out at libraries and GPs’ surgeries, read: “Sorry no carol singers, I won’t open my door to you.”

Produced by the Safer Chorley and South Ribble Partnership, an umbrella body for police, local councils and neighbourhood watch groups, they have already been distributed in Penwortham, a middle class suburb of Preston and there are plans to hand them out more widely.

It represents an extension of a tactic widely used at Hallowe’en to deter unwanted trick-or-treaters. A similar message on the reverse of the cards warns unwanted trick-or-treaters not to call.

Some church leaders said that the suggestion that people are now afraid of carol singers represented an alarming reflection on modern Britain.

“It is a terrible state of affairs that people are terrified of answering their doors, so this is what they have to do,” said Father Timothy Lipscomb, the Vicar of Preston, the parish priest for the city’s Minster.

The Rev Christopher Nelson, vicar of Penwortham, said it could be seen as “insensitive” to group Christmas and Hallowe’en together but said that the organisers had good intentions to protect vulnerable people.

Cllr Mary Robinson, a Conservative member of Penwortham Town Council, said: “Are they saying that they have replaced hoodies with Father Christmas hats?”

She went on: “It isn’t a concern that has been brought to me, I would say that in the current economic climate a little bit of festive cheer might be welcomed by a lot of people.”

Organisers said that the cards were produced in response to demand from vulnerable residents who said that large groups of people left them feeling nervous.

There have been a handful of cases elsewhere in the country in which burglars have posed as carol singers.

Chief Inspector Richard Robertshaw of Lancashire Police rejected accusations of a “bah-humbug” approach.

“Singing Christmas carols is a wonderful tradition which we encourage, as long as children are considerate,” he said.

“But while carol singers bring festive cheer to many, we must bear in mind there are residents who for a variety of genuine reasons, are not comfortable with having groups of people at their doors.”

And now, from the USA: (Also from the Telegraph)

A US judge has ordered South Carolina not to issue car number plates that feature a Christian cross in front of a stained glass window along with the slogan “I Believe”.

Cameron Currie, the district judge, said the plate, similar to the one pictured, was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment.

Cameron Currie, the district judge, said the plate, similar to the one pictured, was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment. Photo: AP

The southern state’s legislature had already approved the licence plate, but Cameron Currie, the district judge, said the plate was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment, which requires the separation of church and state.

“Such a law amounts to a state endorsement not only of religion in general, but of a specific sect in particular,” Ms Currie wrote.

Her ruling also singled out Lt Gov Andre Bauer, who had pushed the bill approving the license plates through the state legislature. Christian advocates tried to get the same license plate approved in Florida, but the bill did not pass that state’s lawmaking body.

Mr Bauer wanted to accomplish in South Carolina what had been unsuccessful in Florida, Ms Currie wrote, in order to “gain legislative approval of a specialty plate promoting the majority religion: Christianity.

“Whether motivated by sincerely-held Christian beliefs or an effort to purchase political capital with religious coin, the result is the same.

“The statute is clearly unconstitutional and defence of its implementation has embroiled the state in unnecessary (and expensive) litigation.”

Mr Bauer was not immediately available for comment.

The case was brought by the group Americans United for Separation of Church and State, on behalf of several individuals and Hindu and American-Arab groups.

Rev Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, said government must never be allowed give favourable treatment to one faith over others.

“That’s unconstitutional and un-American. Some officials seem to want to use religion as a political football,” Mr Lynn said.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

5 Replies to “Extinguishing Christianity one bit at a time”

  1. Keep your fucking god off my front doorstep. Retaining the right to shoo away annoying religious zealots will come in handy against unwanted muslims and jehova’s witnesses. Pick your battles.

  2. Of course you have the right to shoo away zealots. The problem is, when you only have that right selectively. I have a terrible feeling that church bells will be banned, but not minarets as that would be racist and discriminatory. We already see similar things accross the western world. So perhaps its more a function of choosing one’s allies more than the battle. The battle is chosen even if some do not know it yet.

  3. Hypocrisy angers me. I do think that Muslims are often given a much wider birth than other minority groups (why else would I be here) when it comes to politics. I think it’s unfair that the “kid gloves” get put on when dealing with “sensitive” muslim people. These rights and special privileges seem to have been earned not by friendship and cooperation with society as a whole, but rather through violence and fear.

    All that being said too often those who decry Islam with a sword in one hand, usually have a bible in the other. I’m an Atheist, I do not want to be some pawn in a grand crusade to re-christen the West.

    Out of all the religions today, Islam is the most violent and extreme. Key word being ‘Today’. It’s all the same gobbeldy gook to me.

  4. Al no question. But this is a matter of hypocrisy. In Belgium, a rule was made that no religious symbols should be allowed in government buildings. Fair enough sort of. The real reason this rule was made (For employees not anyone who happened to be in them) was because Islamic garb was so over the top. Clearly, Muslim clothing etc. was about establishing primacy, not simply people wearing a gold cross or whatever. So the rule had to be made for all in order to appear rational. What happened? Muslims claimed the rule was discriminatory as it meant that Muslim women (in particular) could not work for the government at all then. As a consequence, a exception was made for Muslims to the rule. Now, only Muslims can show religious symbols in Belgium in government buildings effectively achieving primacy.
    We could get into a long discussion about the history of religion and why it would be better to see them all go, but I tend to think that in its absence, the vacuum is filled with something else. In India, that something else was indeed better. Buddhism, a cognitive tool akin to the Greek logic was a fantastic way to fill that void. Hinduism may be said to be the same thing.
    The Romans arguably where atheistic as they didn’t actually believe their religion so much as copied the Greeks who did, and used it as a symbol set.
    But at this moment in hisotry, the only people who are accurately reporting the news overall, are CBN of which many videos can be found here on Vlad.
    The secular left well represented by the current president of the US, seem to be living an ideological delusion which may kill an awful lot of us before someone suspects they are wrong.
    Not that I disagree with you, I found the above post somewhat difficult to write and I did it for one of our other authors, but I do think we have to chose our allies well, and Christians and Jews at this time in history are by a country thousand miles preferable to Islam, a system so pernicious and political the case that it is not a religion at all is often made with some merit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*