Wednesday 15 November 2006

"Merry Christmas" is not swearing

Normblog has a humane and amusing defence of Christmas. Some years ago I used to hang out on the Christian website Ship of Fools. They had some good discussion boards, but I came to realise that most people who posted there were white, middle class liberals (academics or social workers it seemed) - thjat was when they had a long discussion about the exclusivity and offensiveness of Christmas. It seemed that in the opinion of some that you should assume Christmas is offensive, unless told otherwise, like signing a sort of verbal pre-nup, when you greet someone in the street. I'd always believed it was only cynical secularists hijacking the "multiculti" agenda who went in for that kind of bullshit, but no. It's not as simple as that. It's much more like "Insofar as I am a white male striving to overcome my innate prejudices and to atone for the evils on which my privileges were built, I would like to ascertain whether you would be reminded of the heinous legacy of slavery, oppression and homophobia of the church, not forgetting the crusades of course,if I were to venture that I wished that in the event of your being of broadly Christian sympathies, or even simply a conscientious atheist who likes getting presents, whether you would enjoy a felicitous solstice..."

and so on. Lesson: when academic socialism is mixed with flannel-like Christianity, disaster inevitably ensues.


A final word on Elton John's recent thoughtful call for organised religion to be banned. This has been left hanging on the BBC website for days now, as if someone thinks it has something powerful to say. I'd like to ask Mr John how he proposes to achieve this. Presumably people holding services at home as their churches have been closed, would be subject to raids, as this is clearly "organisation". Presumably the great cathedrals would be left to rot, as they are remnants of this evil thing. Perhaps also people reading Bible stories to their children would also be subject to the full force of the law, pace the law drafted by someone on Harry's Place a while ago( it's in their archives for October). I am not quite sure why some people think that it would be a more tolerant and humane world if only their views were allowed in the public sphere, but there you have it. It's always indoctrination when it's someone you don't like, and education when it's someone you do. It's always intolerance when it's someone you don't agree with and ethical when it's someone you do. Other people's views always lead, naturally, to war and carnage, when you don't share them, and build harmony and peace when you do.
Update: I meant to say...."and I am no different" at the end here, but purely due the pressures of time, if not space, I didn't.

No comments: