Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Anti-Religious Bigotry

That's what Newt Gingrich calls it, and he's right. In a recent case where a condo management stopped a 93-year-old woman from even putting an angel on top of a tree in the common area, "Even the word 'Christmas' was banned The residents were told to use 'holiday' instead (an irony not picked up by the elites since the word 'holiday' is derived from 'Holyday'). The management company blamed federal regulations for its anti-religious directive. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) denies that this is their policy, but they say that religious bans like this are commonplace. Anti-religious zealots have put property owners and managers on the defensive. Rather than risk a lawsuit, they issue blanket prohibitions that amount to nothing less than anti-religious bigotry. It's another example of the biases of the elites -- in this case, anti-religious bigotry -- being imposed on the American people." [Lowe's is now banning the use of the word "Christmas," too. -RT] [Update: Lowe's has apologized and called it "a proofing error, saying they "proudly sell Christmas trees and have for 60 years." I think they got such a big negative response when some liberal on their staff made a decision to stop calling them "Christmas trees," that they decided to rescind the policy to avoid losing a lot of money. -RT] But, as further noted by Gingrich, these bans are not "equal." "Did you know that, while religious images are under assault across the nation, in nine Western states the courts have ruled it constitutional for public schools to require a three-week course on the Islamic faith -- a course in which all junior-high students are mandated to pretend they are Muslims and offer prayers to Allah? This is the same court, mind you, that infamously ruled (in the case brought by atheist activist Michael Newdow) that it is unconstitutional for students to mention 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance." What the hell are they trying to do? Replace Christianity with Islam? I, for one, would NEVER follow a religion that pretended to control me to the extent that Islam does, their treatment of women notwithstanding. It looks to me as if the liberals (mostly Democrats) have been "bought off" by Islamic interests. They can protest this comment all they want, but I then must ask, "What would they do differently if they weren't?" (Newt Gingrich,)

No comments: