Posts Tagged ‘war on God’

…I wonder he will say about this:

Nazi Germany celebrated Christmas without Christ with the help of swastika tree baubles, ‘Germanic’ cookies and a host of manufactured traditions, a new exhibition has shown.

The way the celebration was gradually taken over and exploited for propaganda purposes by Hitler’s Nazis is detailed in a new exhibition.

Gee where have we seen this before. Clayton Cramer expands on it and gives Jonah Goldberg a pat:

This doesn’t surprise me particularly. I recently finished reading Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism. He makes the claim that the Nazis removed prayer from German public schools in 1935, for a similar reason. I have not had a chance to spot check Goldberg’s claims, but I this does generally fit. National Socialism was derived from progressivism, and shared many of its most obnoxious traits: hostility towards religion, and especially Judeo-Christian beliefs; support for eugenics; government control over the economy; hostility towards free market capitalism.

Is anyone surprised by this? I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.

Well it looks like the European court is going to show those backwards Italians that they aren’t going to be displaying Crosses is going to be verboten!

In a decision that could force a review of the use of religious symbols in government-run schools across Europe, the court ordered Italy to pay a euro5,000 ($7,390) fine to a mother in northern Italy who fought for eight years to have crucifixes removed from her children’s public school classrooms. The Italian government said it would appeal.

Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi said the crucifix was a fundamental sign of the importance of religious values in Italian history and culture and was a symbol of unity and welcoming for all of humanity — not one of exclusion.

He said a European court had no right intervening in such a profoundly Italian matter and said “it seems as if the court wanted to ignore the role of Christianity in forming Europe’s identity, which was and remains essential.”

Italians as you might guess are a tad displeased.

Italy’s education minister condemned the judgment by the European Court of Human Rights, saying that the Christian cross was a symbol of the country’s Roman Catholic religion and cultural identity.

Mariastella Gelmini, a member of the conservative government of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, argued that “no one, and certainly not an ideological European court, will succeed in erasing our identity,” said

Other ministers said they were appalled by the ruling, calling it “absurd,” “shameful” and “offensive.”

Italians being practical people are going to do the practical thing concerning the ruling; Ignore it:

Italy will ignore an “unreal” European court ruling that bans crucifixes from state-run schools as it appeals the decision, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said.

“It’s not binding,” Berlusconi said of the ruling after a Cabinet meeting in Rome today. “Whatever the outcome of the appeal, there’s no obligatory force to the decision.”

It’s not like the European Union has an army to enforce the rule.

Meanwhile while the EU Human rights court is fighting against the Crucifix it doesn’t have much to say about a real Crucifixion about to happen:

You can’t display an image of the crucified Christ in Saudi Arabia, but if you are ghoulish enough to want to see a genuine crucifixion, then the Kingdom is planning to stage one soon.

Saudi’s Court of Cassation has confirmed that it will crucify 22-year-old kidnapper and rapist Muhammad Basheer al-Ramaly, though it won’t be following biblical precedent to the letter: he will be beheaded first, and his head will be stuck on a pole separately from his crucified torso.

This guy is a piece of work to say the least but it is interesting that the European Court of Human Rights is zealous concerning one but has no comment on the other.

In case my conservative friends still haven’t gotten it let me say one more time. I dislike this healthcare bill and believe it should be defeated.

But lets look at something interesting:

One month ago it looked like Dede the angrysmug would be elected to congress. She would be the one republican vote for this bill. She would be lionized by the media and held up as an example of moderation and bi-partisianship. She would be interviewed on every MSM outlet and held up as an example saying that Republicans need to moderate on Abortion and Gay Marriage. For a year this would be shoved down our throats.

But by the efforts of Doug Hoffman, Sarah Palin and conservatives all over the country. Dede was dropped like a bad habit and may even lose her position in the NY Republican delegation.

Although Hoffman was not elected he was just about the only republican/conservative who wasn’t on Tuesday. The democrat who defeated him Bill Owens managed to compromise himself with the voters who elected him in under 24 hours (Hoffman 2010). The president was desperate for a victory and more importantly needed one NOW! As time passed the 2010 election would be coming closer and the vote would be more painful and costly for blue dog democrats.

Now comes Joseph Cao the man who replaced William (Refrigerator) Jefferson. His district is about as democratic as you can get and he squeaked through with 49% to win. The bill is very popular there but Cao wasn’t buying and I wrote about this in August:

You know that in a district where there hasn’t been a republican congressman since 1890 and is 64% black it might be politically necessary for a newly elected republican to support the president on some key issues. Even if Abortion is paid for in it..

But Don Surber reports that when congressman Anh Cao says he is a Catholic, unlike say a John Kerry or a Nancy Pelosi he means it:

Cho bluntly stated that he would rather lose his seat than to vote for a healthcare bill that supports abortion.

Obama needed a win and wanted at least one republican so places like Think Progress could have headlines like this:

House Passes Historic, Bipartisan Health Reform Legislation

So comes the Stupak amendment and the vote for it. ONE QUARTER of the democratic caucus votes for the pro-life amendment, Pro-Abortion democrats hold their nose and vote for the final bill anyway.

Now the media has a dilemma: There is a Republican who voted for the bill. He is the first Vietnamese congressman, he has a great story and now he has been the vote for healthcare, one would expect that he would be lionized all over the place…

…however he is a DEVOUT Catholic and only was willing to vote for the bill because the Abortion provision was included and has made it clear that re-election campaign if the Abortion language goes so will he.

What is the MSM to do? Can they lionize an anti-abortion republican? Can they praise him on the talk shows? Will Obey, Maddow, the today show, the view and all the others dare to push him and praise a believing catholic who practices what he preaches?

If they don’t then they lose their bi-partisan meme if they do then they lionize faith. I think they will ignore him, I think in the end the media is so far left that even supporting Obama and this bill is not enough for them to go against their sacrament.

God works in mysterious ways, but I don’t see this as very mysterious. Bills come and go, parties rise and fall but Sin is Sin and God is constant.

I still hope the bill will fail but I’m going to enjoy watching the media squirm over the next two days over Cao.

A: Because he knows we won’t kill him for it.

In fact there is only upside professionally for him among the people who call Roman Polanski the victim of a “young hooker“.

He has the right to do what he wants but if anyone tries to tell you it is “courageous” then they are either fools or liars.