Christmas, is Misnomer

'Christmas', is Misnomer.


It seems ashame, these days, to argue about Christmas.Yes,I use the 'capitalized' form in my dossier.I do not think we can equate the harmless hanging of some greenery with the separation of church and state and/or the unfair labor and black /women's rights issues.Greenery hurts no-one.The latter hurt everyone.
It has been stated that Santa Claus(being Christian presumably) only brings presents to good little Christian children.This is absurd;Santa Claus is a myth and only exists in the pocket books of parents.I cannot imagine any parent,regardless of the political and/or ethnic/religious persuasion not complying with their child's plea to Dear Old St. Nick!
Many presentations are made to our schools concerning the prohibition of Christmas.No-one ever 'forbids' these protests.My question is,why is it that others are 'forbidden' to celebrate Christmas in our schools?
In one class;children were asked to draw a picture of what they felt was the real meaning of Christmas.Many drew pictures of family,turkey,presents,giving to the less fortunate.All of these were well received and displayed in the halls of the school.One child,however,drew a picture of Christ.His was not allowed to be displayed lest someone be offended.Why was his picture 'forbidden'?Are we not a democracy with rights given to the minority?Granted,this is a 'religious' picture.But so what??This picture is that particular child's depiction of what the "real meaning" of Chistmas is! If this did not fit into the modern secular customs then it must,surely, fall within the bounds of free speech and, at least, political correctness.
People are riding around town enjoying the lights and displays at other's homes.People are thrilled to join friends and family to celebrate the holidays.I fail to understand why this cannot be translated to the classroom.One is not excluded if one joins in.
We feel,as a society, that we are 'excluding' others by the celebration of 'Christmas'.Nothing could be further from the truth.Whether it be the winter solstice,Hannuka,Kwansa,or the Muslim feast of 'winter's eve' we are all included.We come together as family and to rejoice in the coming of a new year.If it is Christ,Allah,Budda,or the evergreen tree;bless it all and may the next year bring fruitfullnes.I raise a toast!
"Christmas",however, is the wrong word to use.The early church fathers were great public relations men.What we are really celebrating is the 'winter solstice',the returning of the sun.The fervor of the solstice was turned towards the birth of Jesus and all the celebration followed.Certaintly,great music and art evolved from this.Great music and art evolve from all religions.
The customs of Christmas are as varied as the nations that observe them.Except for the creche,which originated with St. Francis,every custom is pagan to the core.The use of evergreens, as garland, was discouraged by early church leaders.The pagan customs persisted.Soon the 'Yule Log' from the Druids came into play to ensure a good harvest next year.This leads us to the tree,(Germanic),wich has no religious significance at all.
Somewhere around 354AD there was much controversy as to whether Christ was born in December or March.The Mithric feast(in Latin:"natilis invicti solis"),or the birthday of the unconquered Sun of Philocalus, was of Latin origin.
The Syrians and the Armenians accused the Romans of sun worship and idolatry.If one wants some interesting reading then read about the arguements amongst the early churchmen.It a wonder Christmas ever got off the ground!
The Puritans forbade Christmas in England in 1644.Charles the Second revived the holiday.However,Scotland adhered to the Puritan ruling.Cromwell even outlawed minced pie.How dast;an Englishman without his minced pie?
The Puritans did not celebrate Christmas when they arrived in 1620.It was not until later,when the nation started forming, that Christmas was revived due to the extensive immigrant population from all over Europe.The first celebrations were in Salem Mass.Go figure,witch trials,etc.
Eliminating the creche from schools can be justified under the ruse of 'separation of church and state'.The tree and the glitter and the joy?Why?My Grandfather had a saying;"God bless ye' merry Chamber of Commerce".They are responsible for the glitz and the glamour of Christmas.And so should it be! It is a happy time and a time of giving.No other religious groups are forbidden from displaying a panapoly of their customs.Why is that only Western customs are forbidden? If we are to be the so-called PC society we claim to be then the addition of all customs to the "winter solstice" would only augment the celebrations.
I do not hold to the quote from Scrooge that those who observe Christmas, "Should be boiled in their pudding with a spring of holly through their hearts."
We have short changed our children in the schools enough.We have cut art,music,sports,activities,and after school programs.Now the liberals want to remove Christmas.The quality of education dimishes daily.For some poor children the only Christmas they will observe is that wich they learn in public schools.Again if we are ,truly,the PC society we claim to be...?
Those of us who endeavour to lead a decent life and partake in civilized behaviour;whether it be from religious backround,ethical and/or moral standards;should be banding together instead of pulling apart over being 'offended'.We should worry about the deterioration of standards in our society,not a wreath at a school.We should worry about terrorists,not a creche on city hall lawn.Their are enough injustices in the world without worrying about a tree in the classroom..

To Sex-Ed or Not to Sex-Ed. We Should Question

To Sex-Ed or Not to Sex-Ed

There is about to be a debate on the parameters of sex education in American schools. There is actually an advocacy group that feels children as young as second grade should not only be taught the Birds and Bees, but also adult forms of sexual behavior (ie: oral, anal, homosexual, etc). There will not even be a chance for parents to circumvent or opt out of such teaching for their children. It will be a mandatory part of the curriculum right alongside the ABC's.
I have no problem with sex-ed. I wish we had it in high school, we had Health Class. The teacher was an idiot! With teen sex on the rise, some sort of education should be available with parental consent. This proposal opens a Pandora's box. As I have said before in The Diatribe, it is all part of the plan. Liberals are not out to actually solve any problems, they are pushing agenda and legislation to gain power. I shall present fact, then present my observation.
Studies have been conducted and concluded that state; children who are sexually abused and/or exposed to sexual situations, material and conduct are 10 times more likely to become hyper-sexual later on. Those same studies have tracked over the years said children and have found a higher rate of early teen sexual activity, teen pregnancy, STD'S, adult sexual alternative behavior (ie: prostitution, S+M, sex/porn addictions, drug abuse, child sex abusers themselves).These are facts played out in study after study over the past forty years.
So, here we are about to purposely expose children to this stuff? Oh, I know, the Liberals will say it is in a safe and controlled environment under friendly, non threatenning format. Bullshit! Exposure is exposure, plain and simple.
Children are naturally curious. We, as parents and teachers, want this to be. We want children to ask, explore, experience. Yes, we shelter them from what is harmfull, and so we should. Plenty of time later in life for them to experience how much life can suck! But this is a Pandora's box that we will reap the harvest on sooner than we think. Shall I explain?
It is all part of the plan. These children will grow up and do the same things those studies have concluded. Exposed at a young age we will spark that neuron in their brains. Sexual behavior is a complex human proclivity. Our ancestors did well to keep girls virginal and boys away from masturbation as long as possible. I agree, in many cases it lead to problems and deviant behavior but the problems we have today never existed as late as the 1950's. Today a girl of sixteen with two interracial kids from two guys is commonplace!
Here is the plan. When these children grow up they will explore younger and give birth to more illegitemate babies. The result? More welfare moms, dependent on government. See where I am going here?
More men on the hook for child support, never getting to college (as well as the girls) working menial jobs and a life time of depending on the check from the State. Men who are of age having sex with girls not of age will increase. Translation? More men labelled as sex offenders, more men in prison, more men never hoping to get a carreer, rather, a menial job. More government dependency. See where I am going now?
More children in single parent homes. Note: With over 85% of all custody cases awarded to mothers this number will skyrocket. Studies, again, have shown children raised in those households are three times more likely to repeat the parents mistakes, end up in jail, end up on welfare, children out of wedlock..More dependency on government. More women never getting to be the best their parents hoped for. The same parents who fought for Equal Rights for Women!..Starting to get it now?
This is the plan! The studies conducted over the last forty years have not told us we need to stop this trend. The studies only gave Liberals food for thought!..mmmm...
How best can we create a society that the government can control to a point where everyone has to depend upon it? Especially if we pass laws that force people to depend upon it..mmmm..Then, if we elect enough legislators of like minds and possibly a President..Well, we can sew this puppy right up! Any opposition, we can call them anti family, anti children, anti, progressive, Tea-baggers, FOX News! Racists!
The goal is never to solve a problem anymore. It is to create a cause, or, an agenda in order to affect legislation and solidify power. Society if infected with this concept. This debate is another wrung on the ladder that Liberals are climbing to the top.

..And That Is The Diatribe..

The War Yet To Come

Over the years I have listened to and learned from the news, history, pundits and other sources of media about the history of the United States, it's relation to the world and it's place in the future. I find one common factor.
Negotiation, leading to war, invasion and conflict.
Our past is filled with pre-emptive war (always yelled about) or invasion/attack (told we were not prepared) explained by the Liberals.

Welcome to 2009! Well what will it be America?

Once again, shall we talk and wait for the bombs? Or shall we strike and wait for the rebuke?

Either way we will lose; either in the war of public debate or the war of scorched earth. Liberals have sewn up the debate either way. America loses! Even if our troops come home triumphant with ticker tape parades, we lose because of our methods. We lose, because Liberal tactics are to "be one with the enemy", talk, negotiate, reach an agreement? How about? No, lets bomb first and strike a decisive blow and gain the upper hand, kill them now before they kill any more of us.
Any President, today, leading any conflict, either way will be regarded as a black mark for eons to come...So, what shall it be America? Talk and wait for the attack? Or, stand up and let God sort the rights and wrongs?

Iran is on the cusp. North Korea already posseses. I predict, before the end of 2010; a mushroom cloud will explode over a large Metro city somewhere in a Western World Country. I ask only this..What will it be America?
Shall we pay the price now? Shall we pay the huge fee later? History tells us the answer. All we need to do is read and listen. Either way cost is incurred. I am sorry to be blunt. Do you think our enemies are not as blunt?

There is a funny line from the last 'Batman' Movie. The Joker is quoted. "...if several troops lose their lives..it is all part of the plan..but if one man loses his life..then everyone loses their minds!.."
That quote reflecks our attitude. Thousands get lost is a tagic event, yet we go on with our lives. One soldier killed in combat becomes a calling cry to end the war!! We attach the name to the family and another reason to "pull out". That is the key to our enemy success.

All it takes is one son, one father, one wife, one mother. We lose all balls to carry on. The truth is those dead fathers, sons, mothers would say.."Take from my dead hands my weapon, shoot back!" It is there we honor the sacrifice. The relatives of that fallen soldier would all agree, yes, that was who my child, father, mother, was.

So what shall it be America?
I beg for the chance to go to Boot Camp, be worked to the point of nothing, then rise again and show myself. I beg to stop writing and use an M-4 instead of a keyboard to state my convictions. War is coming America. Iraq and Afhganistan is just the first dish in an entire dinner. Do you have the stomach to eat it all?? WWIII is here! It will be broadcast live on TV, well, untill the first nukes hit and knock out all our electronics..Anyway..I digress..What shall it be America??

Shall we strike first and gain the upper hand, and hopefully save this world? It is not a sure win! Or, shall we talk and spend the next twenty-plus years 'hopefully trying', well, to re build it.. That win?..I cannot say..


....And That Is The Diatribe..