Sunday, March 24, 2013

O’Reilly Now Fighting Against "The War On Easter"

Fox’s Bill O’Reilly declared victory against those who waged the “war on Christmas.” Regardless, this culture warrior can’t rest on his laurels, since secular progressives have now supposedly declared war on Easter. O’Reilly explains, “So, if the far left can marginalize Santa and the Easter Bunny…they then set the stage for a totally secular society in the future” that includes abortion on demand, laws against criticizing minorities, and the legalization of drugs. Already at this early stage of the war, "the Easter Bunny is on the run here in America." His "proof" of this nefarious plot is a handful of "anti-Easter municipalities" whose schools substitute the word “spring” for “Easter,” as in “spring egg hunts.” O’Reilly is joined by Laura Ingraham in lamenting the leftist onslaught against “traditional forces.” Watch:

4 comments:

Michael The Molar Maven said...

O'Reilly's mistake is that this is not a war on Christianity, but a silly attempt to address the possibility that non-Christians would take offense to a celebration that is identified with a specific religion that is not theirs. Strangely enough, I agree with the over-arching argument O'Reilly should be making. We try too hard to address everyone's perceived sensitivities. And by perceived, I refer to the perception of the subject (the speaker), not the object (the audience). If his example is true (spring eggs rather than Easter eggs) he is absolutely correct in its silliness. As a Jewish-American, I am no more offended by an Easter egg hunt than I am by the presence of a Christmas Tree in the town square. (You'll never hear me ask, "Where's the chanukiah?") As we continue to sanitize every ethnic or religious celebration we begin to insult the intelligence or all. It all goes back to, then presidential candidate, Jimmy Carter's ethnic purity comment for which he was unjustly maligned. The only issue I have with O'Reilly's commentary is that he comes off as "whiny" in the very narrowness and unimportance of the example he chose and that his only concern seems to be Christian identity. If he were to broaden his scope, I'd be right there with him.

Jeff Tone said...

I'm not with O'Reilly at all. I don't believe in religious displays in public squares or events associated with religion celebrated in public schools, especially in an increasingly diverse country. The separation of church and state is not "sanitizing" religion; it's keeping it in its proper sphere as a private choice.

Michael The Molar Maven said...

The bigger issue in this case is not separation of church and state, as you put it, nor is it a war on Christianity, as O'Reilly claims. We have become so afraid to say anything for fear of offending someone, some group or some ideology. And there's always some politician or some pundit ready to pounce on any comment to promote his or her own narrow special agenda. Calling an Easter egg a "spring" egg for fear of offending non-Christians is an insult to the intelligence of all non-Christians. That is the point O-Reilly should have made; but, in true O'Reilly form, he chose to limit his complaint to some nebulous war on Christianity, which it clearly is not.

Jeff Tone said...

The issue goes beyond "comments" to actual activities. Should events centering around religious holidays like Easter be held in public schools? Certainly not. That is a blatant violation of the separation of church and state, which is indeed the issue.