The Week‘s Jon Terbush wrote recently that the war on Christmas is over and the secularists have won, citing new polls showing that Christmas has gradually become less of a religious holiday and more of a cultural one. “Younger Americans are far less likely than older ones to view Christmas as a religious holiday,” he writes.
While it’s true the fight is no longer the cultural flash point it once was, its legacy remains in ongoing local battles over religious expression in schools and on government property. One such battle is playing out now in Florida.
Florida officials attracted the ire of atheists this holiday season when they erected a Nativity scene in their state Capitol rotunda, and for a minute it looked like Christmas was going to get a taste of its own medicine. Secular groups quickly moved to erect their own monuments to atheism alongside baby Jesus, successfully installing a Festivus pole (read: a stack of empty beer cans) as well as a Flying Spaghetti Monster.
But Florida state officials drew the line at Satanists. After getting an initial go-ahead, the Satanic Temple of Florida was all set to put up its display when it received an email from the state’s Department of Management Services calling the display “grossly offensive.” The design Satanists submitted, featured above, depicts a scene from Isaiah 14:12 that some interpret as the moment when Satan was cast down to earth, or “born.” The text reads: “How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations!”
Lucien Greaves, spokesman for the Satanic Temple, said the Satanist design adheres to every guideline required by the state. “Our proposed structure does not present any images that would be inappropriate for people of any age,” Greaves wrote in an email to state officials. “Like the Nativity scene, it presents an image from a biblical story, which is shared with other religious traditions besides our own. In addition, a positive sentiment of ‘Happy Holidays’ is displayed.” Greaves is still waiting on a response.
A few days before Christmas, the war rages on …
What We're Following See More »
Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."
In The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin gives Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the longread treatment. The scourge of corrupt New York pols, bad actors on Wall Street, and New York gang members, Bharara learned at the foot of Chuck Schumer, the famously limelight-hogging senator whom he served as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee staff. No surprise then, that after President Obama appointed him, Bharara "brought a media-friendly approach to what has historically been a closed and guarded institution. In professional background, Bharara resembles his predecessors; in style, he’s very different. His personality reflects his dual life in New York’s political and legal firmament. A longtime prosecutor, he sometimes acts like a budding pol; his rhetoric leans more toward the wisecrack than toward the jeremiad. He expresses himself in the orderly paragraphs of a former high-school debater, but with deft comic timing and a gift for shtick."
President Obama has announced another round of commutations of prison sentences. Most of the 58 individuals named are incarcerated for possessions with intent to distribute controlled substances. The prisoners will be released between later this year and 2018.
The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"