Tuesday, 16 December 2008

Chuck Weighs In

Oooh, now it gets interesting.

Entering the latest War on Christmas debate, sparked recently by that sign erected in Olympia, Washington, is none other than Chuck Norris.

Yes, the rough, tough, roundhouse kicking Walker Texas Ranger has decided it’s personal, and he’s taking it to the man.

His argument is pretty straightforward, as you’d expect from the man who destroyed the periodic table, because he only recognizes the element of surprise.

It basically boils down to “Yes, yes, First Amendment and freedom of speech is fine, but NOT IF IT OFFENDS ME”.

Which seems to be typical of your modern US Christian.

Then he proceeds to list all his grievances (both real and imagined) against atheists, while pretending that he’s not really complaining because there would be no point doing that. Or something.

It’s all a bit muddled, to be honest. But in the end, it’s just a plug for his new book.

I recommend this one instead. It’s hilarious.


ZAROVE said...

Matt, not beign in AMerica , I doubt you even udnerstand the ifrts Amendment and htink tis just "Seperation fo Chruhc and STate" and "Free SPeech.
You, beign a Militant Ahtist, also side wihthte FFrF interpretaiton that says that they shoudlnt' allow any Religiosu speech at all in the public Aquareofor if thye do they shoudl allow Anti-Religiosu Speech. (WHich is a Non-Sequiter. in what wayy is their campaign not religious?)

The truth is, nothign in the FIrts Amendment actually compells the Government to set up confluctign poiitns of view.

THe Nativity Scene need not be erected either, but is not forbidden.

Her eis why.

The Nativity Scene doens't represent the Federal GOvernemnt (Or even State or CIty) making it a STate Relgiion, it merley shows that they wish to Honour ( Or to allow others ot honour in a Public space) the Holiday.

The State can determien how its own property is used, and shoudl be ablew to determien its own decisions in speech.

Contrary to the Militant Athiest position, there is no actual legal grounds compelling the State Govenrment to erect their plaque, in the itnerest of fairness. The STate cn accpt pr refuse any display, includign he Nativity, it so desires. If the State wanted to allow the display of a Hitler statue it culd, but coudl also refuse to, legally.

There is no special Category for Reliiosu Speech, and the City or State c an easily refuse to set up the FFrF plaque and still be within their rights, ebcause the Govenrment woudl simply be excersising its righ ton its own property.

I'm sorry you vcan't graps this very simple concept, but I suspect it sfor the same reaosn you cna't see the difference between Magic and miracles, becuase you simply want an excuse to slag off agisnt Relgiion and make it look bad.

Not that you and Athiests liek you are capable of orraitnal and bilegerant attituces, you always ever so reaosnable.