Miscellanea Agnostica

Cue the sanctimonious rage, the accusations that Christmas is being outlawed in in one US state, the wild-eyed delusional claims of Christian persecution. And what, you may ask, sparked the furor that has lit up Fox News and Religious Right pundits around the country?

Rhode Island governor Lincoln Chafee has named his statehouse’s decorated tree a “holiday tree,” and not a “Christmas tree.”

Fortunately, as the Boston Herald reports, Chafee has no intention of caving in to the Religious Right caterwauling and wailing over his choice of labels (WebCite cached article):

A beaming Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee calmly weathered a cross-country Christmas controversy yesterday, standing by his PC pronouncement that the 17-foot spruce in the State House rotunda is a “holiday tree” as outraged residents cried foul.

Taking the Christmas out of the tree is in the Rhode Island spirit, Chafee said, invoking the 1663 Colonial charter and the legacy of state father Roger Williams.

“I’m just continuing what other governors have done,” Chafee told the Herald after dedicating a separate tree to soldiers who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. “I just want to make sure I’m doing everything possible in this building to honor Roger Williams.”

For any of my readers who don’t understand the importance of Rhode Island’s history and how it specifically relates to the idea of separating church and state, R.I.’s founder, Roger Williams, was a Baptist minister who’d endured Puritan persecution in the Massachusetts colony, found refuge among the Narragansett to the south, and established his own colony on the premise of religious liberty. He penned The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution, a treatise promoting religious tolerance and freedom of conscience, including Christian-scriptural support. Rhode Island, perhaps more than any other state, has a heritage of religious tolerance. So Chafee is not overstating his reasons for insisting on “holiday tree” instead of “Christmas tree.”

Besides, since Christmas is a “holiday,” it is never semantically wrong to call a “Christmas tree” a “holiday tree.” If it weren’t for the modern Christian custom of putting up Christmas trees, there would be no “holiday tree” in the Rhode Island statehouse, so it hardly matters what the governor calls it; as New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick would say, “It is what it is.” The militant Christianist outrage over this is just ridiculous. People really need to fucking grow up.

P.S. Having mentioned Roger Williams, I’d like to add something important. Thomas Jefferson is frequently named as the man who coined the phrase “separation of church and state” (in his famous 1802 letter to the Danbury CT Baptists). But in fact, he didn’t. Roger Williams did. In Bloudy Tenent, he wrote:

When they [the Church] have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the Candlestick, etc., and made His Garden a wilderness as it is this day.

Given how well-read Jefferson was, it’s not safe to assume he couldn’t have been inspired by Williams.

Hat tip: Friendly Atheist.

Photo credit: alvesfamily.

Tags: christian, christian martyr complex, christian right, Christianity, christians, christmas, christmas tree, holiday tree, lincoln chafee, persecution, religious freedom, religious right, religious tolerance, rhode island, Separation of church and state, tolerance, war on christmas, war on christmas 2011

It’s that time of year again, folks. The time when the Religious Right gets its knickers twisted into knots over their delusion that Christmas either has been, or soon will be, outlawed in the U.S. This “war on Christmas” trope is usually good for about a dozen blog posts each year, and likely will continue to be … because the R.R. is so predictably outraged over this manufactured controversy.

The Aledo (IL) Times Record reports that Congressman Joe Walsh has proffered what he calls the “Save Christmas Act” in an effort to “defend” his supposedly-beleaguered holiday (WebCite cached article):

Yesterday, Congressman Joe Walsh (IL-8) introduced the ‘Save Christmas Act’ to permanently end the Obama Administration’s new tax on Christmas trees. This tax was established to fund yet another unnecessary government board, the Christmas Tree Promotion Board. This is clearly the most ridiculous in a long list of new taxes and regulations proposed by the Obama Administration.

Walsh stated: “The sheer audacity of a tax on Christmas trees is ridiculous. Are we going to start taxing Halloween candy and pumpkins or turkey and apple pie? Are we going to tax the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny too? Are we going to tax hotdogs and hamburgers and American flags for the Fourth of July?

There are actually several problems with this. Yes, the proposal to levy a 15¢ fee per tree sold on sellers of live Christmas trees was a genuine one. And it was announced by the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture recently. However, as Snopes makes clear (cached), it is not a “tax.” Rather, it’s a cooperative program — first requested by the Christmas-tree-growing industry, I might add! — intended to promote the sale of live Christmas trees.

Of course, these little facts didn’t get in the way of the Right-wing flaring up with sanctimonious outrage. In light of this shitstorm, the White House quickly put the kibosh on this idea … even though those who raged and railed against it were angry for all the wrong reasons. If the Right-wing fury over this supposed “Christmas tree tax” was predictable, so too was the Obama administration’s eagerness to cave into it.

But beyond the problem of the Right’s outrage over this being counter-factual, is that even the scenario they were telling themselves was in play — i.e. that Obama and his evil cohorts were taxing Christmas trees in order to hinder the celebration of Christmas by Christians around the country — makes absolutely no sense! A 15¢ tax is nowhere near enough to put a dent into sales of Christmas trees, which normally cost upwards of $20; and it wouldn’t have been limited just to real trees, artificial ones would have been “taxed” too.

Time to get over yourselves, Christians, and grow the fuck up. Not everything is intended to abolish your religion and/or its trappings. Really. Moreover, if you guys are really fans of the private sector and want to help industry, you’d have supported this 15¢-per-tree fee, because it was the Christmas tree industry itself that originally came up with it!

P.S. There’s almost nothing truly or genuinely “Christian” about Christmas trees, as I explain in my page on the myths about Christmas that the R.R. clings to so irrationally.

Photo credit: julian.

Tags: barack obama, christian right, christmas, christmas tree, christmas tree promotion board, christmas tree tax, christmas trees, department of agriculture, illinois, joe walsh, obama, obama administration, religious right, usda, war on christmas, war on christmas 2011, white house

Bill Donohue, the Christofascist who heads the Catholic League, reached a new high in low, during an appearance on Fox News, wherein he made his position on Christmas — and on what everyone should believe, generally — crystal clear. News Hounds reports that what he said, is that non-Christians need to convert to Catholicism and worship Christmas along with him (WebCite cached article). He began with some remarks about reports that Christmas trees make some non-Christians uncomfortable:

Bill’s verbal pugilism escalated with “tell them to get over it.” He then did a litany of those who are “excluded,” including “mothers who feel excluded from father’s day” (WTF!) and said “too bad.”

What the fuck, indeed! I had no idea that any mothers felt “excluded” from Father’s Day. Where did the Billster pull that from?

Bill claimed that his Jewish friends (imaginary?) say this is ridiculous and that “everybody celebrates Christmas.”

Aha. The old “some of my best friends are Jewish” thing. Sorry Bill, but that you happen to know a few Jews who celebrate Christmas, tells us absofuckinglutely nothing about Jews as a group, or even about non-Christians generally. My guess, Bill, is that any Jewish friends you may have, are telling you what you want to hear because they know what a ferocious Christofascist you are. (That’s assuming you really have any Jewish “friends,” Bill … I find that claim to be non-credible.)

He then brayed that if people are made uncomfortable by Christmas displays — are ya ready for it — they should “convert to Catholicism.”

Yes, folks, that’s the Billster’s solution to the problem of religious inclusiveness … everyone should just convert en masse to his own religion, Roman Catholicism, and — voilà! — problem gone.

That, Gentle Reader, is the very definition of a religious militant, and now you see why I’ve been saying that the Billster is a Christofascist.

The really sad part about this is that a lot of religious folks are going to read what the Billster said, and agree with him, that everyone converting to the same religion would solve the problem of religious division. What all of Bill’s believer/defenders fail to understand is the truly hideous nature of this idea. Its horror would become clearer, if put in the mouths of others. They wouldn’t be too keen, for example, on al-Qaeda terrorists saying to them, “If you want us to stop trying to blow you up by the dozen, all you have to do is convert to our Wahhabi Islamism.” Its criminality becomes even more obvious if one puts it in the mouth of a robber: “All you need do is give me all your money, and I won’t be forced to attack you.”

At any rate, I have to wonder, though, how many of the Billster’s allies among the rest of the Religious Right — which is overwhelmingly evangelical Protestant and therefore opposed to Catholicism — are going to take his demand that everyone convert to Catholicism. My guess is that they secretly cringed when they heard that … but in the interest of militant-Christian solidarity against non-Christians, they likely would never openly admit it.

I hope any doubts as to the religiofascist goals of people like Bill Donohue have been dispelled. Now you understand why they make such an issue out of Christmas every year … for them, it’s a wedge issue they can use to push their demand that everyone in the world believe what they do.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: bill donohue, billster, catholic, catholic league, catholicism, catholics, christian, christian right, Christianity, christians, christmas, christmas tree, christmas trees, christofascism, christofascist, christofascists, conversion, convert, fox news, militant, militant religion, religiofascism, religiofascist, religiofascists, religionism, religionist, religionists, religious militant, religious right, roman catholic, roman catholicism, the billster, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010

In a twist on the usual “other people won’t celebrate my religion the way I demand they do!” Religious Right whine, one fundamentalist activist has gone on a hunger strike. Over Christmas. That’s right … he thinks this will convince people to convert to his fundamentalist religionism and otherwise do what he wants them to.

No, I don’t get it either, but hey, you can’t just expect a militant religionist to make any sense, can you? The New Haven (CT) Register reports on this juvenile, sanctimonious publicity stunt (WebCite cached article):

Many Christians complain at this time of year when store clerks and others wish them “Happy holidays!” instead of “Merry Christmas!” — but Ned Coll may be the only one willing to go on a bread-and-water fast for the cause.

Coll, an activist who first gained notoriety for his efforts to open the state’s beaches to the public, has for 20 years been on a more religious quest, calling people to follow Jesus.

“Now the purpose of the fast … is basically to get people to focus on Christmas as the focal point of human history, the birth of Christ, and to say ‘Merry Christmas’ and to focus on it in every possible way during Christmastime,” Coll said during a visit to the Register Wednesday.

Pretty much most of what Coll has to say echoes what other paranoid Christofascists usually say about Christmas:

“I think ‘happy holidays’ is a creation of Madison Avenue,” Coll, 70, says of the non-religious greeting, which is scorned by conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly and others. “I think that’s the whole push, to get people to buy stuff for New Year’s, buying stuff for Hanukkah, buying stuff for Christmas.”

In the past, “The standard thing for people to say was ‘merry Christmas and happy new year,’ and that’s been completely eliminated as much as possible by Madison Avenue.”

Aha. So, Mr Coll, the early 1940s song “Happy Holiday” was written by “Madison Avenue,” not by Irving Berlin. Got it. I don’t agree — and the facts run contrary — but by all means, Mr Coll, do not let them get in the way of your hyperpious, crybaby antics.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: activism, activist, christian, christian right, Christianity, christians, christmas, happy holiday, happy holidays, merry christmas, ned coll, new haven, new haven CT, religious right, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010

The 2010 edition of the annual “war on Christmas” marches on. This time it involves bellyaching by a bank in Oklahoma, which has been told by federal regulators to stop using their business to proselytize. KOCO-TV in Oklahoma City reports on this controversy, which sounds more draconian than it really is (WebCite cached article):

A small-town bank in Oklahoma said the Federal Reserve won’t let it keep religious signs and symbols on display.

Federal Reserve examiners come every four years to make sure banks are complying with a long list of regulations. The examiners came to Perkins last week. And the team from Kansas City deemed a Bible verse of the day, crosses on the teller’s counter and buttons that say “Merry Christmas, God With Us.” were inappropriate. The Bible verse of the day on the bank’s Internet site also had to be taken down.

Residents are upset by this imposition:

“This is just ridiculous,” said bank customer Jim Nyles. “This whole thing is just ridiculous. We all have regulatory bodies that govern us. But this is too much.”

“I think that’s absurd,” said Chelsi Holser, a bank customer. “I don’t agree with it at all. They are taking Christ out of Christmas and life.”

But the regulations exist, and the Federal Reserve is required to enforce them. KOCO explains them:

Specifically, the feds believed, the symbols violated the discouragement clause of Regulation B of the bank regulations. According to the clause, “…the use of words, symbols, models and other forms of communication … express, imply or suggest a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion.”

The feds interpret that to mean, for example, a Jew or Muslim or atheist may be offended and believe they may be discriminated against at this bank. It is an appearance of discrimination.

Now, I worked at a bank in the 1980s. We had Christmas trees in the lobby and various other decorations, and employees wished their customers “Merry Christmas.” And I’m not sure the Fed is saying, in this case, that any of that is unacceptable. This action appears to be triggered by the fact that this particular bank — which, curiously, is not named by KOCO — goes much further than that. At the bank I worked at, we did not push Bible verses on customers and didn’t wear pins that said, “God with us.” This bank, on the other hand, is making a concerted effort to proselytize to its customers. This is the kind of thing Reg B is trying to prevent.

As one usually expects of Christians, they’re feeling persecuted, which leads them to say foolish things:

“I think that’s absurd,” said Chelsi Holser, a bank customer. “I don’t agree with it at all. They are taking Christ out of Christmas and life.”

Did you catch that? This customer things the Fed is “taking Christ out of … life.” I have no idea how they could possibly go that far. How “out of life“? They aren’t taking Christ out of anyone’s “life.” They’re not going into homes and swiping Christmas trees, Bibles and crosses; they aren’t shutting down churches; they aren’t taking nativities off of people’s lawns. They aren’t doing any of that.

It would behoove people like Ms Holser to stop deluding themselves. There is no effort underway in the US to abolish Christ or Christianity. None. Nowhere. It is not happening. Period. End of discussion.

What’s more, being a Christian is not — to my knowledge — an automatic entitlement to disobey Federal Reserve regulations. If you want to own and operate a Federal Reserve-backed bank, then you have to follow their rules. That shouldn’t be too much to ask of law-abiding, upstanding Christians.

Photo credit: Christmasstockimages.Com.

Tags: bible verse, bible verse of the day, bible verses, christ out of christmas, christian, Christianity, christians, discrimination, federal reserve, federal reserve bank, merry christmas, perry OK, scripture, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010

Here’s an example of one of the standard responses, when officials are caught using public property to proselyize. WLWT-TV in Cincinnati reports on yet another nativity controversy in Brookville, IN (WebCite cached article):

Residents of Brookville rallied at the Franklin County Courthouse on Saturday to save a nativity scene that has come under fire. …

[The Freedom From Religion Foundation] said that the display violates the First Amendment and said it had received a complaint about it.

The group said that displaying the Nativity alone would indicate that the local government was endorsing one religion above others.

Of course, there was no need to “rally” to “save” the nativity, since the FFRF had not actually ordered that it be removed entirely. Rather, they explained how it might be retained, but legally:

The [FFRF] letter indicated that if the reindeer already on the courthouse grounds were not separated from the display as they are now, or there were other seasonal decorations, such as a Santa Claus, the display would be more secular and would likely comply with legal precedent.

The standard response I mentioned, which was repeated in this story, is:

Brookville Town Council President Michael Biltz said the display, owned by the city, has been at the courthouse for at least 50 years without complaint.

There you have it. The old “we’ve been doing it that way for years, why should we change now?” retort. This is an appeal to tradition, and as such is both childish and fallacious. That something has been done one way, for decades, centuries or millennia even, does not mean it cannot or should not be changed. For example, in the occidental world, we used to use horses and oxen for transportation; should we have refused to use automobiles and trucks to replace them? At one time, too, people used to think the earth was at the center of the universe, with the sun and all else revolving around it; should Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler all have refused to contribute to a heliocentric model, because the geocentric one was traditional and had always “worked” before?

The cold fact is that “tradition” does not equate with veracity, and it doesn’t make anything “right.” That no one had complained in 50 years about the Franklin County courthouse’s nativity scene, does not mean it’s legal to have been there in that form, all those years. All it means is that Franklin County managed to get away with something that it shouldn’t have — because of the voluntary complicity of local Christians.

Photo credit: *clairity*.

Tags: brookville IN, christian, Christianity, christians, christmas, ffrf, franklin county, franklin county courthouse, franklin county IN, freedom from religion foundation, nativity, nativity scene, public property, religionism, religionist, religionists, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010

Having a menorah, but no nativity, on city property in Boca Raton, Florida? That’s absolutely intolerable, according to the militant religionists at the Catholic League. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports on their childish caterwauling (WebCite cached article):

The New York-based Catholic League is accusing Boca Raton of discrimination for buying menorahs with taxpayer dollars and displaying them in public buildings without displaying Christian nativity scenes alongside them.

Contrary to what the Catholic League claims, though, Christians are not being forbidden to decorate for Christmas:

In an e-mailed statement, Boca Raton Assistant City Manager Michael Woika responded, “The City of Boca Raton celebrates the holiday season by having displays in the lobbies of public buildings in a manner consistent with Supreme Court and other judicial rulings. These displays are City-owned decorations and are comprised of a Christmas tree, a menorah, and a “Seasons Greetings” sign, and may include garlands, winter decorations (such as snowflakes and snowmen), and/or lights.”

The irony of the Catholic League’s bellyaching is revealed in this quotation:

“What we have now is Jews get preferential treatment and Christians are told, ‘No, you have to be satisfied with your Christmas tree’,” [League President Bill] Donahue [sic] said.

Well, boo fucking hoo, Bill. Jews are getting “preferential” treatment, you say? Gee, I can recall a time when your own Church was vehemently anti-Jewish, Bill. Time was, under Catholic rule, Christians got decidedly “preferential” treatment over Jews. Remember the expulsion of Jews from Catholic Spain, Bill? Remember the Inquisitions? Sure, that was a long time ago, but in more recent times, Catholics in Nazi-occupied Poland openly aided their mortal enemies in the Third Reich in that regime’s diabolical effort to exterminate as many Jews as possible.

Seems to me that — perhaps — a little comeuppance is in order here, Bill. Besides, Bill, no Catholics are being prevented from worshipping their God as they wish, in their homes and churches under this policy. Besides, I dare you, Bill, to produce any sort of scriptural or conciliar order requiring that they worship only nativities placed on municipal properties in their locales.

I’m serious. Where, exactly, can I find documented the Christian doctrine that nativities are required, only on government property? When are Christofascists going to produce this document?

Oh, and it’s ironic that Donohue is claiming that Christmas trees aren’t religious enough for Boca Raton to permit to be set up, when their religiofascist colleagues at the AFA had just gotten through weeping and wailing that it’s the natural-born right of every Christian to see a Christmas tree in the lobby of every bank in the country? What part of “This is absolutely fucking ridiculous!” do these people not understand?

Isn’t it time for militant Christians to grow up, fercryinoutloud, and quit beefing over the fact that they no longer run civilization and can no longer openly and freely put the screws to everyone else in the universe?

Photo credit: ricklibrarian.

Tags: bill donohue, boca raton, boca raton FL, catholic league, chanukah, christmas, christmas decorations, christmas tree, christmas war, creche, decorations, hannukah, jew, jewish, menorah, nativity, religionism, religionist, religionists, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010

The American Family Association — fresh off its recently-earned designation by the SPLC as a “hate group” — continues fighting their phantasmal “war on Christmas.” Like the rest of the Religious Right, the AFA continues to adhere to the delusion that Christmas is somehow being outlawed in the US, as some sort of sinister precursor to Christianity being abolished.

That such an effort is not happening, is not something they care to hear … so they keep on deluding themselves.

Having forced a national sporting-goods chain to capitulate to their demands, a national bank is in AFA’s sights. Their problem with this bank? Christmas trees. According to Consumerist, the AFA demands that this bank place a Christmas tree in the lobby of each of its branches nationwide (WebCite cached article):

According to an AFA press release, internal [bank name redacted] documents state that “We don’t want to lose somebody’s business because of seasonal decorations,” and that they want to “ensure that everyone who visits our branches is made to feel completely welcome and comfortable.”

As per my policy, I edited out the name of the financial institution in question, so as not to aid the AFA’s sanctimonious campaign.

I expect this national bank is already in the process of shipping Christmas trees to its branches, even as I type this. Corporations are pretty much now the slaves of the Religious Right, so I don’t see any reason why they wouldn’t be dutifully obedient.

I’m not quite sure why this is such an issue, though. There is nothing scriptural about the Christmas tree. They are not mentioned in the Bible … not even hinted at. So it’s odd that a group like the AFA — which prides itself on reading the Bible literally and interpreting scripture strictly — would get so worked up about something that’s not even Biblical in the first place. (OK, so Martin Luther might have started the current fashion of Christmas-tree decorating with the intention that it symbolized the Tree of Life, which is mentioned in Genesis … but let’s be honest, that’s really stretching things.) My guess is that the AFA knows Christmas trees aren’t scriptural or critical to Christian worship; they’re just using them as leverage to force a giant corporation to obey their whims. In other words, it’s really about a “power trip” and not about religion at all.

Photo credit: scottfidd.

Tags: afa, bank, banks, christian, christian right, Christianity, christians, christmas decorations, christmas tree, decorations, religious right, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010

By now you’ve probably heard about the atheist billboard along the highway leading to the Lincoln Tunnel heading into New York, which has become the latest battle in the 2010 edition of the Religious Right’s annual “war on Christmas.” The R.R. — particularly Bill Donohue of the Catholic League (cached) — is incensed at this sign which says that the Jesus-nativity legend is precisely what it is … a myth (cached article).

The following Newsy video is an excellent encapsulation of this whole topic:

Supposedly, this sign is incendiary and “in your face,” and it represents “atheists pushing their belief on people.”

It may well be true that this billboard is an effort by some atheists to “push” themselves on people … however, for centuries, religious people have “pushed” their beliefs on others — and without apology. Consider how commonplace religious signage is, even now. Over a year ago I blogged about how religious advertising isn’t new — even though lots of Christofascists claim it’s never existed. Well, here is a great example of some good old-fashioned “in your face” religionism for your consideration:

Is that “in your face” enough!? I’m not sure anyone was incensed about this sign … in spite of its obvious hostile, if not downright threatening, nature. Maybe it’s time for the religionists who are angered by the “you know Christmas is a myth” sign, to grow the hell up, for the first time in their sniveling little lives, and realize that — maybe! — this is exactly what they’ve been doing to the rest of the world for almost two millennia … and then stop whining about it. Boo fucking hoo hoo.

Top photo credit: The Atlantic Wire blog. Middle photo credit: Chairman Meow.

Tags: american atheists, atheism, atheist billboard, atheist billboards, atheists, billboard, billboards, christian, Christianity, christians, christmas, christmas myth, ef briggs, in your face, lincoln tunnel, nativity, new jersey, new york, new york city, religionism, religionist, religionists, religious ads, religious advertising, rev ef briggs, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010, you know it's a myth

The great Religious Right “war on Christmas” lurches on this year. This time it’s Senator Jim Inhofe from the Christofascist state of Oklahoma who’s screeching about Christmas. The Tulsa World reports on a conniption he’s throwing over an annual parade in that city (WebCite cached article):

U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe announced Tuesday that he will not participate in Tulsa’s Parade of Lights until organizers put “”Christ” back in the event’s title.

“Last year, the forces of political correctness removed the word ‘Christmas’ and replaced it with ‘Holiday’ instead,” the Oklahoma Republican said.

Here’s the thing, Jim. It’s Tulsa’s parade. The Tulsa government can call it whatever they want to call it. If they want to call it the Thingamabob Parade, or the Fitzgiggle Parade, or something even more senseless than that … well … they can! And there’s nothing you can do about it. There is no law preventing it. And while you might attempt to pass one, Senator, I doubt it would succeed.

Second, Senator, as it turns out, Christmas is a holiday. (If you need help understanding how this is the case, Senator, please have a look at these dictionary definitions of “holiday” and of “Christmas.”) Referring to Christmas-time as a holiday, therefore, is never semantically incorrect. Don’t like it, Senator? Too bad. While you may get to vote on a lot of things in the U.S. Senate, you do not get a vote concerning English semantics.

The mature thing for you to do, Senator, is to grow up and accept that you are no longer the mayor of Tulsa, and that this decision is out of your hands. I know it’s difficult to act mature — especially when you’re such a militant religionist — but please, give it a try. Just once. OK?

Update: Here is a very nice Newsy video report on the Tulsa holiday-parade issue:

Photo credit: Nmajdan | Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: christian, christian right, Christianity, christians, christmas, christmas parade, christofascism, christofascist, christofascists, holiday, holiday parade, jim inhofe, oklahoma, religionism, religionist, religionists, religious right, tulsa, tulsa OK, war on christmas, war on christmas 2010