‘Counterpoint’ to Keillor’s War-on-Christmas op-ed is more of same
Tuesday, December 22, 2009 at 12:59 pm
- 5 Comments
Photo: Wikipedia
Two days after the Star Tribune carried Garrison Keillor’s War-on-Christmas op-ed, the paper prints a “Counterpoint” by Mitch Pearlstein, president of the Center of the American Experiment. Pearlstein calls Keillor “nasty” but “brilliant” — and agrees that Christmas is under seige.
Point by point, Pearlstein paraphrases Keillor and seconds his emotion.
“Christians are more frequently dismissed and ignored when they believe their traditions are dishonored than is the case with members of other faiths”
“I appreciate the point,” writes Pearlstein.
“[I]t has grown increasingly hard to celebrate Christmas in publicly full-throated and spirited ways.”
“I stand with him,” writes Pearlstein.
“[H]e’s had enough of ubiquitous sensitivity specialists staying up late worrying about whether otherwise decent men and women might possibly wish their diverse fellows ‘Merry Christmas’ instead of ‘Happy Holidays,’ thereby offending finely tuned feelings”
“I’m with him again,” writes Pearlstein.
“[S]teamed-up lawyers are bullet-fast to seek injunctions if a village chooses to add a crèche to its square”
Pearlstein writes, “the same holds.”
And while he’s counterpointing Keillor, Pearlstein extends the War-on-Christmas argument for good measure:
… why aren’t minority groups (defined in both religious and other ways) more readily expected to be just as respectful of the traditions and prerogatives of majority groups as majority groups are obliged to be respectful of theirs?
With counterpoint writers like Pearlstein, who needs friends?
5 Comments
Comment posted December 22, 2009 @ 1:10 pm
Man, if you have to explain a joke to someone, it might not be funny. But Pearlstein (and everyone else on the right I’ve read on this one) seems to be purposefully obtuse here.
Comment posted December 23, 2009 @ 1:24 am
Honestly. Keillor’s op-ed is satire. It’s no surprise that Lake Wobegon news is fraught with dry humor and double entendres. If you bother to read the entire thing on a quiet evening you will realize why he ends the piece on the point that his favorite Christmas was one alone in New York and the other being miserable in Norway. He’s tired of culture pundits pushing Christmas to be both “less offensive” and yet “more Christian.” His meaning is that Christmas is merely a day to which everyone has their own version, whether you are alone without religion on your mind, or whether you are in the swarms of Scandinavian Christendom. It needs no more re-evaluation than that.
Comment posted December 26, 2009 @ 11:59 am
There’s nothing quite like seeing people – who enjoy the many priveleges of American life, including complete freedom of religion – wallow in victimhood because others don’t embrace Christianity as they prefer.
I wonder what Darfur refugees thought of the 2009 version of American Christmas wars …. where as a result of this “civil war” about Christmas celebrations …. no one in America missed a meal, driven from their home, nor was murdered, wounded or raped, or even prevented from practicing their own religion as they see fit, including how to word of holiday greetings they use.
Such American victims seem rather self-indulgent viewed from outside the inwardly-focused US media context
Victimhood wears poorl
Comment posted December 26, 2009 @ 12:03 pm
sorry about the edit errors
“was driven from their home” instead of what appeared
“Victimhood wears poorly on such privileged shoulders” should have been the closing line.
Comment posted December 27, 2009 @ 12:25 pm
G.K.’s article was offensive and its humor, if there was any, was not there for me. Pearlstein is just being a right wing
culture vulture jerk.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
