I hear the baby Jesus cried
To hear His name so oft denied—
The cross (for which we all give thanks)
Is merely “intersecting planks”;
The sacred scene, nativity?
“A plastic Jewish family”
That baby, in the manger’s hay?
Without a nametag, who could say?
La Jolla’s cross, so bright and tall?
It’s not religious—not at all!
“In God We Trust”? The phrase is phony,
Ruled to be mere ceremony!
Each mention of our mighty Lord
Is no big deal, and best ignored…
Denying Jesus, through and through—
I wonder, What Would Peter Do?
Looking through the mental and legal contortions intended to preserve Christian privilege, I’ve noticed a trend: The nominally Christian arguers are the ones denying Christ. The latest (on Fox, in Palin’s book, and in comment sections everywhere) is the “plastic Jewish family” that atheists are so unreasonably offended by. It’s not at all that this scene actually means anything–this family (let’s call them the Goldbergs) are just plastic people, so we can put them up in the town square. And now, Ed reports on the even more shocking twist that, without an actual name tag, how can anyone be expected to know that this babe, wrapped in swaddling clothes and laying in a manger, is anything other than little Max Goldberg? Wait, what? Jesus? Nah, Jesus would have a name tag saying so.
The “intersecting planks” is nice, too–in Palin’s book she describes a cross as “a horizontal plank intersecting a vertical plank”. It’s just two pieces of wood–why on earth would anyone object to that on public property? Sacred? Nope, nothing religious about it at all.
It’s funny, really–the people who claim to love Jesus the most are the very ones trivializing their sacred symbols.
There’s precedent… but Peter only denied Jesus three times. Lightweight.