Holy Zombie Jesus!

Holy Zombie Jesus! Christ is risen from the dead!
That’s the message that they’re sending, but they’re catching flak instead
For their baby zombie Jesus, with a manger for His bed
Which the neighbors do not like, in Cincinnati.
A nativity with zombies—for the most part, cos it’s fun!
It’s an advert for a haunted house a local group has run
So it’s good for Christmas business, see, when all is said and done,
But the neighborhood is going rather batty.

Holy Zombie Jesus! Cincinnati is obsessed!
Cos the baby in a manger’s slightly different from the rest
And the neighborhood is angry (and they always know what’s best;
They know “born again” is different from “undead”)
This is really not religion—it’s the Cincy zoning laws!
There would never be a case of them enforcing “just because”
The “Queen City” is a diamond, though each diamond has some flaws
And they could have just done right, instead.

No, seriously. The New York Expletive Times reports (seriously, click through for the pic!):

For the second year in a row, a Cincinnati couple has constructed a zombie-themed Nativity scene against the objections of local zoning officials and religious groups.

Shingle by shingle, Jasen and Amanda Dixon built the Nativity display in their front yard, documenting the process on their Facebook page.

The biblical scene comes complete with Mary, Joseph, undead wise men and a razor-toothed baby Jesus in a manger. A spooky version of “Silent Night” blares in the background. At night, rainbow-colored lights showcase the scene.

This could be (as some reports claim) a simple case of zoning laws. In which case, I hope Cincinnati is consistent in applying these laws to all nativity scenes. Otherwise, this is basically a Christmas version of the Baphomet statue; a test case for the first amendment.

My only complaint is that I did not think of it first.

Seriously, there are probably thousands of traditional nativity scenes in Cincinnati. This zombie creche does not erase them, and any enforcement against it would likely apply to at least a handful of the traditional scenes.

My goodness… the war on Christmas is entirely different if casualties rejoin the fight!


  1. Cuttlefish says

    I am a little saddened; in the NYT article it is noted that the reaction is not all positive (well, duh), and that as part of their response to criticism they have added to their Facebook description “We are not atheist”.

    Because, you know, that would have made their blasphemous creche much worse. Because reasons.

  2. PatrickG says

    Well, if it’s a religious statement (and remember, atheism is a religion these days, except when it’s not), then it’s more offensive. But if it’s art about religion, it’s just good times for all and nobody can complain.

    I think?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *