You know, I always used to wonder why the ACLU continually tried to sue everyone for manger scenes, saying “Christmas”, etc., and now I finally think I have figured it out! They think that if they can eradicate Christmas, they won’t have to listen to all this repetitive, maddening Christmas song Muzak all November and December in every store, mall, supermarket, etc., imaginable! But the joke’s on them, for Christmas Muzak is an unavoidable assault upon our sanity no matter what! And since they’ve removed the words, you can’t even accuse them of promoting Christmas anymore: it’s just a vague, minimalist instrumental suggestion of old Yuletide songs we kind of sort of remember from old holiday movies and such, I guess. (“Doobie doobie doobie doobie doo doo!” to the tune of “Walking in a Winter Wonderland”: I hear it everywhere I go! {Aaaaaa! Make it stop!!!})
And then it hit me: This is how towns and churches and schools ought to fight back against the “War on Christmas”! All they have to do is have a manger scene without a baby Jesus! Everyone will remember what it’s supposed to represent, and so they’ll get their message out, but they can’t be directly accused of religious partisanship, because there’s no deity in it. After all, it’s just a few people sitting around in a manger: they must be animal-rights advocates! (What, do you hate animals or something?) And since there’s no direct religious reference, it’s merely a suggestion; and as such, it ought to be defensible as art. And then they could maybe have Santa’s reindeer, so long as they had a guy with a rifle so it looked like a hunting scene. Just make it close enough to be suggestive, but not specific enough to be actionable! That would finally bring an armistice to the “War on Christmas”, I’ll bet. (But probably not an end!)
But hey, maybe they could make the ACLU sign the armistice in Santa’s sleigh, just to rub it in! (They could say: “What? It’s just a winter sleigh! What’s wrong? It is winter, right?”)
