intent of the Constitution. This âwall of separationâ falsehood has, however, been lovingly embraced by the secular media and foisted upon the American public with a ferocious intensity.
Perhaps the most precise analysis of the bogus separation of church and state argument was put forth by Senator John Cornyn of Texas, who wrote:
        Â
For generations, Christmas trees, nativity scenes, Menorahs and other traditional public holiday items have been displayed in places of business and public squares, largely without objection. Groups could sing carols, schools could hold pageants, children could exchange Christmas cardsâ¦
Today, however, it seems the first order of business every December may soon be for Americans to consult their lawyers. For only then might they know whether they are in the proper setting or sufficiently in compliance with complicated Supreme Court âmulti-prongedâ or âbalancingâ tests before celebrating [Christmas or Hanukah].
The First Amendment clearly provides that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion nor interfering with the free exercise thereof. Nothing in these provisions requires government to be hostile to religious speech or religious liberty. The Constitution nowhere requires government to expel expressions of faith from the public square nor forbids government from acknowledgingâindeed celebratingâthe important role faith plays in the lives of the American people.
Yet some courts, led by the U.S. Supreme Court, have demonstrated an unmistakable hostility toward religious expression in the public square. This effort to cleanse virtually all things religious from public life, including Christmas, is impossible to ignore and is contrary to our nationâs founding principles.
Public expression of faithâone of the very freedoms most cherished by our Founding Fathersâshould not be allowed to fall victim to a pervasive misunderstanding of the First Amendment perpetuated by a handful of secularists and judicial activists. In particular, during this time of religious celebration for so many Americans (Christmas and Hanukah), we should remember that we should, by right, be free to exercise our religious beliefs openly and to celebrate those beliefs as we choose.
        Â
Kudos to Senator Cornyn. President John Adams could not have said it better himself.
There is ample evidence that the Founding Fathers were exactly in tune with Senator Cornynâs analysis. While disagreeing with me about the Christmas controversy on my radio program, a caller adamantly claimed that founder James Madison was an âavowed atheistâ who would have supported the S-P attack on Christmas. Of course, thatâs nonsense. I scolded the caller, pointing out that Madison, while not a particularly religious man along the lines of, say, John Adams, made numerous references to the benefits of spirituality in his public statements, including this one documented by the American Historical Association: âAll men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the magistrate.â
Letâs seeâ¦âunrestrained by the magistrateââ¦âfull tolerationââ¦I believe that means Madison would encourage all of us to say âMerry Christmas,â including those working at Sears, where olâ James might be getting his tires and buggy whips.
While the religious aspectâChristianityâis certainly in the forefront of the Christmas controversy, the political agenda in the war on Christmas has remained largely hidden. It is a decidedly covert operation, in other words. In fact, many people were surprised when I said on TV and radio that politics, not religion, was the driving force behind the attempt to keep Christmas behind closed doors.
Hereâs my
Mark Helprin
Dennis Taylor
Vinge Vernor
James Axler
Keith Laumer
Lora Leigh
Charlotte Stein
Trisha Wolfe
James Harden
Nina Harrington