“In 1787,” Kramnick writes, “when the framers excluded all mention of God from the Constitution, they were widely denounced as immoral and the document was denounced as godless, which is precisely what it is.”

Opponents of the Constitution challenged ratifying conventions in nearly every state, calling attention to Article VI, Section 3: “No religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

The United States Constitution is a completely secular political document. It begins “We the people,” and contains no mention of “God,” “Jesus,” or “Christianity.” Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as, “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust.” (Article VI), and “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (First Amendment).

Regarding the FFRF display in Olympia, WA on public property….It, as well as all the other displays, are unconstitutional. Support our Constitution’s separation of church and state and set up the Nativity on church property next year. Problem solved!

[Your law outlaws freedom of speech.–IM]

On the other hand, several parties (neither liberal nor Nazi) held their owns at the polls right up to 1933. They include the clerical Center party (which held steady), the Social Democrats (who declined somewhat but not precipitously), and the Communists (ditto). Whether these parties fared better than the liberals because they were less intimidated, or because their voters were inherently different from liberals, is a matter of interpretation.

[Intimidation is one thing; forcing one to vote quite another. Most of the German people were not intimidated. People went to the polls for Adolph.–IM]

It’s a semantic argument whether the NSDAP ever won any fair elections, because victory is only clear when there is (a) one person to be elected and (b) that person is the most important in the country.

The man who appointed Hitler Chancellor (Hindenburg) won fair and square, but by tradition the President was supposed to (like the King in Britain) appoint someone chief executive who could win votes in parliament, assemble a cabinet out of a successful bundle of parties, etc.

The Nazi party’s share in Reichstag elections increased steadily, with a single downward blip, from its 2.6% performance in 1928 to an unprecedented 43.9% in 1933. They never got a majority, which is why some say they never “won”, but majorities in multiparty systems are exceedingly rare. In both 1932 elections and in 1933 they got pluralities; in 1933 they and the DNVP (a party closely aligned with Hitler at that point) got a majority (51.9% of the vote) between them.

I’d say, Hitler came to power by way of election results.

Wonderful piece (as usual!) Thank-you.

No need to apologize btw… I think we’re all getting pretty tired. Well-known (to some anyway) or not, Hitler is an excellent illustration of your point!

Mr. Pearson, your view of Christmas is, alas, far too simplistic and doesn’t take into account far more than it does. To begin with, there was no prophetic/revelatory/Torah, i.e. “biblical” basis for Purim either, but the Jewish population throughout Persia, Mordecai and Esther, were so profoundly moved and grateful for God’s great gracious and providential deliverance that “they decreed”–decided–to never forget what God did for them on that day. To this day, Purim continues to be celebrated!

A much healthier perspective that runs in this direction (and common sense), may be found at http://www.jimmcguiggan.com

Look for the article Christmas and Paganism. For such a short piece, it has a lot to teach “us” Christians who are forever shooting ourselves in the foot with reductionism. We would do well to follow in the attitudinal footsteps of the Jewish Faithful in the Book of Esther, chapter 9. Ultimately, the idea of Christmas is a page from that book, or so it seems to me.