It’s that time of year again. Christian’s believe they are persecuted while they spend their money on themselves instead of helping the needy. Children are starving to death around the clock, but it’s important to them to argue that they are persecuted. War rages on several continents yet the supposed attack on their holiday is news worthy. I don’t think they actually know what their ‘christ’ tried to teach them. If they lived those lessons they’d be a much more tolerable bunch.
Yet, here we are, once again. People arguing for the defense of their deity. As a non-believer I’d simply like to see some credible evidence to show they have standing in this argument. That is, I’d like to see where they are harmed. Personal feelings do not count as standing. There must be evidence of harm.
The harm principle holds that the actions of individuals should only be limited to prevent harm to other individuals. John Stuart Mill articulated this principle in On Liberty, where he argued that, “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.” An equivalent was earlier stated in France’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 as, “Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law.”
The rightfully free expression of thought does not cause harm unless it can be shown that by promoting one line of thinking it does harm to individuals who do not hold this line of thinking to be true.
It is at this point we can postulate that Christians claiming harm by the supposed ‘war on Christmas’ is in fact harming other religions at this time of year. Any standing that they have holds true also for those of other religions and those of no religion. Deductively, we can reason that the supposed war on Christmas (religion) is nothing of the kind, in any sense. It is simply expression of thought which is not in agreement with Christianity. If this supposed war gives the Christians legal standing then they have legal standing anywhere a mosque or synagogue is erected. We can also reason that the supposed war on Christmas is nothing more than a ploy for theocracy that benefits Christians. This in turn is in violation of the Constitution. By this I reason that the very phrase ‘war on Christmas’ is both heretical and unconstitutional. It is self defeating in its arguments.
All of this is said without yet even defining the meaning of the word war: a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.
Where are the dead Christians? If there is a war, can we go ahead and start killing them?