Thursday, November 05, 2009

Associated Press article on Gov. Grinch's change of heart on state Christmas tree

Here is Joe Biesk's story from the AP on Gov. Beshear's foxhole conversion on the state Christmas Tree. It is truly a wonder just how out of touch the Beshear administration is with what Kentuckians believe. In what political parallel universe is it a good idea to change the name of the state Christmas tree to the state "Holiday tree" in a state as conservative as Kentucky?

But not only are their ideas bad in their inception, these people are also just slow on the uptake.

Last week, the Governor and his advisors unapologetically defended the idea of his "Holiday Tree." It took them an entire week to realize what a truly astounding political blunder they had made.

It started when the Associated Press story about the decision got wide play all over the state, as well as around the country. Then a Facebook group formed that, as of this writing, has over 15,000 members.
“For Gov. Beshear, it is a Christmas tree. Period. The end,” [Kerri] Richardson said. “That first request from the Finance Cabinet didn't reflect that, but the governor speaks for himself. He's calling it a Christmas tree. That's what it is.”
No, Kerri, it's not the end. In fact, it may be just the beginning. Despite the Governor's new attitude, the Facebook group is still growing. In one utterly ridiculous decision, the Governor created a whole new body of opposition. Amazing.

These are 15,000 people that could be tapped the next time the Governor makes a bad decision--like running for reelection.

And then there's our favorite "ethicist": Paul Simmons. Simmons was the ethics professor at Southern Seminary in the days before Al Mohler cleaned the seminary's Aegean stables. They used to trot him out every time the issue of abortion flared up so he could explain the ethical justification for killing unborn babies. Now, Simmons, who works for James Ramsey over at U of L, is being trotted out to explain why Christmas trees should be called something else.

Here is Simmons from an earlier story:
Using the term “holiday tree” typically is intended to avoid offending people who are not Christian, said Paul Simmons, an ethics professor at the University of Louisville.
Maybe Simmons could tell us precisely who was offended by the state Christmas tree. Then we could compare it to the 15,000 members of the Facebook group.
And he said “holiday tree” is the more fitting description, considering that the tradition started among pagans and was later blended into the Christian celebration of Christmas.
Hmmm. So why is this a reason to call it a "Holiday tree"? Is there a buildup of pagans in Frankfort? It would explain a few things.

1 comment:

Dave Charlton said...

And then there's our favorite "ethicist": Paul Simmons. Simmons was the ethics professor at Southern Seminary in the days before Al Mohler cleaned the seminary's Aegean stables. They used to trot him out every time the issue of abortion flared up so he could explain the ethical justification for killing unborn babies. Now, Simmons, who works for James Ramsey over at U of L, is being trotted out to explain why Christmas trees should be called something else.

Martin - Paul Simmons was one of my professors at Southern during my M.Div. and D.Min. years. Your putting quotes around the term ethicist is an underhanded way of casting doubt upon the morality of a fine man who was treated very badly - and even in unChristian ways - by Al Mohler and others who conducted their purge of Southern Seminary. I watched from close range as Paul - and others - endured slander and treatment that no one should experience. It was an inquisition that took place at Southern, not a cleaning of "the Seminary's Aegean stables." Think what you will of his personal views, but when you question someone's ethics it takes one down a road of demonizing a person and once a person is demonized people feel justified in treating them in terrible ways. Paul was my professor, has served as a reference for me, and is my friend. I admire his courage to stand for what he believes, beliefs that make him a target for a lot of people. What happened to him at Southern was terrible and it was wrong. I would like to know where are the ethics of those who supposedly stand for what is good and right and then treat their opponents in such unethical ways. Excuse my sensitivity on this subject, but I get pretty tired of seeing Paul treated in such poor ways. I am extra sensitive because of people who, in the name of "values", sought to destroy my ministry and acted in ways that seemed to be empty of any values or ethics. The desire of so many to enforce a purity of belief has led to terrible abuses, so I think you need to be careful of how you mention Paul.