For years and years now, maybe even decades, we’ve had quite the war on Christmas on our hands. It is for this reason that Donald Trump makes it a point to say “we can say ‘Merry Christmas’ again”. Leftists will mock that, saying that we could always say it, but stories like the one I am about to share prove Trump right on this. There definitely is a war on Christmas.
You see, the principal at Manchester Elementary School in Nebraska is so against Christmas, she makes the Grinch look reasonable.
Jennifer Sinclair, the principal of this school, sent a list of guidelines of what is appropriate and what is not appropriate to have or wear inside the school during the Christmas season. Here’s the list of what is considered “not acceptable” to Sinclair:
So that is a pretty loony list, but just wait and see what Sinclair deems acceptable:
So basically, just about anything that is not related to Christmas is fine.
Now, let’s look over these lists again. In the “unacceptable” list, we find things like Santa, whom I suppose could be considered a saint, even though he’s the secular symbol for Christmas. But what is perhaps most puzzling is finding candy cane on that list.
The reason Sinclair gives for banning that item is that it’s shaped like a J and she argues it’s supposed to represent Jesus. “Historically, the shape is a ‘J’ for Jesus. The red is for the blood of Christ, and the white is a symbol of his resurrection.” Now, that’d be a strange argument anyway, but she then follows that up by saying: “This [ban] would also include different colored candy canes.”
So then what’s the point of pointing out the supposed symbolism behind the colors of the candy cane as being the blood and resurrection of Christ if differently-colored candy canes are also banned?
Never mind the fact that it’s not exactly proven that candy canes have that shape because they represent Jesus. No one has pinpointed the historical roots of the reason for candy canes to be shaped the way they are.
But even if they do represent Jesus in any way, what’s this woman’s problem? She’s literally taking candy from kids at this point.
As far as the “acceptable” list goes, I would laugh at the fact she includes “snow people” and not just snowmen, or even snow women, but considering this woman is in the education business, she is in charge of educating kids. Of course, and to the surprise of no one, I doubt that’s what she’s doing, opting to indoctrinate kids rather than educate them. Academia may be mostly specific for college, but it does technically include all academic institutions aka schools at any level.
Between you and me, I don’t think snowmen have the mental capacity to question basic biology… not that snowmen are actually biologically male. The only thing that makes snowmen “men” is what the kids put on it, such as a top hat or other male clothes. Snow women might wear female clothes, but I doubt there are snow “people” in as far as if you put male clothes on a snowman, it’s a snowman; ditto for snow men with female clothes. Depending on the clothing choice, that’s the snow person’s gender, I guess is what I’m trying to say. Regardless, that’s just a dumb tangent that “educators” like Sinclair force us to go into because she is the one who included “snow people” as if snowmen could be transgender.
But in any case, the good news is that this lunacy was quickly put to a halt, as the Elkhorn School District placed the principal in administrative leave (no indications as to the time of her return).
The school district told Fox News: “The memo (sent by Sinclair) does not reflect the policy of Elkhorn Public Schools regarding holiday symbols in the school.” The district’s policy regarding holiday props says that “Christmas trees, Santa Claus and Easter eggs and bunnies are considered to be secular, seasonal symbols and may be displayed as teaching aids provided they do not disrupt the instructional program for students.”
And that is something that I wanted to talk about too. Santa Claus, Christmas trees, presents, all of these things are the secular part of Christmas. The original meaning of Christmas is the celebration of our Savior’s birth, who was conceived by a virgin, and who would go on to live a perfect life so that He would be an appropriate sacrifice at the Cross, where He would die for the sins of whosoever believeth in Him.
We are supposed to celebrate the birth of our Lord and Savior on the holiest of days. But the secular world was against that, and set up the same holiday to be about gift-giving and spending time with your family. Now, I’m not completely against that. As a kid, I would love getting gifts for Christmas. Spending time with your family is also a worthwhile deal. However, the problem I have with these things is that they come to replace the original, intended meaning of Christmas which is, as I said, the celebration of our Savior’s human, yet holy birth.
The reason Trump insists that we can say “Merry Christmas” again is that saying “Happy Holidays” (which even that is being attacked by the Left for including “holy” in it) takes the focus away from Christ. Yes, I am also happy about Hanukkah (or Chanukah) and the meaning behind it, being a Jewish holiday, but I believe the birth of our Lord and Savior is considerably more important than the rededication of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem after a pretty great Jewish victory against the Seleucids (Syrian-Greeks).
For whomever celebrates Hanukkah, I would happily wish them a Happy Hanukkah. But what’s more important is the birth of the Messiah, foretold to come throughout the Old Testament.
So the exchanging of gifts, the gathering of the families, the kissing under the mistletoe, and everything else while good in my eyes, should not take away the focus of the holiday.
Although, I do find some irony in the fact that a Leftist (yes, I can tell she’s Leftist. Read those lists again and tell me otherwise) is attacking the secular part of the holiday that was set up by Leftists of the past who wanted to shift the focus away from Christ. Still, it’s also pretty clear that she is no fan of Jesus, considering her reasoning behind some of these bans, particularly candy canes.
Thankfully, the school district actually did the right thing here and placed her on administrative leave over it. Of course, I don’t think she should lose her job over this, but let’s just say I am no fan of Principal Jennifer Sinclair at the moment.
Of course, the reason she was removed wasn’t simply because of her outrageous demands but because such demands were actually against district policy, so I won’t go around saying that the school district loves Jesus, but at least this gutting of Christmas was stopped this time.
“But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
We bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...