No – such a position is unrealistic to the point of being preposterous. The mere attempt to follow this concept is in itself an ‘establisment’ of religion. Atheism. It therefore becomes an equal violation of the separation clause as defined by the left. If it is a ‘violation’ of the establishment clause to put a manger scene up on a city park, then how is it not a violation to ban religion from all public sites? Does that not ‘establish’ a position by the state? Is that not “telling” people to be atheists just as much as a Christmas tree is “telling” people to be Christian?



You want to pretend it's impossible for an organization to be neutral to religion? Really? Are Science classrooms that teach evolution without mentioning the book of Genesis (or any other religion) also teaching atheism, by the same logic?

jefferson's quote is pretty self explanatory and while you do point out the one half concerning religion you ignore "there shall be no law respecting an established religion"-now what do you think "respecting" could possibly mean in this context?

The quote is “an establishment”; and respecting does not mean “no one in government is allowed to have or be influenced by religious belief”. The founding fathers expected government servants to be people of faith with all kinds of values, mores, and beliefs. What they didn’t want is for government to step in and impose church attendance. It really is that simple.

What constitutes an 'innocent display'?

Anything that doesn’t force you to attend a church.

How 'innocent' is any religious icon in a court of law?

Short answer? Completely.

Long answer? Should I be offended because an idol of Lady Justice is in a courthouse? Does it mean the STATE is going to frogmarch me to go worship at the local temple of Themis? Will it suddenly turn me and my family into Dikeists? Of course not. Likewise, it is a silly position to say the 10 Commandments in a courthouse is somehow an “establishment” of religion. Law is rooted in religious history. To display a religious symbol in a legal building is a tip of the hat to historical precedence. It no more violates the 1st Amendment than a public museum or library with a statue to the Muses in it.

Doesn't it seem far more reasonable to just take a pass on displaying ANYTHING religious and be done with it?

No – such a position is unrealistic to the point of being preposterous. The mere attempt to follow this concept is in itself an ‘establisment’ of religion. Atheism. It therefore becomes an equal violation of the separation clause as defined by the left. If it is a ‘violation’ of the establishment clause to put a manger scene up on a city park, then how is it not a violation to ban religion from all public sites? Does that not ‘establish’ a position by the state? Is that not “telling” people to be atheists just as much as a Christmas tree is “telling” people to be Christian?

That’s why the left’s position on this issue is so laughable. It is hypocritical and self-defeating in the extreme, like most leftist policy. The 1st Ammendment is supposed to keep government from making laws that force you to attend a specific church. Christmas trees, the 10 Commandments, the word “God” in the pledge, prayers in schools, and all the other stuff that left is so uptight over are not germane to the subject in any way. The left just WANTS them to be germane, and so they’ve come up with this idiotic position as a means to justify it.

This is videosift, not youtube and most sifters are well informed and certainly know the proper reasoning of the first amendment. It's correct interpretation is exactly how Cenk stated, which makes perfect sense since many of the founders were agnostic at best.

I think the general demeanor of VS is that its denizens are "well informed" in the sense that they carefully follow the far-left blogosphere's opinions as doled out by HuffPo, Kos, et al. I am pleased to introduce actual facts and history to an audience with a rigid and limited mindset.

Cenk and others on the left very much desire the "wall of seperation" to be defined in 'their' way. Problem is that defining it their way requires the burial of facts and history with the substitution of personal interpretation and more than a little willful miscontruance.

For example, just because "the right" doesn't agree with the radical far-left's interpretation of the 1st Ammendment does not mean that they want a 'state religion'. The left for many years has trotted out this crazy 'either or' vision of the right on the issue of seperation of church & state. The level of intolerance inherent within such a view is what makes people protest such innocuities as christmas trees in schools, or the 10-commandments in a courthouse.

Most other folks are far less (for lack of a better word) insane when it comes to the 1st Ammendment. They don't want the states or the Feds imposing a religion on them, but they don't mind innocent, harmless displays OF religion in government or public life. This is where the left totally loses the issue. The right isn't and never has advocated the far-left's racial fear based vision of state-mandated religions. And yet in their fear of such a vision, the neo-lib left has to wrest the 1st Ammendment, Madison, Jefferson, and a host of other things in order to paint the "wall of seperation" in such a way as to advocate their radical interpretation. And so whe Tea Partiers CORRECTLY frame the issue, they flip out as if the TP guy was saying, "And we'll force you all to go to church after we're elected..." because that's how neolibs see it. Craziness.

Never even heard of Daniel Baldwin. He must be a lesser Baldwin. >> ^EMPIRE:

HOLY SHIT... a Baldwin is involved in this crap. The worst of them all, but still...

And I love how they are all christiany for christmas, but they all have pagan christmas trees.

HOLY SHIT... a Baldwin is involved in this crap. The worst of them all, but still...


And I love how they are all christiany for christmas, but they all have pagan christmas trees.

Sooooo much cheese on that ham samich...

"Hey! Christmas tree!" reminds me of those old deadpan Discovery channel commercials: "Hello mosquito." " Hello mosquito." and "Ahhh. The atmosphere. ahhh."

Personally, I think that was one of his best damn reviews. Going from, "cleavage that could hold up a fucking Christmas tree," to, "all it's teeth fell out into my mouth and it gave me scurvy" is some of the most vivid writing I've ever heard. Suck it Hemingway.

Your video, Bad dog and the Christmas tree, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Thanks for the promote Krupo . Merry Christmas

In reply to this comment by Krupo:
A little late, and a little sideways, but *promote!

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Totally fake. If you've ever seen a cremated human, they don't put them in little teeny ceramic pots. They give you a freaking INGOT. Seriously, the vessel they put the ashes in by itself alone has to weigh 15-20 pounds.


Perhaps the ashes were split amongst different relatives.

>> ^potchi79:
If it's a video on the internet it's clearly fake. It's all FAKE! No ones gonna trick me!


Are you suggesting that this is somehow real? As has been said above, there is a lot of evidence that its not.

>> ^alizarin:
The vase breaks in mid air from the impact of that soft tree... rigged.
The acting was believable though.


Are you fucking kidding pal? THIS constitutes great acting?

"What was it doing on there!?!"
"That's where we keep it!!!"

>> ^Xaielao:
Yea I don't understand the whole 'leave the ashes in a jar on the hearth' thing either.
Me, when I die, throw my body deep in the woods so the natural processes can be had. That or bury me somewhere and plant a tree over the grave.


There's a man who loves all the little critters!

I've asked to be slaughtered and served to my friends and family, but for some reason nobody seems to like that idea. Weird.

Also, if you look, there's very few ashes in that urn, unless "Mom" was a dwarf, there should have been far more ashes.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Your video, Dad Ruins Christmas Tree Setup, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.