was preferred Says Christianity

One can argue rationally as to whether or not it is a good thing to keep church and state separate, but your statement that “last we checked, our country was founded on separation of church and state” is historically false.

When this nation was founded, half of the states were supporting particular denominations of Christianity, either by proclamation or financial assistance or both, and the others had a Christian heritage that was respected in the laws and customs of the time. That was the status quo ante.

The Congress was prohibited from making any law “respecting an [emphasis added] establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” But the states already had their established religions.

Contrary to the editorial in The Acorn for Dec. 15, the First Amendment secured the rights of the states to continue their support of Christianity in all of its forms, and additionally prohibited the federal government from interfering with any public or private exercise of religion.

And then there’s Article I, section 7, paragraph 2 of the Constitution. The text therein states that the President has 10 days in which to veto a bill, Sundays excepted [emphasis added.] By defining Sunday as a day of rest for government, our Founders rejected the separation of church and state that is such a beloved matter of faith for atheists.

Last Sunday was the Christian day of worship, Jews worship on Saturday and Muslims on Friday. Our Founders chose Sunday over Saturday or Friday. That means the U.S. Constitution officially recognized generic Christianity, and surprise, the first article of the Bill of Rights can now be seen to read correctly as prohibiting the Congress from changing that recognition or interfering with the people’s religious rites.

Finally, as to whether too much is being made of “business” decision. One, the ACLU sent a letter to the national headquarters of the Boy Scouts threatening to sue any public school that sponsors a Boy Scout troop.

Two, last Christmas, I was unable to pry the words “Merry Christmas” from employees of our local Ralphs, even from people I’ve know for many years. I don’t know what they were afraid of, but it was only after Christmas that I heard those words from them.

The attack upon Christmas is obviously more than a “business” decision. What business would choose to offend the majority of its customers?

A few firms have changed in part. This year at Ralphs, I get a Merry Christmas in response to my own proffered Merry Christmas, and Federated Department Stores is once again using Merry Christmas in its advertising. William O. Felsman Woodland Hills