Mmmm...Sacrilicious...

This wraps 'er up.  I rest my case.

I've written about some insipid stuff:  Silly video games, dolls, and even Jesus-shaped hot-air balloons.  I've noted that they take the transcendent and reduce it the point that SNL can't even lampoon it. 

But you -- oh, you! -- have valiantly objected.  You have argued, "If just one person is touched...", and so forth.  And, sure, while I might think the spectre of watching a giant Jesus deflate on an open field is unappealing, someone, "Might -- just MIGHT -- be led to truth," by...a giant...deflating...Jesus. 

Yep.

So, I give you...Cross Pops.  And -- warning here -- to explain this product, I'm about to write a sentence I've likely never written:

You see, you dip the cross in popping candy and then you suck on the cross.

Please -- I can't wait! -- please defend this.  Please.  Oh please oh please oh please oh please.

(You:  "Make me."  Me:  "I don't make trash, I burn it."  You:  "That why your face is all burnt."  Me:  "Exactly. . .yeah.  That's why my...face is...burnt...?")

I don't think Cross Pops are defensible, but who knows?  If the ol' "If just one person..." approach fits once, as an all-justifying narrative, why not all the time? 

(By the way, I *do* understand the whole Bunnies and Candy Crosses Set.  That?  Yeah -- I get that.  But not "Cross Pops".  Bunnies-n-Crosses -- sure.  But you don't dip them in stuff.  That's where it crosses the line.)