|
|
Post by phil on Dec 22, 2005 23:27:02 GMT -5
WOAH ! Back up the truck one moment !!
What I reported was the banning of religious symbols
from public property ...
I'm not aware of any church being barred
from putting a nativity scene on its front lawn ...
Not that I care one way or the other !!
the whole controversy is rather silly
and played out only in the U.S. as far as I know !!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 22, 2005 23:30:14 GMT -5
No I realize what you said, and that you meant public buildings, it happened in the county I use to live in Florida last year. I never said anything about any churches.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 23, 2005 1:49:51 GMT -5
Then what is the problem? See, that's what I don't get. If there's ever one single instance of:
a) Religious instititions being forced to curb their religious expression, or;
b) Private individuals being forced to curb their religious expression
then, by all means, get angry, protest, do whatever you need to do.
As it is, all that has happened is:
a) Public, government institutions have been prevented from endorsing one religion, and;
b) Some private businesses have CHOSEN to take a more inclusive approach to the holidays
Neither of these are instances of Christians or Christmas being under attack in any way whatsoever. The first is a case of a non-religious institution remaining non-religious, and the second is a group of collective events which are individual people or individual businesses making decisions based on their own personal preferences or what they deem to be good business. But none of them demonstrate in any way any sort of attempt to stop Christmas, or to destroy Christmas, or to prevent people who want to celebrate Christmas from celebrating it in any way that they deem appropriate.
A few pages back I said that the only people getting worked up about this whole thing are the most sensitive or the most easily manipulated in society, and I'm sticking with that. Anyone who stops for a minute to actually look at the situation can easily recognize that this whole culture war is being fabricated by a very small segment of the conservative media, and that there is no threat whatsoever to Christmas. No one wants to eliminate Christmas or stop anyone from celebrating it. Anyone who says "Happy Holidays" is doing so for one of three reasons:
1) They want people to have a happy holiday season. There is nothing but goodwill behind this reasoning.
2) They don't want to offend any non-Christians they may encounter. Chances are, saying "Merry Christmas" wouldn't offend too many people anyway, but regardless, there is nothing but goodwill behind this motive either.
3) They're businesspeople, and they want to appeal to the largest group of people possible. The O'Reilly-led idiots have kind of deflated this idea, but regardless, there was nothing but goodwill combined with an attempt at strong business sense driving this motive too.
In short, if you're actually concerned that Christmas is being threatened by someone wishing you "Happy Holidays", you're either really dumb, or you're really eager to be offended about something.
I think its very telling that, other than Tuatha, this issue seems to be something that almost everyone here agrees on, regardless of political ideology. I know that in the past, Chrisfan and I have disagreed over the harm done by Christmas displays in public areas, and yet, on this issue, we seem to be in pretty strong agreement that "Happy Holidays" is not a big deal, it doesn't threaten anyone, it doesn't prevent or even attempt to prevent anyone from celebrating Christmas in any way whatsoever. This isn't just a matter of some people on the left disagreeing with some people on the right. Most people of all political stripes agree that this is absurd. And yet it has overtaken the political discourse for this particular holiday season.
Shit, sorry, I mean Christmas season.
A few months ago when O'Reilly started blathering about all this stuff I remember laughing at how absurd it is. At this point I'm just in total disbelief that its gone this far and really made its way into mainstream media discussion. It's so amazingly dumb that it really just blows my mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Dec 23, 2005 1:53:51 GMT -5
Spot on, Rocky.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 23, 2005 2:22:51 GMT -5
Dude, I am not angry about it. A little irritated yes but not like pissing my pants over it. The problem I see is that it has only been Christmas and Christian symbols that are being attacked. For instance the case in California with the Kids being forced to dress up like Muslims and recite prayers from the Koran as part of the curriculum. Up in New York they tried to ban Christmas trees in the schools. And then here ya go! Hell I love Menorahs I think they are beautiful and was actually looking for one in Walmart the other day but they were out of stock. But hey it isn't really right to ban Christmas trees and symbols but allow the other symbols. Same goes for the case the ACLU is fighting for the seal of Los Angeles. I only wish they could be fair and have all symbols displayed.
School Okays 'Christmas Witch,' Menorahs; Rewrites 'Silent Night'
By Jim Brown
AgapePress
December 9, 2005
(AgapePress) -- The "war against Christmas" rages on. A Wisconsin elementary school has changed the song "Silent Night" to "Cold in the Night," and secularized the lyrics.
Ridgeway Elementary School in Dodgeville may be taking a cue from the White House, which as been sending out greeting cards in the last few weeks, wishing recipients a happy "Holiday Season" rather than "Merry Christmas." The school's "Winter Program" features a secularized version of the traditional Christmas carol "Silent Night" with the following lyrics:
Cold in the night, no one in sight;
Winter winds whirl and bite.
How I wish I were happy and warm,
Safe with my family out of the storm.
A concerned parent whose child attends Ridgeway Elementary contacted the Florida-based Liberty Counsel, which has contacted the school. The legal group's president and general counsel, Mat Staver, explains that as part of its program, the school has also included decorations from other holiday themes.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 23, 2005 2:27:03 GMT -5
Dude, I am not angry about it. A little irritated yes but not like pissing my pants over it. The problem I see is that it has only been Christmas and Christian symbols that are being attacked. For instance the case in California with the Kids being forced to dress up like Muslims and recite prayers from the Koran as part of the curriculum. Up in New York they tried to ban Christmas trees in the schools. And then here ya go! Hell I love Menorahs I think they are beautiful and was actually looking for one in Walmart the other day but they were out of stock. But hey it isn't really right to ban Christmas trees and symbols but allow the other symbols. Same goes for the case the ACLU is fighting for the seal of Los Angeles. I only wish they could be fair and have all symbols displayed. School Okays 'Christmas Witch,' Menorahs; Rewrites 'Silent Night' By Jim Brown AgapePress December 9, 2005 (AgapePress) -- The "war against Christmas" rages on. A Wisconsin elementary school has changed the song "Silent Night" to "Cold in the Night," and secularized the lyrics. Ridgeway Elementary School in Dodgeville may be taking a cue from the White House, which as been sending out greeting cards in the last few weeks, wishing recipients a happy "Holiday Season" rather than "Merry Christmas." The school's "Winter Program" features a secularized version of the traditional Christmas carol "Silent Night" with the following lyrics: Cold in the night, no one in sight; Winter winds whirl and bite. How I wish I were happy and warm, Safe with my family out of the storm. A concerned parent whose child attends Ridgeway Elementary contacted the Florida-based Liberty Counsel, which has contacted the school. The legal group's president and general counsel, Mat Staver, explains that as part of its program, the school has also included decorations from other holiday themes. Is that school singing any songs that specifically cite other non-Christian religious beliefs? I highly doubt it. Regardless, earlier I said that the whole "Merry Christmas" vs. "Happy Holidays" debate is really stupid, and I stand by that, so I'm not going to waste my time discussing it with you. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 23, 2005 8:40:00 GMT -5
For instance the case in California with the Kids being forced to dress up like Muslims and recite prayers from the Koran as part of the curriculum.
Would you care to provide more info or a link to that story ... ??
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 23, 2005 8:49:51 GMT -5
Never mind ! I found it ... Only in the Excited States !  ! |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 23, 2005 9:02:18 GMT -5
People should always read on a subject
and get the actual facts
before getting all riled up about it ... !!
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 23, 2005 9:08:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by shin on Dec 23, 2005 9:09:29 GMT -5
Wait, let me guess...they were reinacting in order to better understand the culture, not to indoctrinate?
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 23, 2005 9:12:17 GMT -5
Well ... how do you say ...
D'OH !!
|
|
|
|
Post by shin on Dec 23, 2005 9:13:47 GMT -5
Is that a weird way of saying "yes"?
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 23, 2005 9:22:16 GMT -5
Yes !!
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Dec 23, 2005 9:51:10 GMT -5
This arguement that "it's only Christian symbols that are being targeted"...its only Christian symbols that are shoved down everyone's throats as well. I mean seriously if you're upset that stores are "banning" employees from saying "Merry Christmas" shouldn't you be equally as upset if it were forcing to say it?
I'd love to see some judge try to put a giant menorah on the court house lawn. That'd be some shit.
|
|
!