|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 24, 2005 1:28:58 GMT -5
Our Congress opens their sessions with prayer, is this an establishment or endorsement of religion? I actually wouldn't be a bit saddened if this was eliminated. Good point. We should abolish this practice. If individual Congressmen wish to pray on their own, fine, but I actually would be just fine with them not doing it as an official part of the session. |
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Dec 24, 2005 1:33:24 GMT -5
Our Congress opens their sessions with prayer, is this an establishment or endorsement of religion? Well, unless they represent each religion present within the congress, Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 24, 2005 1:38:29 GMT -5
On Nov. 21 the family received a letter asking them to remove the nativity scene but said nothing about the other numerous figures on the lawn, including a holiday Minnie Mouse and Winnie the Pooh along with a Santa and Mrs. Claus.
The letter from Williams on Tuesday said the intent of the regulation is to control permanent statues and is not intended to apply to temporary holiday decorations.
"You don't see them pulling down the American flag on every house or these Halloween displays. It's a bunch of garbage," Cooper said.
Do you know how to read?
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 24, 2005 1:39:59 GMT -5
On Nov. 21 the family received a letter asking them to remove the nativity scene but said nothing about the other numerous figures on the lawn, including a holiday Minnie Mouse and Winnie the Pooh along with a Santa and Mrs. Claus.The letter from Williams on Tuesday said the intent of the regulation is to control permanent statues and is not intended to apply to temporary holiday decorations."You don't see them pulling down the American flag on every house or these Halloween displays. It's a bunch of garbage," Cooper said. Do you know how to Yes, quite well. The stuff you're bolding is exactly the reason why THEY RETRACTED AND APOLOGIZED FOR THE LETTER THAT ASKED THEM TO REMOVE THE DISPLAY. Can you read? |
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 24, 2005 1:42:08 GMT -5
But you just got done saying this:
Oh, and that Novi article is total bullshit. The issue in that case was NOT that it was a nativity scene at all. The issue was that that particular subdivision has bylaws banning ALL lawn ornaments. It had nothing to do with religion, it had to do with garish decorations making the neighborhood look trashy. No one involved in that took issue with the content of the display, just with the fact that it violated their local bylaws.
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Dec 24, 2005 1:42:32 GMT -5
Well I imagine the minnie mouse and everything was assumed in the entire display. Flags and most halloween decoration would probably not be consisdered "lawn decoration".
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 24, 2005 1:44:07 GMT -5
But you just got done saying this: Oh, and that Novi article is total bullshit. The issue in that case was NOT that it was a nativity scene at all. The issue was that that particular subdivision has bylaws banning ALL lawn ornaments. It had nothing to do with religion, it had to do with garish decorations making the neighborhood look trashy. No one involved in that took issue with the content of the display, just with the fact that it violated their local bylaws. Exactly. And that's exactly what happened. They asked them to take it down BECAUSE THE LOCAL BYLAWS PROHIBITED SUCH A DISPLAY, and then realized they were in error and retracted it. This isn't that difficult. It's a vague bylaw that they're kind of figuring out as they go along. Regardless, you're missing the point that THIS WAS NOT AN ATTACK ON CHRISTMAS. And therefore is completely irrelevent to your point. |
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 24, 2005 1:46:23 GMT -5
Dude, they didn't do it at Halloween to anyone. They also didn't ask them to remove the other lawn ornaments. ONLY THE NATIVITY SCENE.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 24, 2005 1:47:43 GMT -5
Well I imagine the minnie mouse and everything was assumed in the entire display. Flags and most halloween decoration would probably not be consisdered "lawn decoration".  |
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Dec 24, 2005 1:49:53 GMT -5
Seriously, that confused you? You don't see the differnce between a flag or a pumpkin and a huge nativity scene?
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 24, 2005 1:51:59 GMT -5
Dude, they didn't do it at Halloween to anyone. They also didn't ask them to remove the other lawn ornaments. ONLY THE NATIVITY SCENE. Because it didn't apply to temporary displays, WHICH IS WHY THEY RETRACTED THE REQUEST. And yes, I recognize that the negative publicity played a part, but regardless, it's pretty clear that this was NOT an attack on Christmas. Can you at least admit that? And it should be added...can you provide proof that the nativity scene is the only thing they've requested anyone to take down? I would wager quite a bit that it is NOT the only thing they've ever asked people to take down based on that particular ordinance, it's just the only one you've heard of, because someone fighting to keep their ugly lawn gnomes can't get newspaper coverage so easily. |
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 24, 2005 1:53:12 GMT -5
but said nothing about the other numerous figures on the lawn, including a holiday Minnie Mouse and Winnie the Pooh along with a Santa and Mrs. Claus.
Yes Rocky you are correct it was an attack on Jesus, Joseph, Mary, and the wise men.
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Dec 24, 2005 2:00:51 GMT -5
I think without actually seeing the size and placement of said mouse and pooh bear it's easy to assume either way. I'm saying maybe the Nativity scene was the only thing they thought crossed the line of tastful decoration...or maybe they hate Jesus.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Dec 24, 2005 2:06:22 GMT -5
Yes and that was my point earlier about the attempt of taking 'Christ' out of Christmas. And denying freedom of religion or religious symbols.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Dec 24, 2005 2:07:06 GMT -5
|
|
