"Merry Christmas" signs at my school

Mariner said:
So many people here seem to speak straight from Fox News, with its fixed "red state" viewpoint.
Mariner.

So, you're saying that life imitates art; that we only spout what weve been spoon-fed by Fox. Have you ever considered the glorious possibility that it's the other way around? That, perhaps, a news agency which reports in a straight, unadulterated, non-slanted manner might find success? That America tires of the mainstream media, with its fixed "blue state" viewpoint? That YOU GUYS might be the pawns?
 
Mariner said:
to understand why it is important to Christians for private entities like department stores to help them celebrate their holiday... ?
Because we are PAYING the stores for what we consider to be CHRISTMAS presents, not "holiday" presents. It would be nice if they would acknowledge that fact.

Mariner said:
It's equally unclear to me why some Christians want public entities such as public schools to recite the "under God" phrase that was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the mid-1950's when we were deathly afraid of communism.

Because "under God" is what separates us from the atheistic Communists.
In case you didn't know, the ACLU has communistic roots.
 
musicman said:
So, you're saying that life imitates art; that we only spout what weve been spoon-fed by Fox. Have you ever considered the glorious possibility that it's the other way around? That, perhaps, a news agency which reports in a straight, unadulterated, non-slanted manner might find success? That America tires of the mainstream media, with its fixed "blue state" viewpoint? That YOU GUYS might be the pawns?

Hey, I guess he missed this:


http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664
Posted here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?p=364772#post364772
 
The ClayTaurus said:
Are you offended by Happy Holidays?

See, this is where you lefties don't seem to get it. It's not an offense at "Happy Holidays." It's offense at the exclusion of "Merry Christmas." Let's go back to the sandwich shop analogy. We don't want the place to stop serving everything that's not a turkey sadwich, but we'd also like the place to continue to serve turkey sandwiches, despite the fact that they think we'll come anyway and they're trying to reach the other tiny portion of the population.

In fact, I think this fits it better. Let's say I have a shop it town that serves sandwiches, but let's switch the preferred sandwich to ham. Jews and Muslims are forbidden to eat ham, so they come in and get roast beef, turkey, and a few other non-pork products. They watch others eat ham, eat their other stuff, and, in general, are content to let everyone else go their own way. One day, a person from PETA who doesn't really care about the Muslims and Jews, but instead want to eventually outlaw all forms of meat eating. They sue the city to ensure that none of my ham sandwiches can be served at any public function, since it descriminates against Muslims and Jews, and is therefore an endorsement of Christianity, since most Christian holidays (like Christmas) traditionally involve a ham meal. There's also a bunch of news stories in the local paper of how appalled a Muslim is that I would even touch ham, much less serve it in my store. At the same time, there's several articles featuring non-Jewish, non-Muslim people saying things like, "What's the big deal? So we'll just have to buy ham and bread when we want a ham sandwich in our own homes. This isn't an attack against ham, since everybody can still eat ham in their own homes, just not on public property where it offends Muslims. With all of this going on, I'm quietly convinced that I wouldn't lose the ham-eating audience by removing ham from my store, but that it will boost my business, since the Muslims and Jews won't be offended any more and will come in and buy my sandwiches, now that they're free from watching the abomination that is ham. Understandably, the guys who have enjoyed my ham sandwiches for years are outraged, and I lose a good chunk of my business. Now tell me, were my faithful customers wrong and overreacting when they stopped buying my sandwiches? Should I re-institute ham or just tell my customers that they're a bunch of intolerant bigots like the guys on the news say.

Or what if I even keep selling ham, but I don't market it as a ham sandwich? It just comes in a plain brown bag and is made behind a screen and none of my employees can call it ham and my customers can't take it out and eat it in my store. Should my customers be offended that they're love of ham be treated as something that should never be shown in public, or are they just being pushy bigots who want ham-eating pushed on everybody?
 
Hobbit said:
See, this is where you lefties don't seem to get it. It's not an offense at "Happy Holidays." It's offense at the exclusion of "Merry Christmas." Let's go back to the sandwich shop analogy. We don't want the place to stop serving everything that's not a turkey sadwich, but we'd also like the place to continue to serve turkey sandwiches, despite the fact that they think we'll come anyway and they're trying to reach the other tiny portion of the population.

In fact, I think this fits it better. Let's say I have a shop it town that serves sandwiches, but let's switch the preferred sandwich to ham. Jews and Muslims are forbidden to eat ham, so they come in and get roast beef, turkey, and a few other non-pork products. They watch others eat ham, eat their other stuff, and, in general, are content to let everyone else go their own way. One day, a person from PETA who doesn't really care about the Muslims and Jews, but instead want to eventually outlaw all forms of meat eating. They sue the city to ensure that none of my ham sandwiches can be served at any public function, since it descriminates against Muslims and Jews, and is therefore an endorsement of Christianity, since most Christian holidays (like Christmas) traditionally involve a ham meal. There's also a bunch of news stories in the local paper of how appalled a Muslim is that I would even touch ham, much less serve it in my store. At the same time, there's several articles featuring non-Jewish, non-Muslim people saying things like, "What's the big deal? So we'll just have to buy ham and bread when we want a ham sandwich in our own homes. This isn't an attack against ham, since everybody can still eat ham in their own homes, just not on public property where it offends Muslims. With all of this going on, I'm quietly convinced that I wouldn't lose the ham-eating audience by removing ham from my store, but that it will boost my business, since the Muslims and Jews won't be offended any more and will come in and buy my sandwiches, now that they're free from watching the abomination that is ham. Understandably, the guys who have enjoyed my ham sandwiches for years are outraged, and I lose a good chunk of my business. Now tell me, were my faithful customers wrong and overreacting when they stopped buying my sandwiches? Should I re-institute ham or just tell my customers that they're a bunch of intolerant bigots like the guys on the news say.

Or what if I even keep selling ham, but I don't market it as a ham sandwich? It just comes in a plain brown bag and is made behind a screen and none of my employees can call it ham and my customers can't take it out and eat it in my store. Should my customers be offended that they're love of ham be treated as something that should never be shown in public, or are they just being pushy bigots who want ham-eating pushed on everybody?

Relax, friend. I was just checking the hypocrisy meter. There are some people who are offended by Happy Holidays. Your message has been consistent over time, and I "get it". You're pissed Christmas is being excluded, but other holidays are not. You've got legimate beef. :beer:
 
Hobbit said:
Now tell me, were my faithful customers wrong and overreacting when they stopped buying my sandwiches?

No, you'd be an idiot businessman who deleted his most popular product.

Your comparison is really bad to start with. The stores that you are complaining about still sell items that can be given as Christmas gifts, paper to wrap them with, bows to put on them, cards to go with them, trees to put them under, etc.,etc. If Walmart and Target et al went to a Hannukah and Kwanza items only inventory, you would have a case that they are trying to obliterate Christmas. This isn't the case, nor will it ever be, as it would be financial suicide.

The over-reaction is real, as evidenced by the President's Christmas cards causing an uproar with certain Christian conservatives. The card included pics of the Presidential pets, verses from the Old Testament, and the phrase "Happy Holidays". There are apparently some who would be offended by a Christmas card that read "Christ is King! Happy Holidays".

Even more surprising was the statement by one of the complainers that he would expect a Jewish president to send out Christmas cards. :wtf:
 
Mariner said:
PS regarding church-state separation law--I looked into it a little but need to do some more research. I read somewhere that it was discrimination against Catholics that prompted the main Supreme Court decisions.

Didn't bother with the other stuff. It's getting like beating a dead horse.

You're right about this. It was Justice Hugo Black that put the first twist on the First Amendment in 1947 when the Supreme Court decided that any aid or benefit to religion from governmental actions was unconstitutional. It all stemmed from parents being reimbursed for bus fare for their kids to go to Catholic school. Black said, "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

That's not what Thomas Jefferson meant when he coined the term separation of church and state, and it's certainly not what the Constitution says.
 
Why do people want private and public entities to actively join them in celebrating their particular religous holidays?

Aren't we all better off if the religious sphere is separated from the other aspects of life? After all, Christians can't agree among themselves about how properly to praise their Creator, what to say of agree with pantheists, agnostics, and atheists. Why not just get religion out of the public sphere entirely? Safer for everyone, and fairer.

mariner
 
Mariner said:
Why do people want private and public entities to actively join them in celebrating their particular religous holidays?

Aren't we all better off if the religious sphere is separated from the other aspects of life? After all, Christians can't agree among themselves about how properly to praise their Creator, what to say of agree with pantheists, agnostics, and atheists. Why not just get religion out of the public sphere entirely? Safer for everyone, and fairer.

mariner

I can't speak for every community in the country, but where I live and grew up, Christmas was always a time of celebration. There was no problem with the various religions all celebrating Christmas together. If someone is an agnostic or an athiest, what difference does it make to them? Ahem... Heaven forbid an athiest be forced to accept a Christmas bonus from their job or take advantage of a Christmas sale.

Basically, my point is that there has never been a problem before. For years Christmas was celebrated by everyone in a community, including merchants and within the town square, and nobody had a problem. Suddenly, a handful of people start making noise about a "problem", and some people fall in line.

So, a couple of questions for you.

What problem is there with openly celebrating a holiday that has been celebrated for decades?

Safer? What kind of Christmas did you have as a kid?
 
who really started it, the ACLU, some department stores that didn't want to offend non-Christians, or Bill O'Reilly? I had the sense it was Fox News and O'Reilly. Maybe he was trying to get everyone's attention off the sexual harrassment suit he recently settled.

I don't think it's fair to say that the old system was fine. As a non-Christian I was always uncomfortable with it, and many Jewish people will tell you that Christmas was the hardest time of year. Some have responded by remaking Hannukah into a type of Christmas, so their kids don't feel so left out. That's just what shouldn't happen in a country that celebrates minority freedoms and rights and abhors the tyranny of the majority on any subject.

When I said "safer," I didn't mean physically, I meant economically, for example--boycotts, etc.

Mariner.
 

Forum List

Back
Top