The Impending Death of Christmas?

[007]

I don't think your overreaction lies in not giving your business to these stores.

First off, Gunny is NOT overreacting, as he clearly explained. Your continued use of the word gives reason for me to think you have very little reading comprehension skill.

Your overreaction lies in thinking that this is some part of the conspiracy.

As a matter of fact, it's ALSO been explained to you and MM, that the urgent push by the heathens and secularist to ban Christianity from Christmas has larger implications to THEM. Any ground these godless people can gain in their fight against religon, Christianity in particular, is another open door for them to push their godless agenda, i.e., abortion on demand, queer marriage, etc., to the point where what? They can legitimize NAMBLA? That seems to be the world you heathen people want. A world where men can fondle little boys, LEGALY.

As many others have pointed out, it's about one and only one thing: money. Businesses were told they could get more business by using Happy Holidays, and, according to all of you, they will learn that this was a mistake. Believe me, if Walmart thought they could make the most money by offering holy communion while you wait in the check-out line, they would.

You need to open your eyes and look at the bigger picture here. Maybe you'll see what this is really all about. The attack on Christmas is just one limb on the tree. If you can't see that, then your blind to the liberal agenda, or just plain part of it.

 

[KarlMarx]

Karl's Fractured Christmas Carols

Sung to the tune of "Jingle Bells"

Dashing through the snow..

The ACLU told us "No"

So the judge he said to me...

It's now a "Holiday Tree"

So what could I do?

I then had to sue....

So Santa said keep up the fight

And sing this carol tonight!!!

Ohhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!

Jingle Bells, the ACLU smells...
The Supreme Court laid an egg
Here's the deal, we lost the appeal
And they took the nativity set away!!!!!

P.S. I know, it sucks.... that's why I'm keeping my day job!!!!

 

[The ClayTaurus]

First off, Gunny is NOT overreacting, as he clearly explained. Your continued use of the word gives reason for me to think you have very little reading comprehension skill.



As a matter of fact, it's ALSO been explained to you and MM, that the urgent push by the heathens and secularist to ban Christianity from Christmas has larger implications to THEM. Any ground these godless people can gain in their fight against religon, Christianity in particular, is another open door for them to push their godless agenda, i.e., abortion on demand, queer marriage, etc., to the point where what? They can legitimize NAMBLA? That seems to be the world you heathen people want. A world where men can fondle little boys, LEGALY.



You need to open your eyes and look at the bigger picture here. Maybe you'll see what this is really all about. The attack on Christmas is just one limb on the tree. If you can't see that, then your blind to the liberal agenda, or just plain part of it.

Pale, respectfully, I've used the word overreacting twice, and it was in my last post, so I'm not sure where you're getting this "continued use" business. I was trying to make a point that Gunny seemed to think some thought he was overreacting for not giving the companies his business, when, for me, that's not the case. My comprehension skills are just fine, thank you.

As far as the bigger picture, why have I not heard of any stories about secularists threatening to boycot stores who say Merry Christmas, or the ACLU suing stores to remove "Merry Christmas" or other methods by liberals to get Christmas removed from stores? All I'm saying is, somewhere along the line, someone got the idea that "Happy Holidays" would be more inclusive than "Merry Christmas" or easier than saying every holiday of the season and hence more profitable. They thought it would help their bottom line, and most signs point to that not being the case. Next year, Christmas will be everywhere again. I am well aware of the needless attacks on Christmas, but I do not see how this was anything more than capitalism in action. To somehow expect character out of a corporation like Walmart is... a bit naive? Money and only money is how they operate, and if you don't like their holiday campaign you don't have to give it to them. They'll either make enough or they won't, and things will change so that they can try and make more next year.

Lastly Pale, try to limit how much innuendo you drop about me wanting it to be ok to molest children. It's sensationalistic, irrelevant to the debate, and most importantly untrue, no matter how many times you disdainfully call me a heathen.

 

[dmp]

Honesty? I doubt I'd care if christmas went away. God never told anyone to celebrate Christ's birth. In fact, the only activity I believe Christ instructed was to eat and fellowship with one another - last supper type.

(shrug).

Christmas today is a function of two influences, neither were mandated by Christ:

1) Tradition
2) Retail Sales

 

[Hobbit]

Honesty? I doubt I'd care if christmas went away. God never told anyone to celebrate Christ's birth. In fact, the only activity I believe Christ instructed was to eat and fellowship with one another - last supper type.

(shrug).

Christmas today is a function of two influences, neither were mandated by Christ:

1) Tradition
2) Retail Sales

I'd be content with celebrating all of the Jewish holidays Christ himself celebrated if this whole thing wasn't an attack on Christianity itself. At this point, I'd compare it to a bomb hitting the homec building at a college. Yeah, homec isn't that important, but somebody just bombed your frickin' college!! Are you just gonna take that?

 

[dmp]

I'd be content with celebrating all of the Jewish holidays Christ himself celebrated if this whole thing wasn't an attack on Christianity itself. At this point, I'd compare it to a bomb hitting the homec building at a college. Yeah, homec isn't that important, but somebody just bombed your frickin' college!! Are you just gonna take that?

I got cha.

 

[Avatar4321]

The impending death of Christmas? – Part 2​

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 13, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com


I wrote Saturday of the hastening effort by secularist organizations to terminate Christmas from the American public square.

I wish to look back now through the annals of history to substantiate the fact that this great nation has historically been involved in religious pursuits and that our government, under the guidance of Thomas Jefferson, even got involved in evangelization and church building.


When recognizing that Mr. Jefferson – who the left wants only to remember for authoring the phrase "the separation of church and state" – was interested in advancing religion, it becomes readily apparent that our Founders never intended government to be hostile toward Christianity or menacingly unreceptive to religious expression.

Congressional funds for church building

On Dec. 3, 1803, the U.S. Congress, following the request of President Jefferson, ratified a treaty with the Kaskaskia Indians. This treaty was significant because Congress, recognizing that most members of the tribe had become Christians, deemed to give an annual subsidy of $100 for the support of a priest during a seven-year period. That priest, as the Congress noted, was to perform "the duties of his office, and ... instruct as many ... children as possible."

The treaty, signed by President Jefferson, stated: "The United States will further give the sum of three hundred dollars to assist ... in the erection of a church."

You read that right. The U.S. Congress of 1803, at the request of President Thomas Jefferson, allocated federal funds for the salary of a minister and for the construction of a church.

The Congress of 1803 was not hostile to Christianity. The members understood the value of imparting Judeo-Christian values among the Indians. They also recognized the need for advancing biblical values among the citizenry of the young nation.

Congress agrees to print Bibles

In 1777, with war plaguing the land, the Rev. Patrick Allison, chaplain of the Continental Congress, petitioned that body for a specific need – the printing of the Holy Bible. After America had declared its independence, the Revolutionary War had interrupted the supply of Bibles. Printed Bibles had previously come to America from England and Holland, but at this time of war we were often cut off from the rest of the world. As a result, Bibles were in short supply.

The committee which received Rev. Allison's petition then submitted it to Congress on Sept. 11, 1777. The report stated: "The use of the Bible is so universal and in importance so great, that your Committee refer the above to the consideration of Congress, and if Congress shall not think it expedient to order the importation of types and paper, the committee recommends that Congress will order the Committee of Congress to import 20,000 Bibles from Holland, Scotland, or else where, into the different parts of the States of the Union."

That mandate for 20,000 Bibles never went into effect, though, because publisher Robert Aitken printed the New Testament in Philadelphia. After successful print runs of this Bible, in 1781, Mr. Aitken petitioned Congress to aid in the printing of the entire King James Bible.

The Congress responded with this resolution: "Resolved, That the United States in Congress assembled, highly approve the pious and laudable undertaking of Mr. Aitken as subservient to the interest of religion as well as the progress of the arts in this country, and being satisfied from the above report, of his care and accuracy, in the execution of the work, they recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize him to publish this recommendation in the manner he shall think proper."

Mr. Aitken then published the only Bible ever recommended by Congress and it is today a rare treasure.

The lies of the left

We rarely hear of men like Robert Aitken and Rev. Patrick Allison today because the left wants to sweep their stories under a rug. Many liberals purposely disregard and disrespect our nation's religious heritage so they can bring about their own godless version of this nation. But their vision is deceitful and fraudulent.

Today, school children are barred from singing Christmas carols on the school bus (Lake County, Ill.), school bands are prevented from playing carols (Maplewood, N.J.) and school productions of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" are halted (Kirkland, Wash.).

These are just the most recent examples of the growing hostility toward Christianity that is transpiring in schools across our nation because groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State have fallaciously convinced educators that even the most rudimentary mention of Christmas (or Christ) is illegal.

These organizations thumb their noses at our nation's palpable heritage of respect and appreciation of Christianity.

Their agenda to purge God from America is a national crime!

The ACLU's and AU's Scrooge-like war on the public expression of faith is nothing but a deceptive and dangerous charade that has no historic merit. Through their lies, they are effectively spitting in the faces of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and numerous other Founders who took great pains to ensure that religion had a prominent place in American life.

This Christmas, may the spirit of our Founders ring in our hearts as we accelerate our efforts to reclaim our religious freedoms.

Merry Christmas to all (even the ACLU and AU)!

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41904

I think the fact that Jefferson of all people approved the funding is probably the biggest blow to the people who falsely use the establishment clause as a weapon against the free exercise of religion.

 

[007]

Honesty? I doubt I'd care if christmas went away. God never told anyone to celebrate Christ's birth. In fact, the only activity I believe Christ instructed was to eat and fellowship with one another - last supper type.

(shrug).

Christmas today is a function of two influences, neither were mandated by Christ:

1) Tradition
2) Retail Sales

I know what you're saying. The article below illustrates it. But I say even though there isn't a specific day mentioned as to the birth of J.C., theologians have deduced that he must have been born somewhere very near December 25th. So that is why we celebrate it then. It's close.

Taking The Christ Out Of Christmas

About this time of year, it is not uncommon for religious folks to remind others to "Keep the Christ in Christmas". The thought is that He ought to be the focus of our celebrations, and not the exchanging of gifts, munching on candies and consumption of turkey and fixings. Friend, I take issue with such a comment. Now, don't misunderstand. Jesus Christ should be the hub from which every day we have on earth is guided, including "Christmas day". However, we must be careful that what we do and say does in fact honour the Lord.

We cannot "keep the Christ in Christmas" for the simple reason that He was not there to begin with. Celebrating December 25 as the birth date of Christ is to venerate a day of which God has said nothing. There is no command, example or inference in Scripture that the Lord desires us to commemorate the date of His birth. If it were His will, surely He would have revealed it to us. In the absence of instruction there should likewise be an absence of action.

A commonly used example of the authority which resides in the silence of God is the case of Nadab and Abihu. These were sons of Aaron, priests in Israel. They thought to exalt God through the burning of incense. Hear the inspired record, "...each took his censer and put fire in it, put incense on it, and offered profane fire before the LORD, which He had not commanded them. So fire went out from the LORD and devoured them, and they died before the LORD." (Lev 10:1-2).

Why was the fire used profane before the LORD? Had it been borrowed from the pagans? Perhaps they used the fires of the dung hill? No, the reason it was profane was simply that the LORD had not commanded it. It was not revealed until Leviticus 16:12 what fire should be used to burn incense to the LORD.

If the Lord has said nothing to us about celebrating "Christmas", shall we proceed without His approval? We serve the same God that Nadab and Abihu served. Hear what he said regarding their presumptuous action, "By those who come near Me I must be regarded as holy; and before all the people I must be glorified." (10:3) Let us not fail to regard the Lord as holy, and may we be sure to glorify Him before others. We bring no glory to God and in no fashion display His holiness by celebrating Christmas as a religious holiday. Rather, by so doing, we arrogantly place our own will above the Lord's.

Among religious folk, there are two extreme positions with regard to Christmas. The advocates of "keep the Christ in Christmas", as mentioned above are wrong. However, those who take the opposite extreme, concluding that the Christian should have no part in any manner of "Christmas" celebrations are equally wrong.

There are a number of "Christmas" traditions which can be traced back to various festivals and carnivals of pagan cultures. The "12 days of Christmas", yule logs, exchanging of gifts, parade floats, carollers, savoury feasts, garland decked halls, trees with lights, mistletoe, and more. Some, taking into account the pagan use of these automatically oppose any use of them today. Certainly, if we are using them in some sort of pagan worship, then God forbid that we do so. However, to dismiss them merely on the basis that they have in the past been used for pagan purposes is to bind where God's word has not bound.

Paul gave instruction to the Corinthians regarding the eating of meats. Some meat in their marketplace had been offered to idols, however, he directed the Christian "...eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience' sake; for the earth is the LORD's, and all its fullness." (1 Cor 10:25, cf. v 27). One could eat meat offered to an idol without giving glory to the idol. The mature Christian understood that the idol was nothing (1 Cor 8:4). One could freely eat meat that had been offered to an idol, unless the conscience of a weak brother or unbeliever was at hand (1 Cor 8:7-13; 10:28-33).

Why reference these meats offered to idols? Simply this – the meats were not made unclean by their misuse and association with the idol. The idol was nothing. In like manner, the various things we today associate with the holiday season are, in and of themselves, clean.

I suppose if one today cannot disassociate a gift from the gift-giving which accompanied the Roman celebration for their god Saturn, then I ought not give such a person a gift. Likewise, if my neighbour, immediately upon seeing my porch decorated with garlands claims that I am celebrating Saturnalia, then I need to take the garlands down. Incidentally, I've never had that happen. And no surprise. We are about 2,000 years removed from the pagan application of these practices.

Often we find that the truth lies between two extremes, and so it is with regard to the celebration of Christmas. Let us not attempt to put the Christ into a holiday which He has not placed Himself. Christmas, if celebrated religiously is not a Christian holiday, but rather a pagan holiday. However, let us not go to the opposite extreme, outlawing what amounts to nothing more than innocent decorations, gifts and meals.

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/20031221.htm

 

[007]

As far as the bigger picture, why have I not heard of any stories about secularists threatening to boycot stores who say Merry Christmas, or the ACLU suing stores to remove "Merry Christmas" or other methods by liberals to get Christmas removed from stores? All I'm saying is, somewhere along the line, someone got the idea that "Happy Holidays" would be more inclusive than "Merry Christmas" or easier than saying every holiday of the season and hence more profitable. They thought it would help their bottom line, and most signs point to that not being the case. Next year, Christmas will be everywhere again. I am well aware of the needless attacks on Christmas, but I do not see how this was anything more than capitalism in action. To somehow expect character out of a corporation like Walmart is... a bit naive? Money and only money is how they operate, and if you don't like their holiday campaign you don't have to give it to them. They'll either make enough or they won't, and things will change so that they can try and make more next year.

I can only reply to this so many times, and then I believe I'm just repeating myself with no effect. So I'll just say that I "respectfully", but wholeheartedly, DISAGREE with you. It's more about religon than money.

Lastly Pale, try to limit how much innuendo you drop about me wanting it to be ok to molest children. It's sensationalistic, irrelevant to the debate, and most importantly untrue, no matter how many times you disdainfully call me a heathen.

I appreciate you're being civil, so I will say to you, if you are a heathen, then why do you take offense to being called one?

And I didn't say "YOU" wanted to molest little boys, but heathens backed by the aclu do. The aclu openly SUPPORTS the sick, vile, disgusting, outragously perverted, homosexual pedophile orgnization called NAMBLA, North American MAN BOY LOVE ASSOCIATION. There aren't any Christians in support of that, only liberals and heathens. That is part of the big picture I keep refering to. These sick fucking animals want religon GONE! It stands in the their way, so they attack ANYTHING to do with religon, including "Christmas". If you can't understand that, then your either blind or in denile.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I can only reply to this so many times, and then I believe I'm just repeating myself with no effect. So I'll just say that I "respectfully", but wholeheartedly, DISAGREE with you. It's more about religon than money.

I was just about to offer the same solution.

I appreciate you're being civil, so I will say to you, if you are a heathen, then why do you take offense to being called one?

I am not offended by being called a heathen as much as I am the intent in your voice. Just like the word "girl" isn't insulting, but saying "that's pretty good, for a girl" is. I'm insulted by the disdain, not by the word. If you insist there was no such disdain, then I have no point of contention with you on this subject.

And I didn't say "YOU" wanted to molest little boys, but heathens backed by the aclu do. The aclu openly SUPPORTS the sick, vile, disgusting, outragously perverted, homosexual pedophile orgnization called NAMBLA, North American MAN BOY LOVE ASSOCIATION. There aren't any Christians in support of that, only liberals and heathens. That is part of the big picture I keep refering to. These sick fucking animals want religon GONE! It stands in the their way, so they attack ANYTHING to do with religon, including "Christmas". If you can't understand that, then your either blind or in denile.

Fair enough; as I stated, I don't deny that these people exist. Where we differ in opinion, we appear to have agreed to disagree.

As sort of a closing, I'd like to ask you to be sure you don't let all this anti-Christmas stuff get you down, it'd be a shame if your holidays are ruined by the ACLU... after all, it's probably their goal to make you miserable anyhow, so you might as well have the best merry Christmas possible just to rub it in their face.

Remember the saying "If you change your way of life, the terrorists have already won"?

Perhaps we need a new one: "If you let the attack on Christmas ruin your Christmas, the ACLU has already won."

 

[007]

As sort of a closing, I'd like to ask you to be sure you don't let all this anti-Christmas stuff get you down, it'd be a shame if your holidays are ruined by the ACLU... after all, it's probably their goal to make you miserable anyhow, so you might as well have the best merry Christmas possible just to rub it in their face.

I have no family here in Reno. My closest relative is 750 miles away. I have no Christmas tree. I've put up no Christmas lights. I've not one Christmas decoration in my home. Christmas this year exists in my heart and memory, of the incredible anticipation of Christmas morning when I was a child, to go see what Santa had left under the tree. The going to church for the Christmas sermon. The visiting of realatives and a big diner. Those days were so filled with happiness and joy, they were magic. It just seems to me that this is all slipping away, and no one cares enough to fight back. People are too easily placated these days. The "whatever" attitude too often wins the day.

Remember the saying "If you change your way of life, the terrorists have already won"?

Perhaps we need a new one: "If you let the attack on Christmas ruin your Christmas, the ACLU has already won."

Not a bad parable Clay... not bad.

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

Let's get a couple things straight. I've seen a lot of squawk about an attack on Christmas. I haven't seen any link to any lawsuit sponsored by the ACLU to have Merry Christmas removed from any retailers. I've seen lots of inference that retailers are "feeling" compelled to assist with some anti-Christian conspiracy, but I've seen no statements from the operators of these retail outlets that support these inferences. IMO, the only thing that motivates a retailer is money.

I have no fear of the establishment of a theocracy here in the U.S. I am of the belief that the same mentality that led the founding fathers to build a wall between church and state is alive and well in the silent majority that makes up the center of the political spectrum. The whackos on both ends of the spectrum get most of the MSM air time and some folks are misguided in their belief that these fringe elements have any real sway over our daily lives.

I agree with your use of the phrase "overly-dramatic nonsense", but I apply it to the response to Happy Holidays.

As was pointed out in the other thread on this subject, the "real" spirit of Christmas (filling Christmas wishes for less-fortunate kids) is alive and well and Walmart's Happy Holidays sign is not going to change that.

Agreed.

ps Wal-Mart still kicks ass too!

 

[KarlMarx]

I have no family here in Reno. My closest relative is 750 miles away. I have no Christmas tree. I've put up no Christmas lights. I've not one Christmas decoration in my home. Christmas this year exists in my heart and memory, of the incredible anticipation of Christmas morning when I was a child, to go see what Santa had left under the tree. The going to church for the Christmas sermon. The visiting of realatives and a big diner. Those days were so filled with happiness and joy, they were magic. It just seems to me that this is all slipping away, and no one cares enough to fight back. People are too easily placated these days. The "whatever" attitude too often wins the day.

That's so sad.... I have that Christmas... lots of relatives and so forth... but that "whatever" attitude sounds familiar... some of them are beginnning to want to spend the holidays alone.... an aunt and uncle are now going to Florida for Christmas.... some cousins are making excuses, my Mom is getting tired of begging and trying to accomodate them.... I can't say that I blame her, she's been trying to be good about it for a long time...

and I know.. I know... that when my Mom and Dad are gone.... I'll be in a similar situation as Pale.... because I can tell already that some of the cousins really don't want to be there, they just feel obligated.... besides, they have their families... so in about 20 years, it's going to be KarlMarx fending for himself on Christmas....

well... perhaps there is something I can do to spread the ol' Christmas cheer then, I'll be old and fat so I can be Santa or something nice to some little kids.... (and annoy the ACLU in the process!!!!! I'm so evil!!!!!!)

OK, so I'm going to start practicing my Santa lines..... how does this sound?

"So little Johnny don't you want a toy RPG or a toy machine gun for Christmas so that you can kill those bad Islamofascists????"

"So little Suzie, don't you want an toy oven and a baby doll so that you'll grow wanting to get married and have children in wedlock???"

Whaddya think?!?!?

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

My Christmas is always about family.
It helps that we are SO big of a family that we all
can't afford to get gifts for EVERYONE. Granny had 13 kids.
I got like 56 (first) cousins

 

[archangel]

That's so sad.... I have that Christmas... lots of relatives and so forth... but that "whatever" attitude sounds familiar... some of them are beginnning to want to spend the holidays alone.... an aunt and uncle are now going to Florida for Christmas.... some cousins are making excuses, my Mom is getting tired of begging and trying to accomodate them.... I can't say that I blame her, she's been trying to be good about it for a long time...

and I know.. I know... that when my Mom and Dad are gone.... I'll be in a similar situation as Pale.... because I can tell already that some of the cousins really don't want to be there, they just feel obligated.... besides, they have their families... so in about 20 years, it's going to be KarlMarx fending for himself on Christmas....

well... perhaps there is something I can do to spread the ol' Christmas cheer then, I'll be old and fat so I can be Santa or something nice to some little kids.... (and annoy the ACLU in the process!!!!! I'm so evil!!!!!!)

OK, so I'm going to start practicing my Santa lines..... how does this sound?

"So little Johnny don't you want a toy RPG or a toy machine gun for Christmas so that you can kill those bad Islamofascists????"

"So little Suzie, don't you want an toy oven and a baby doll so that you'll grow wanting to get married and have children in wedlock???"

Whaddya think?!?!?

If I told my GD that she would look at me like I was nuts...she would prefer the machine gun...and the wedding dress...wants to be a Jet Jock or Police Officer! :halo:

 

[archangel]

My Christmas is always about family.
It helps that we are SO big of a family that we all
can't afford to get gifts for EVERYONE. Granny had 13 kids.
I got like 56 (first) cousins

sounds like a old "Elvis" movie... :teeth:

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

sounds like a old "Elvis" movie... :teeth:

Till the liquor comes out.
Granny gave me a case of Bud Light for Christmas when I was 19.
She got tired of me stealing it from the fridge.

 

[007]

I've seen a lot of squawk about an attack on Christmas. I haven't seen any link to any lawsuit sponsored by the ACLU to have Merry Christmas removed from any retailers.

I did a quick search, and can't find one either. I'll concede this one very small point in this otherwise very large discussion to you.

I've seen lots of inference that retailers are "feeling" compelled to assist with some anti-Christian conspiracy, but I've seen no statements from the operators of these retail outlets that support these inferences. IMO, the only thing that motivates a retailer is money.

That may also be true. One can find much "opinion" to go both ways though. So let me ask you then MM, why are these stores omitting Merry Christmas, if they KNOW that by doing so HURTS their business? You don't think that possibly the big men at the top could be "making a statement"? Sure they may put Merry Christmas BACK the next year to save their ass financially, but they've still "made their point". They're against Christmas.

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

I did a quick search, and can't find one either. I'll concede this one very small point in this otherwise very large discussion to you.



That may also be true. One can find much "opinion" to go both ways though. So let me ask you then MM, why are these stores omitting Merry Christmas then, if they KNOW that by doing so HURTS their business? You don't think that possibly the big men at the top could be "making a statement"? Sure they may put Merry Christmas BACK the next year, but they've still "made their point". They're against Christmas.

i think it's a huge decission, that isn't thought out to well.
Out of fear for being labled "not pc" retailers try to do the
least amount of damage so they can still make money.
As soon as the public opinion shifts, so does their decission.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

So let me ask you then MM, why are these stores omitting Merry Christmas, if they KNOW that by doing so HURTS their business? You don't think that possibly the big men at the top could be "making a statement"? Sure they may put Merry Christmas BACK the next year, but they've still "made their point". They're against Christmas.

Do you really believe this? That the head of Walmart would intentionally make less money to somehow make a political statment? This was what I was trying to get at earlier; do you think that the Walton family is trying to make an anti-Christmas statement?