Another bullshit lawsuit threat against Christmas

[Dr Grump]

Sitarro

You're wrong (for a change ). I think the lawsuit is crap. I am a true non believer, but I still see Christmas as part of my culture. I grew up with it and my kids like it...So, no, I agree with Mr P - the lady should have grown a pair...

 

[dilloduck]

I disagree - the Romans killed Christ...And Jesus was a Jew anyway....so if you want to blame them, they killed one of their own..

Jesus was only a jew by birth---he spent the rest of his life preaching that which was against Jewish law and for a new covenant. Romans performed the crucifixtion only after the Jewish elders demanded that he be executed for blasphemy.
No one is blaming them--Jesus forgave them--it's just a fact from the bible.
Do you have any sources that say otherwise?

 

[Dr Grump]

Jesus was only a jew by birth---he spent the rest of his life preaching that which was against Jewish law and for a new covenant. Romans performed the crucifixtion only after the Jewish elders demanded that he be executed for blasphemy.
No one is blaming them--Jesus forgave them--it's just a fact from the bible.
Do you have any sources that say otherwise?

How many FACTS are in the bible? He wasn't completely against Jewish law, just aspects of Jewish life. Without the Romans I doubt he would have been crucified. They did it....go figure...

 

[glockmail]

A local rabbi wanted to install an 8-foot menorah and have a public lighting ceremony. He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn’t put up, and gave a two-day deadline to remove the trees.

Sea-Tac public affairs manager Terri-Ann Betancourt said the trees that adorn the Sea-Tac upper and lower levels may not properly represent all cultures.

.....

This is BS, as the trees represent Christmas, and official AMERICAN holiday, and the menorah represents a Jewish holiday.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

This is BS, as the trees represent Christmas, and official AMERICAN holiday, and the menorah represents a Jewish holiday.

Exactly!

Sea-Tac public affairs manager Terri-Ann Betancourt said the trees that adorn the Sea-Tac upper and lower levels may not properly represent all cultures.

This manager is just another typical stupid PC liberal who, with her misguided belief in multiculturalism, only knows how to screw AMERICAN culture.

 

[jillian]

Exactly!



This manager is just another typical stupid PC liberal who, with her misguided belief in multiculturalism, only knows how to screw AMERICAN society.

So only Christians are American?

 

[glockmail]

So only Christians are American?

Nice straw man, Jillie.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Nice straw man, Jillie.

you know, I'm still amazed that liberals can resist the allure of the shiny ornaments of Christmas trees....seems they can be swayed by just about anything...including stupid arguments....

 

[mattskramer]

You do realize, you f'd up bigtime with your opening sentence?

Founding documents are nice as sentimental pieces but are not to be taken seriously. Look at other nations that have nice-sounding documents and see how the documents are put into practice. I’d rather see what groups actually do then see what their documents say that they do.

 

[Annie]

Founding documents are nice as sentimental pieces but are not to be taken seriously. Look at other nations that have nice-sounding documents and see how the documents are put into practice. I’d rather see what groups actually do then see what their documents say that they do.

And we would want to copy other countries why? As for our own founding documents, on what do you rely to say they are not to be taken seriously? They have been cited by SCOTUS, the legislature, and the executive branch on numerous occassions.

 

[dilloduck]

Founding documents are nice as sentimental pieces but are not to be taken seriously. Look at other nations that have nice-sounding documents and see how the documents are put into practice. I’d rather see what groups actually do then see what their documents say that they do.

The Declaration of Independence is a " sentimental piece " ??

You have it worse than I thought.

 

[jillian]

And we would want to copy other countries why? As for our own founding documents, on what do you rely to say they are not to be taken seriously? They have been cited by SCOTUS, the legislature, and the executive branch on numerous occassions.

But they are still only persuasive authority and not binding law.

 

[Annie]

But they are still only persuasive authority and not binding law.

But they are cited in decisions and as precedents.

 

[jillian]

But they are cited in decisions and as precedents.

Precedent is a decision decided by a court of higher jurisdiction (or in the case of the S Ct, by itself) which controls on the particular facts/law at issue and is binding on subsequent courts hearing the same/similar issues.

Founding documents are only persuasive authority and are generally cited in dicta, which means the part of the decision that isn't binding because it isn't necessarily relevant to the facts at issue but describes what the court is thinking on a given subject.

 

[dilloduck]

Precedent is a decision decided by a court of higher jurisdiction (or in the case of the S Ct, by itself) which controls on the particular facts/law at issue and is binding on subsequent courts hearing the same/similar issues.

Founding documents are only persuasive authority and are generally cited in dicta, which means the part of the decision that isn't binding because it isn't necessarily relevant to the facts at issue but describes what the court is thinking on a given subject.

Our Constitution----founding document ?? It is in my book.

 

[Annie]

Precedent is a decision decided by a court of higher jurisdiction (or in the case of the S Ct, by itself) which controls on the particular facts/law at issue and is binding on subsequent courts hearing the same/similar issues.

Founding documents are only persuasive authority and are generally cited in dicta, which means the part of the decision that isn't binding because it isn't necessarily relevant to the facts at issue but describes what the court is thinking on a given subject.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/precedent

prec·e·dent /n. ˈprɛsɪdənt; adj. prɪˈsidnt, ˈprɛsɪdənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[n. pres-i-duhnt; adj. pri-seed-nt, pres-i-duhnt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. Law. a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.
2. any act, decision, or case that serves as a guide or justification for subsequent situations.
–adjective pre·ce·dent
3. preceding; anterior.

 

[jillian]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/precedent

And?

You see a distinction between that and what I said?

 

[Annie]

And?

You see a distinction between that and what I said?

Yes, and you don't?

 

[dilloduck]

This Rabbi is a jerk, Christmas trees aren't the same as a stinking Menorah. I'm really tired of this country's diversity being an excuse for a lousy lawsuit. I'm sure Jili/Grump would agree with the grounds for this bullshit but I think the rest of the nation is getting very bored with the asshole lawyers in this country(easily some of the most useless, dishonest twats on the planet).

http://www.king5.com/localnews/stories/NW_120906WABxmastreesEL.11b0d0cc.html#

Xmas trees removed from Sea-Tac
05:57 PM PST on Saturday, December 9, 2006
By KIM HOLCOMB / KING 5 News

No menorah, no tree
SEA-TAC Airport - All of the Christmas trees inside the terminal at Sea-Tac have been removed in response to a complaint by a rabbi.

A local rabbi wanted to install an 8-foot menorah and have a public lighting ceremony. He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn’t put up, and gave a two-day deadline to remove the trees.

Sea-Tac public affairs manager Terri-Ann Betancourt said the trees that adorn the Sea-Tac upper and lower levels may not properly represent all cultures.

She said that since this is their busiest time of year and they don't have time to add a fair representation of all cultures, her department decided to take down all of the decorations, review their policies, and decide if they need to make a change for next year.

"You know, our focus is on customer service, getting our passengers through the airport, and we thought if we could take the trees down and avoid litigation because we don't want to littigate with this individual, we want to reach some kind of solution," Betancourt said. "But that is going to take some thoughtful discussion and we would like to have time to have that thoughtful discussion."

Until then, no Christmas decor at Sea-Tac.

This Rabbi is a hoot. And O'Reilly goes as far as to defend him too. He blames the airport for NOT just putting up a menorah and be done with it. Apparently they don't quite understand how hostile THREATENING TO SUE someone is. This wasn't a request--it was BLACKMAIL.

 

[jillian]

Yes, and you don't?

I think you don't get the difference between binding precedent and things that merely have persuasive value, so you think I said something different than your googled definition. The Constitution is enforceable law. Decisions construing that Constitution and the laws enacted under it are binding precedent. Citations to things like the Declaration of Independence, while interesting and certainly persuasive, is not binding law. Nor does a mention of its principles, as dicta, in a court decision, make it enforceable law.

Aren't you the guys who are ostensibly purists?