USMC Gets it Right
 

I say bravo, USMC, for doing the right thing. I also think Mr La Roe is an idiot if he truly is "surprised and disappointed".

If they want to give them away, there are literally hundreds of faith based charities that I'm sure would be glad to take them. Or they could put an ad in the paper and park a truck at some parking lot, letting people that want them, come for them. :2cents:
__________________

Not anymore. Though it seems they're handling it well; sending the dolls to the groups that wrote in to complain.

I wonder if Mr La Roe knew they would be rejected and give him free publicity? Seems to me that if they are getting all these requests from all over the world, there is no need for the Marines to be involved at all, now. :headshake

In boot camp they told us there is NO black and white , just dark green and light green

I thought it was Gunny and the rest of you scum sucking dogs. :lol2:

I'm a little bummed out by this reverse, though I can see the expedience of not wanting to waste time fielding calls...

Strange how so many just cannot understand the separation of church and state.
Lot of very slow people out there.

Oh! Now I understand his "surprised and disappointed" response. Sneaky fucker, using the media to turn religion into money.

Okay, someone 'splain this to me all slow like ... you're not allowed to donate a toy Jesus to celebrate his "birthday" ... am I getting this properly?

I'm guessing it's because the Santa Claus, present-giving version of Christmas is not considered religious...but I'm a little confused, too.

In theory they're giving presents for the "holiday season," including Hannukkah, et al.

The reality is there are two Christmases, the religious and the secular. The secular, although originating from the religious celebration, is capable of standing on it's own and would continue without Christians.

I think it's important to keep them separate simply to keep the politically correct from corrupting the religious holiday and the religious holiday from imposing on others.
The government (marines) should not be involved with the religious one.:2cents:

Bob...

See what happens when you worship idols....especially Taiwanese idols. ;)

Yeah...I was thinking I recalled something about not worshipping graven images that I read somewhere.

And the "religious" Christmas is not a Christian holiday, it's a Pagan holiday. (You all know this, of course?)

I wonder why Halloween catches shit for being a "devil worshipping" celebration, but Christmas isn't treated equally?

The root of Holiday is "Holy," after all.

Yule is a Pagan Holiday.

Christmas is Christ's Mass. Yes, the date was chosen because of proximity to the night of Yule, (or possibly the feast day of the God Mithras) and the seculrized elements, the tree, holly, misseltoe, and giving of presents are essentially Pagan, but the celebration of the Birth of Jesus, whether they located it in April or December, is a decidely Christian festival.

Pagan themes run through the secularized versions of the other Christian Holidays as well. Candlemas = Imbolc, Easter = Ostara, Samhain = All Saints and All Souls Days, and so on, but as celebrated by Christians, they are days of Christian Worship.

In some strict Christian Churches, it is. The Puritans didn't celebrate Christmas, as such, and according to a friend of mine, in the early days of the United States, unless it fell on a Sunday, December 25th was an ordinary day of business in the United States, including Congress convening for session.

Very detailed text only page about the History of Christmas

These holidays have an illigegitimate, opportunistic veneer of Christianity on their surfaces.

The secular one does. :cool:

Hardly a coincidence since the secular one is an offshoot of the religious one. :rolleyes:

Yes really. :rolleyes:

The thing I find the most amusing about this fussing over the issue of whether to accept the talking Jesus doll is that realistically, kids want cool toys for whatever holiday they have (Christmas, Hannakuh, Quanza or whatever).

Can you see the expression on a kids face when he and his siblings are opening their donated presents. One sibling gets a bike and another gets some kind of remote controlled race car. And he gets a stupid talking Jesus doll?!?!?!

Talk about dissapointment! :sniff: :mad: :( :finger:

This Jesus toy is better IMHO! ;)

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/jesus.php

Jesus Christ Action Figure

"Watch Jesus as he smashes up the tax collectors tables!, Stand in awe as he heals the hideous lepers! Now with movable limbs!" Figure shown not actual size

Miracles not shown actual size. ;)

For the record, I find the whole concept of a talking Jesus doll objectionable.

That said, would people on this forum be writing posts like this about Allah or Mohammed dolls? Shiva dolls? Moses dolls?etc. Or would they find such posts objectionable based on the lack of respect shown for those who sincerely follow the Muslim, Hindu, or Jewish religions? I realize the idea is to sneer at the evangelicals, hopefully in terms of their trivialization of Jesus Christ, whom serious Christians acknowledge and avow to be both the Son of God and God. The posts, however, veer dangerously close to sneering at Christians and Christianity in general.

While there are some (many?) on the forum who do sneer at Christianity, I hope they believe in freedom of religion to the extent that they will tolerate others holding views different from their own. Civil debate is always a good thing. Egregious insults and intolerance of others are not.

I don't think this is an issue of separation of church and state. The Marines were offered a 'religious' item to give away at Christmas, which, yes, is a Christian holiday. (Just because lots of folks like to celebrate the original Pagan version doesn't mean Christmas isn't Christian.) They declined because they were worried about giving Jewish or Muslim kids a Jesus doll (and when did observant Jews and Muslims start lining up for Christmas presents? Anyone know?). As an observant Christian, I wouldn't be lining up for Eid al Fitr feasts or presents for my kids, nor for Hannukah presents, nor for Dhivali 'goodies'. Nothing against these holidays, I just don't celebrate them.

The company is now giving most of the dolls away directly to those who have requested them. The Marines may give some away - to those who want them. Am I understanding this correctly?

As I understand it, the government is not to establish any religion, i.e. force it on people or make it the official government religion. Marines giving away religious items to those who want them does neither.

But giving religious things away to those who DIDN'T ask for them is, while not the same as, very close to, forcing it on them.

Just staying out of religion altogether is the ONLY okay choice.

And there are plenty out there that don't want to get that intimate with Jesus, even if they are in the Bible Belt.

There are plenty of Jews who celebrate the secular aspects of Christmas, as well as plenty of athiests and others who just don't know what to believe.

For the Marines giving-back program, it is much more useful to have mainstream products available since they don't have details (such as religious beliefs) on every individual getting the gifts.

The Marines didn't come up with these dolls on their own; like everything else they give out, the dolls were donated. However, the Marines declined the dolls. On the other hand, if they get direct requests for the dolls, what would be the problem giving them strictly to those who requested them?

I agree that most of the gifts should be mainstream, and I wouldn't advocate giving a religious item to anyone who hadn't specifically requested it. And, as I mentioned, I personally find such a doll objectionable. I'm thinking more of any type of religious item. What about items that teach kids how to cast spells? What about Ouija boards? What about dreidels? I assume all of these should be forbidden as well?

My main point was the attitude toward Christians and Christian holy things in the discussion. Does anyone think that a Muslim would be dismayed or offended by an identical thread using 'Allah' or 'Mohammed' dolls and action figures and accompanying remarks? What about claiming that Eid al Fitr celebrations have an 'illegitimate, opportunistic veneer' of Islam? Or would such remarks be seen as inappropriate?

separation of church and state is what is key to remember here. The Marines are working for the state, therefor, all gifts or donations should be entirely secular.

I do remember, I just don't agree. The gifts aren't paid for by the government. The Marines are a clearinghouse. If they do give a privately donated religious item to someone who specifically asks for it, that isn't 'establishing a religion'. It's just not.

If no government employee should so much as touch a religious item in connection with his/her duties, should we abolish all chaplains of every sort from the military? Having chaplains of every religion and denomination represented within the Armed Forces, so far as possible, provides greater freedom of religion and expression, not less. And it doesn't establish one particular religion. In the same way, giving out donated religious items to people who specifically request that item doesn't establish one religion.

There is a big difference in the first part and the second part of your post.

In this case, the military is being used as a vessel to spread the word insidiously among children. Everyone on the planet is the victim of this type of marketing. Just ask the McDonalds marketing department. Brand recognition techniques are used by everyone...even the church.

The military must not allow itself to fall prey to these sorts of tactics.

orthodoc, they DID start giving them out to people who asked for them, so stop bitching about it.

I already said I object to the dolls on principle - my point wasn't that they should or must be given out. The lesser point was that government can and does 'touch' religion at times without establishing a religion. My main point has fallen completely by the wayside!

That's fine if that''s your point orthodoc.

There is a very strong case for government and religion being separated completely. One should not impinge on the other, and that's the point others and myself have tried to make here with regard to the military giving out religious symbols.

Yes, that IS true, which is why they DID start giving them out to those who ask!

The only PROBLEM occurs if they start giving them to people who DIDN'T ask for them.

And after the Danish cartoon issue last summer you have to wonder. If some company came up with a "talking Mohamed" doll to be fair would they be in a shit load of trouble for insulting the prophet?

I think Karl Marx was right when he said "religion is the opium of the masses."
:eyebrow:

Right, a talking mohamed and allah tag team set of dolls. The allah one could be a totally featureless humanoid figure (he cannot be imaged, remember?) and I'm picturing something like the Buddy Jesus thing for the mohamed doll. You could accessorate with the 71 virgins that are the reward for your martyr action figures as well;)

They should give these out, too:

I'm going to donate 10,000 tee shirts - they'll have the Star of David on them.

The Toys for Tots campaign doesn't work that way. They don't have the resources to be that specific. 5 year old male child = gift appropriate for a 5 year old male child, move along please. No requests.
The reason they had requests for this doll is because of the publicity.:cool:

Therefore, they handed them out to make people go away. No harm, no foul. Yet.