'Merry Christmas' or 'Happy Holiday'

[Pie]

Originally Posted by Elspode

Are you suggesting that there is a functional way to allow equal inclusion and protection for *all* religions within the Governmental milieu?

Then there is the basic incompatability of inclusion of *any* religion with the rights of our token athiest. Do athiests have rights, Wolf? Do we have the *same* rights as Christians?
- Pie

[xoxoxoBruce]

re·li·gion n.

1- a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

2- The life or condition of a person in a religious order.

3- A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

4- A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
If you have enough zeal, Pie, or conscientious devotion.

[Pie]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

re·li·gion n.
1- b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

The problem I've got, Bruce, is that 1B is the only way it is observed in this country by that vast hulking Chrisitian majority. The promotion of organized religion is the antithesis of everything I "believe"!

Still incompatible.

[tw]

From the Associated Press on 22 Dec 2005:

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) withdrew on Thursday his affiliation from the Christian-rights law center that defended a school district's policy requiring the teaching of "intelligent design."

Santorum, the Senate's third-ranking Republican, is facing a tough reelection challenge next year. Earlier, he praised the Dover Area School District for "attempting to teach the controversy of evolution."

But the day after a federal judge ruled that the district's policy on intelligent design is unconstitutional, Santorum told the Philadelphia Inquirer that he was troubled by testimony indicating that religion motivated some school board members to adopt the policy.

Santorum was on the advisory board of the Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, which defended the district's policy. ...

In 2002, Santorum said in a Washington Times op-ed article that intelligent design "is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes."

Funny. Santorum did not have a problem back when the Dover School Board was openly promoting religion in the schools. Suddenly he has a problem with his Thomas More Law Center that was (according to the judge)

Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID ...

Will PA reelect Sen Santorum? Probably. PA reelects 98% of its incumbents. Future victims of religious extremism have remained in denial until it is too late. Even the good people of Dover PA never saw this coming - in part because few really appreciate how serious Christian extremists are to American principles and government. As court testimony demonstrates, some on the school board voted for ID because they did not even know what it was. In PA, such ignorance is still found in the public. (However some 'always' Republican friends have recently admitted that George Jr may have been a mistake. That is a major concession for one.) Santorum, like George Jr, publically approved of what religious extremists in Dover were doing. Each specifically said so using the word ‘Dover’. Suddenly Santorum pretends not to be a Christian extremist? Suddenly he no longer approves of what he previously encouraged? Maybe he lurks in the Cellar and is now worried?

Hi Rick! You don't have a problem. Most PA residents don't care. Only Christian extremists vote with religious furvor - and vote who they are told to vote for.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Pie

Then there is the basic incompatability of inclusion of *any* religion with the rights of our token athiest. Do athiests have rights, Wolf? Do we have the *same* rights as Christians?
- Pie

You have as much right to your beliefs/disbeliefs as a Christian does to theirs. The fact that they believe in a particular Godform does not intrude upon your ability not to believe. Displays of religious iconography do not harm you, or anyone else. You are not forced to participate in their practices, nor am I.

If someone would read a Bible in your presence, that is their choice, and their right. If they ask that you read the Bible, you have the right to decline. If they would attempt to press the issue and inist that you read the Bible, accept Christ as your personal savior, or sacrifice a lamb to appease the Gods, and don't respond to your requests to desist, THEN they are harrassing you and you can pursue legal action against them.

[tw]

Originally Posted by wolf

Displays of religious iconography do not harm you, or anyone else. You are not forced to participate in their practices, nor am I.

However once 'they' tell others what may and may not be displayed, (ie Target attacked for using the expression "Happy Holiday" - and this attack is for political reasons), then their religion does harm everyone. A display of "Holiday" garnish is not offensive when paid for with public money. But when only Christian symbols are displayed, then that is akin to government sponsoring religion.

Wreaths, trees, decorative lights, Santa Claus, etc in the Holiday spirit are not offensive to anyone. But by taking offense to “Holiday” and demanding that government "put the Christ back into Christmas" (as Christian extremists are demanding) is an offense to the 1st Amendment.

It is a fine line. Was not an issue when Christian extremists were not promoting their religion upon all others. Therefore (and unfortunately) a line must be drawn.

Seasonal garnish is one thing. Public spending that promotes the religion of an extremist group offends anyone American. If we have a manger, then we better have some Kwanzaa, Islamic, and Buddhist trappings as well. This only because Christian religion is now being used for a political agenda. “Put the Christ back in Christmas” is offensive because it imposes beliefs of one religious group upon all others.

Let's not miss what their agenda is. As even stated in testimony in the Dover PA school board lawsuit, Christian extremists wanted to put prayer back into public schools. So now even Holiday decorations require a legal opinion. It's shameful what Christian extremists have done to the Holidays.

Merry Xmas to all who are not so intolerant. And Happy New Year. Another part of "Happy Holidays" that are thankfully devoid of religion - so far.

[Nunya]

Well, I've decided not to celebrate the whatchamacallit season at all. Solves the problem for me, and I have had a completely stress-free, non-commercial whatever-everyone-else-who-wants -to-argue-about-semantics-wants-to-call-it season. I AM going to a friend's house for that one dinner that people get together for on the 25th of December, but that is just because I want to hang out with her. I expressly asked that no one buy me a gift this year and I have bought no gifts. It is more important to spend time with people you care about.

I am a whatever-this-season-is-called drop-out. I resent that corporate America is now trying to start the (insert your favorite term here) season at the beginning of November. It is getting absolutely ridiculous. I quit--I'm not even a Christian--so, I quit.

I'm gonna sit back and let everyone else get stressed out and buy a bunch of useless junk for the holiday/Christmas/Xmas..blah, blah, blah, ad nauseum season. And argue with each other over what we are going to call a season that no longer stands for the secular or religious sentiments that it once did. Maybe we should just call it the "buying season." Because that is what it is really about.

A joyous buying and arguing season to all, and to all a good night!

My two cent...

[wolf]

My increasingly senile mother has already decided that I have ruined Christmas. I am not entirely sure why she has decided this. Neither is she, and hopefully by tomorrow she will have picked something else to obsess about.

hmmmmm...





Why not, "Peace on earth"?














Merry Holidays, everyone!

(even you, LJ!)

[Perry Winkle]

religion: a popular cult

cult: an unpopular religion

[xoxoxoBruce]

Why not, "Peace on earth"?

Because it's not "The American Way"tm
Because it's our duty to save the heathens from the evils of their oil, gold, diamonds, etc.
Because it's not profitable.

[Nunya]

Originally Posted by wolf

My increasingly senile mother has already decided that I have ruined Christmas. I am not entirely sure why she has decided this. Neither is she, and hopefully by tomorrow she will have picked something else to obsess about.

Hey, Wolf, your mom sounds like my mom. Jeez, why can't they just realize that they RAISED us to be Christmas ruiners! I "ruined" Christmas last year so I'm staying over on my side of the country this year. But, wouldn't ya know it, my sister stepped up to the plate and "ruined" Thanksgiving this year. We're just a bunch of holiday ruiners--the lot of us. (We're wondering when she's going to wake up and realize that she is actually the one with the problem.)

Chin up! It must simply be something in the mentality of mother's with grown children. :

[capnhowdy]

I prefer Thanksgiving anyway because it is basically the same thing minus the traffic and the maxed out Mastercard.

To all of you:
However you celebrate the occasion, may it be filled with happiness.
If you don't celebrate it, hell , have a great weekend!

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by capnhowdy

I prefer Thanksgiving anyway because it is basically the same thing minus the traffic

Uh, wha? Are you sure you're talking about the Thanksgiving I'm thinking of? The Thanksgiving that involved a 7 hour drive turning into a 13.5 hour drive?

[richlevy]

You can tell it's Christmas by the clothes people wear.

Even the pope was dressed for the holidays, looking like a cross between Emperor Palpatine and Santa Claus.