[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sir Galahad: *
The question is do you want to create a secular society? If you are, then by elminating christainity from Christmas you are infact discriminating against a religion and its followers.
Its like saying that hannukah can be celebrate but eliminate judaism from it. Eid is cool, but no religious traditions.
That is not a secular society. It is a facist one.
[/QUOTE]
No, everyone has a right to practice their religion freely that's a foundation of the country, but the government must be separate from religion, that is a foundation as well.
So since when is a park part of a government institution? It is part of a city and the inhabitants of the city can undertake whatever actions they want to beautiful their park.
Parks are funded by taxpayer's money.. some may not want it cluttered with trees with hanging ornaments etc..
I say let people have Christmas.. afterall the majority wants it.. Neighborhoods of predominantly white christians already don't have problems singing carols or beautifying 'chrismissy' style..
And I agree public owned or funded places should stay away from formally celebrating the occasion. (i don't mind the day off and pay though).
Btw has anyone noticed how displaying the Minorrah is all ok with the places that shun Christmas.... Hmmmmmmmmmm
P.S. A very Merry Christmas to myvoice and all other Christians on the board who celebrate Christmas.
I was talking this my wife yesterday. Back when my mother in law attended NYC Public schools, majority of Teachers were Jewish, and the Public Schools closed on most Jewish Holidays. Now that, that is not the case, the NYC Public Schools still close on Jewish Holidays. I have nothing against that, except I want the schools to be closed on Hindu, Ahmadi, and Sikh Holidays too. There are more Desis in New York now than Jews.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
Parks are funded by taxpayer's money.. some may not want it cluttered with trees with hanging ornaments etc..
[/QUOTE]
In this case majority rules. Such is the beauty of democracy. If the majority want it they can get their parks all chrismasy.
…
BARTOW, Florida (AP) – When a Florida church group put a Nativity scene on public property, officials warned it might open the door to other religious – and not-so-religious – displays. They were right.
This topic has been going around a lot in the uk too, and i am really really curious as to who exactly is stopping people from celebrating xmas and why?
On a side issue, the majority has to be tolerant because the majority by its nature holds the power, the powerful need to safeguard and protect the less powerful, but that is off this topic.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
fake holiday Festivus, featured on the TV sitcom "Seinfeld."
[/QUOTE]
How much more fake can you get than present day xmas?
Coco cola sponsored santa claus some mutated form of some old guy call st. nicholas who left 3 gold balls in someones sock and that all related to the birth of christ, which orthodoxy commemorates on Jan 7th?
The tree too, some german pagan custom intertwined into the roman sun god festival that fell on dec 25 or there abouts.
Red hats and snow weren't that common place in Palestine 2000 years ago.
How long does it take for the slope to become slippery? Every day in the US Congess as well as every state legislature that I am aware of starts with a prayer/invocation. This has been true since the first Continental Congress. After 200+ years, I still don’t recall Satanists, practitioners of witchcraft, pagans or any other really wierd groups demanding equal time for the morning prayer in legislatures. Nobody’s slipped on that slope have they?
So our children cannot do in school what our lawmakers do every day. I suppose, teachers will not be allowed to play video tapes for their students of the start of legislative sessions because of the prayer. Maybe tours and visitors should not be allowed until the prayer is over.
The Declaration of Independence wpeaks of the “Creator” which is why one school banned it.
The attempt to rid God from our public life has gone from silly to insanity. Tolerance goes both ways and the majority ought to be allowed to openly celebrate their special days even if they want to use public parks to do so. After all, since they are the majority, they paid most of the taxes to establish them.
I'm more of an 'equal rights' guy than a 'majority rules' one, and history shows America is too.
If you want to put Jesus in your yard feel free as that is your right. There's a false paranoia that Xmas is being taken away from and that simply isn't true.
The 'government must act with neutrality toward religion, neither endorsing nor discriminating against particular faiths.'
This is a foundation of America and what makes the country so great.
UTD, this neutrality stuff is a hogwash. What the government should do is to celebrate all religions, openly. I wana see not only a Christmas Tree but also a Majh (cow to be sacrificed on Eid al Qurban), a Manorah, and other religious symbols in the White House and on the Mall.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
I'm more of an 'equal rights' guy than a 'majority rules' one, and history shows America is too.
If you want to put Jesus in your yard feel free as that is your right. There's a false paranoia that Xmas is being taken away from and that simply isn't true.
The 'government must act with neutrality toward religion, neither endorsing nor discriminating against particular faiths.'
This is a foundation of America and what makes the country so great.
[/QUOTE]
UTD: You are bouncing around in this thread like a rubber ball. This thread isn't about equal rights or majority rules. It is about tolerance, the free exercise of religion and the attempts to take God out of all aspects of public life that seems to be going on. Acting with neutrality among specific religions is quite different than purging religion generally from public life. I'm quite certain that the prayer that opens legislative sessions is given by clergymen of many different religions from time to time. A rabbi one day, a baptist the next. An Imam on another day. Etc. Etc. The prayer promotes the value of religion generally over non-religion but it does not promote one religion over another.
Some Lion's Club that wants to provide a beautiful nativity scene in a park during Christmas is not trying to convert anyone or denigrate anyone else's belief. It is just trying to bring joy and happiness to Christians. If the JDL wants to light a Mennorah in another part of the park on each night of Hannukah, let them. It won't offend me.
There's something wrong when the majority has to be tolerant enough to issue a permit that allows the KKK to march down city streets but the baby Jesus is banned from the park. And now, so too is Santa, Christmas trees and the Salvation Army.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
Tolerance goes both ways and the majority ought to be allowed to openly celebrate their special days even if they want to use public parks to do so. After all, since they are the majority, they paid most of the taxes to establish them.
[/QUOTE]
Now this argument is just plain silly. If we use this line of thinking, blacks would still have different rest rooms, we would be pulling our troops out of Iraq and there would be publicly funded stem cell research by now.
I am not surprised that you think civil issues should be by 'majority rule' since you think civil rights for some should be limited based on what the majority thinks "ought to be allowed". That's why we don't have mob rule and we do have a judicial branch. The tolerance that liberals usually ask for are usually for minority groups to have the same rights as others; the "tolerance" you ask for is to have your beliefs dominate society (and be publicly funded) over others.
Myvoice, what do you want a law that forces businesses to let the Salvation Army use their property and ask for money? That should be up to Business owners, not the government.
Myvoice, take a looka t what else the big bad ACLU has been up to…
…
ACLU of New Jersey Successfully Defends Right of Religious Expression by Jurors
^^ UTD does the same principle applies for all the gays demanding benefits (especially insurance) on my dime....Should we apply the same reasoning and tell them to eff off, not on my dime...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Kaleem: *
^^ UTD does the same principle applies for all the gays demanding benefits (especially insurance) on my dime....Should we apply the same reasoning and tell them to eff off, not on my dime...
[/QUOTE]
Not relevant. Gays aren't asking for special favors, only to receive the same benefits as the majority. And to use myvoice's reasoning, gays pay higher taxes on average, so they should be allowed at least the same rights.
I suppose, teachers will not be allowed to play video tapes for their students of the start of legislative sessions because of the prayer. Maybe tours and visitors should not be allowed until the prayer is over.