winter wrote: 

Rocks or neat?

 RASPUTIN wrote: 
I'll take a Coke, thanks.

 Manbird wrote: 

Sierra Mist for you?  That's what I'm having.

 winter wrote: 
He must have drank a couple extra red bulls today or something. Dang. 

 kurtster wrote: 
I think a religious symbol in a typically religious place is quite appropriate.  Like a church yard (even if it's publicly owned) or a cemetery — like your example... well, you're not going to find anyone who'll raise outrage there.

These things aren't black & white.  It pains me when people get angry about creches (or not) on public property... but I also empathize with the feeling of repression.  It must be difficult to be non-Christian, and have all these assumptions about Godliness and America thrust upon you all the time.

Although we were started by a nation of Christians, it's crucial to separate the men's personal habits from the government they set in motion.  Did you know that Jefferson was certain America would make Unitarianism it's State Religion?  But only because he thought it was the logical next step. He knew it was wide open.

The Founders very intentionally and purposefully created the basis of a government that would not favor one religion over another, in spite of their own personal beliefs and subsequent use of Christian language.   

So. The important thing is an intent for TOLERANCE.  And when the Christians push too hard that they have some higher status, then the minorities will (appropriately) push back.  And the Constitution will back the minorities in a fight against a group attempting to gain benefits from majority status... as it was designed to do.  I see it this way: the Christians need to take their place as ONE OF MANY religions, and stop trying to claim some higher moral ground that has some sort of preference over other religions.  Although its a majority, like so many other things, it does not get any special rights.

So, a cemetery has a variety of symbols, including crosses.  We expect them there as much as we would expect them in a Museum of Religious History.  It's not an affront to anyone. 

 hippiechick wrote: 


Your Words:

In Israel, this holiday gets very little attention, but in the Diaspora, especially in the US, Hanukkah has grown bigger and bigger, as Jews defend themselves against the onslaught of the increasingly commercial holiday of Christmas. We put up with the Christmas lights contest in the neighborhoods, the Christmas parties at school, and all the other Christmas crap that is shoved into our faces.


Sure sounds like you are speaking for The Jews.

If you are so concerned about your tax dollars, why aren't you leading the campaign to eliminate the Federal holiday known as Christmas. We spend a boatload of bucks giving government workers a paid day off.

 winter wrote: 
I know, it was a coin toss.  What are you having?

 RASPUTIN wrote: 
Okay, you're buying the next round for that one. MAJOR punalty points.

 BlueHeronDruid wrote: 
Jewpiter?

 buzz wrote: 
And all this time I thought you were alien. nttawwt.

 buzz wrote: 
I don't begrudge others celebrating their holidays, I just don't like having to pay for their celebrations with my tax dollars. And I wasn't speaking for you, if you don't want me to. And, if I am not mistaken, you don't have any kids.

 hippiechick wrote: 


Please don't try to speak for Jews. Speak for yourself. I'm Jewish and I certainly don't harbor the anger and resentment you do. I don't celebrate Christmas or most other holidays, but I have no problem with other doing so. you come across as being incredibly selfish.

 winter wrote: 
And, btw, this country was not founded on Christian roots; our founding fathers were very specific about this.

 kurtster wrote: 
You are remarking on how our nation has Christian roots, and implying that Christmas is the most important holiday in the holiday season. It's not such a great leap from there to "this is a Christian nation". Surely you can see that?

The difference between crosses at Arlington and a Nativity scene at City Hall is that one is an expression of religious freedom (the fallen soldiers') and one is an implicit endorsement of Christianity by the city government. If we buried everyone at Arlington under a cross with no regard for their beliefs, that would be inconsistent.

If non-government organizations want to celebrate Christmas in public with parades or festivals or what have you, by all means they should do so - on their own dime, with no involvement from any government agency other than what's needed for public safety.

 kurtster wrote: 
Separation of church and state?

Your boss was generous to give you those Jewish holidays off, possibly because s/he was Jewish? I have always had to take PTO days to have those holy days off.

Here's some 411 on Hanukkah:
Hanukkah is a minor festival day that commemorates the destruction of the Second Temple. Like most Jewish holidays, it celebrates "They tried to kill us, we survived, let's eat."  If it was in October, would get as much attention as a similar festival day of Sukkot, commemorating the harvest.

In Israel, this holiday gets very little attention, but in the Diaspora, especially in the US, Hanukkah has grown bigger and bigger, as Jews defend themselves against the onslaught of the increasingly commercial holiday of Christmas. We put up with the Christmas lights contest in the neighborhoods, the Christmas parties at school, and all the other Christmas crap that is shoved into our faces. We explain why Santa doesn't come to our house, why we don't have a tree, why we get small gifts instead of XBoxes.

Really, it sucks. Big time.

The Federal holiday celebrated on Dec 25 needs to be eliminated.

While you're at it, you can start grinding down the marble wall behind the Speaker of the House.

 winter wrote: 

Huzzah!

 Manbird wrote: 
Yes, and an ex-wife is actually an "eChrist-wife" - a kind of electronic messiah spouse. You learn something every day.

 winter wrote: 
I don't know how you came up with that conclusion, based upon any of my remarks.  I am remarking about how Christianity in this country is being attacked for its public presence.  I am trying to point out inconsistancies in the use of logic in this debate by broadening it to include other aspects of inconsistancy such as Christmas Trees in the White House and the placement of crosses at Arlington.  Either there is tolerance and understanding or there is zero tolerance and no exceptions.  I am clearly in favor of tolerance and understanding and if you have followed my points, I don't see how you could conclude otherwise.

A man withdrew his participation in a Christmas parade because it is no longer a Christmas parade and is being attacked over his decision.  That he is not being allowed to object and not participate without being attacked for his decision is remarkable.  Does calling the parade a Christmas parade imply government preference and endorsement to Christianity over another religion or is it merely honoring tradition and heritage ?  I go with the latter and proffer that those offended have no tolerance or understanding of tradition or heritage or longstanding legacies.

 winter wrote: 
So a railroad xing is actually an abbreviation of railroad christing? Who knew? It's xmas everyday then! Huzzah!