Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by khalling 11 years ago
    Although I do agree that public schools should not put on religious Christmas plays, I do think its ridiculous that policies go overboard to pretend certain times of the year have cultural significance rooted in religion don 't exist. Its not that big of a deal. When my kids were little their school was pressured by some fundamentalist Christian parents to not acknowledge Halloween. Most of the kids were upset and or confused by it. I suppose if your beliefs are such that they forbid certain celebrating ok an alternative should be provided. But most kids are not going to be harmed by hearing a carol or dressing up in a costume. As far as the state capitol and displays go I find complaints to be petty. Most likely the displays reflect the majority of the tax payers in that community and its been represented that way for years establishing a tradion. An aetheist ignores it. It has no intrinsic value to him and so making a big stink about it is more about the agenda of the protestor than the unreasonableness of the practice on public property. There are many options/alternatives for people to express their beliefs, or not-why raise a huge stink? Because of an agenda. You never hear these activists pipe up over other religious holidays. It's most often Christian holidays. It 's a large part of our culture. One can acknowledge that without freaking that it 's taking over the courthouse or the schools. Its just celebrating.






    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by TruthFreedom1 11 years ago
      We all have our own beliefs and our countries are becoming more and more diverse all the time. If someone wishes to espouse their beliefs at a particular time of year then let them. If some one wishes you Happy Chanukah, Merry Christmas, or whatever and you are not a member of that faith, then accept the well wishes in the manner in witch they were intended and say Thank You, You as well. What a happier place this world would be. I agree that governments supposedly represent a cross section of all cultural and religious faiths and should not display preference, but remain neutral. That includes schools which are government funded. Celebrate your holidays, enjoy your family and friends but religion and state must remain separate.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 11 years ago
        I guess my point is, of all the problems we're facing as a nation, THIS is the one to focus on? Really? NSA spying, out of control debt, bad economy, people losing their health insurance and forced to buy insurance they don't want...if I were the current President, yea, I'd want everyone to focus on this
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
    I wonder how well the base would survive if the community supporting it would band together and refuse service to anyone stationed on the base?

    How would the taxpayers like to pay for having to ship supplies like food and condoms from places farther away?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
    Ah, more of the attack on Christianity.

    Let's analyze the analysis, shall we?

    "Government facilities don’t have the right to display religious symbols at taxpayer expense."

    Government facilities don't have rights; only individuals have rights. Government facilities have powers and obligations.
    The Constitution does not forbid any religious expression, even on public property, it forbids the creation of a national church (as the left is doing with the Green religion). It otherwise protects the exercise of religion from governmental interference. It does not specify locations. Question: should the decent citizens of the community hosting the military facility, and the decent members of the military, fund a creche out of their own pocket, would the objection still exist, as taxpayers were no longer funding it?

    "The courts have been clear about this. If the base wanted to display a crèche, it should have included symbols of other faiths and non-religious symbols as well."

    Why? It shouldn't have "included" symbols of other faiths in a nativity scene, as the one has nothing to do with the other. As for providing symbols of other faiths on base, certainly. I would have no objection, for example, of the display of a faux Jew's head spitted on a bloody pike during Ramadan, on a military base, for example.
    More sincerely, there would be nothing wrong with a Menorah displayed during Channukah.

    Does the base ever put up a poster for a rock concert or other event during the year? Does the base ever have any displays for Independence Day... at taxpayer expense? Then it's hypocrisy to demand that it reverse the 1st Amendment to protect PRICKS from exposure to the dominant religion of the U.S.

    "* The Freedom From Religion Foundation “intimidated the state of Washington into banning all holiday decorations from the Capitol building”: "

    Thank you. This was a direct attack on Christianity and Christmas by PRICKS. That it was resolved at detriment to traditional American culture and society does not preclude it being an attack on Christmas. The anti-religious display could have been put up any time of year, or all year, but it wasn't Ramadan or Passover that were targeted, but Christianity. I repeat: the exercise of religion is protected, not the feelings of intolerant PRICKS.

    "* The FFRF “bullied an Oklahoma school into banning all religious-themed Christmas songs from its ‘December Play’”:"

    Funny how a search of the Oklahoman's archives didn't even pick up one article about this incident.

    I *did* come across a story from 2001 where some PRICK had put up an advertisement for an adult bookstore directly across from the New Life Christian Academy (which vandals tore down, and there was much rejoicing)
    http://newsok.com/adult-message-stripped...

    Oh, and a story of a socialist discipline policy in the Sulphur elementary school, from 2001, where they were punishing children based upon popular "vote".
    http://newsok.com/discipline-policy-stir...

    "* “Attempts to ban Christmas observances have occurred in schools in Bulloch County, Georgia, and Frisco, Texas.”: The Bulloch County story was debunked a few days ago. It was a typical attempt by Fox News to slime a public school. The Frisco situation involved an email that was forwarded to a number of parents claiming that the school had banned the word “Christmas” and the colors red and green. The email had no connection to the school, and officials quickly issued a statement noting that the district has no such policies in place."

    Was the email issued or not? So long as it was, it constitutes an attack on Christmas.

    (As soon as the article attacked Fox News, it lost all credibility).

    And then he concedes that the attack on Christmas and Christianity is working:

    "On Tuesday, my colleague Simon Brown wrote about a new poll showing that more and more Americans are celebrating Christmas as a secular holiday."

    Typical of modern, hypocritical, entitlement pigs, they won't give up the fun and goodies associated with the holiday, just the purpose of the holiday.

    I love the irony involved; Christianity is attacked as somehow being oppressive because it is practiced by such a vast majority of Americans (because the country was created by and largely populated by Christians and Christian immigrants... crime of crimes!), and then the attack on Christianity is further justified on the basis that Christian observances appear to be on the wane, after a century long unrelenting attack.

    "Of course, they still insist that they have the right to hijack the power of government and shove this festering theological fruit cake down everyone else’s throat."

    Such a hateful comment directed at Jews or even Moslems would be roundly condemned by the same people who applaud this article, as no doubt my Jewish head on a pike sarcasm above will be.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ 11 years ago
      "Was the email issued or not? So long as it was, it constitutes an attack on Christmas."
      ---
      According to the article, the email was not issued by the school, but rather was propagated by some unknown source in an attempt to stir up anger over a non-existent policy. In other words, it was a hoax designed to rouse people's anger, and therefore was an attack on secularists, not on Christians or Christmas.

      And if government is going to be displaying religious symbols in its buildings or on its property, then it needs to allow all religions, and atheism as well. It's an all or nothing sort of deal.

      That story about the children voting to determine which children have been misbehaving does certainly seem like an extremely bad policy, though I don't see how it has anything to do with Socialism.

      And what kind of attacks on Christian observances were occurring in 1913?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
        Oh really?

        Did you read the school's statement?
        That statement ITSELF was an attack on Christmas...
        http://www.friscoisd.org/news/2013/12/05...

        "Individuals are free to call the winter holiday party whatever they want - holiday party, winter party, Christmas party, etc. However, the District will not label the winter holiday parties as “Christmas” parties. "

        For one example.

        There is no "winter holiday"!

        "And what kind of attacks on Christian observances were occurring in 1913? "
        I didn't say "Christian observances".
        About a century ago is when Holmes took his axe to the 1st Amendment, one of the earliest, albeit indirect attacks on Christianity.


        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ 11 years ago
          You didn't say "Christian observances"?
          ---
          Hiraghm: "[...] and then the attack on Christianity is further justified on the basis that Christian observances appear to be on the wane, after a century long unrelenting attack."
          ---
          Yeah, looks like you actually did say it.

          And from reading the link you provided, it appears as though the school district was just trying to maintain the separation of church and state, which is totally justified.

          I assume the Holmes you're talking about is Oliver Wendell Holmes? What did he do to undermine the First Amendment?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
            No, it's not justified, as there is no separation of church and state. The "wall of separation" which Jefferson talked about was to protect the religious from the government, not vice versa.

            Holmes is the jackass who came up with exceptions to the 1st amendment; his "fire in a crowded theater" nonsense.

            Those evil Christians, going around making people look at nativities...
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VxdyaCun...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo