|
|
Post by caseagainstfaith on Nov 30, 2011 11:43:56 GMT -5
source - www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/69400.htmlTo stay on topic I think singling out a recognizable icon of xmas and changing it to holiday is going a bit extreme. I understand the whole saying Happy Holidays vs Merry Xmas to include everyone but to single out a specific thing and call it "holiday" whatever just seems like you were looking to piss someone off vs trying to "politically correct". |
|
|
|
Post by Yaezakura on Nov 30, 2011 12:02:38 GMT -5
Except that Christmas Trees didn't originate with Christmas, but were standards of other celebrations and festivals that Christmas assimilated. If anything, referring to it as a Christmas Tree is disrespectful of the tradition's origins.
Of course, the entire concept of Christmas is disrespectful to the origins of the celebration, but natch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Nov 30, 2011 12:24:15 GMT -5
"I'm offended at this change, but I just KNOW that no one ever minded it being called a Christmas Tree."
I like that part.
You know what I'd call it? A tree.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Nov 30, 2011 12:28:41 GMT -5
"I'm offended at this change, but I just KNOW that no one ever minded it being called a Christmas Tree." I like that part. You know what I'd call it? A tree. A conifer is better. Gymnosperm also works, but then you could have ginko in your home in December instead. Or Ephedra, because everyone loves meth. |
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Nov 30, 2011 13:09:44 GMT -5
It's called a Christmas tree. The holiday is called "Christmas," not "Holiday." There is no such holiday called Holiday, ergo there is no such thing as a "Holiday Tree."
I don't understand why people can't get it through their heads that Christmas has both a secular and religious tradition. The secular tradition actually pre-dates the religious Christian tradition, deriving from now-defunct pagan practices regarding the winter solstice. Just because there are some people who choose not to celebrate either Christmas tradition (just like there are some people who don't do anything to celebrate the 4th of July) does not mean we have to pretend the holiday doesn't exist.
Christmas is both a United States federal holiday and Rhode Island state holiday. So long as both governments stick to the secular tradition, there is no need to pretend that Christmas doesn't exist.
(I am a Rhode Islander and while I am glad we have a liberal governor, he can be awfully goofy at times. If I were him I would be much more careful about drawing negative attention to myself, considering he only won with 36% of the vote.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Yaezakura on Nov 30, 2011 13:18:46 GMT -5
Except before Christmas existed, it was a Yule Tree, or a Solstice Tree, or any other number of names that have nothing to do with the intentionally deceiving nature of the Christmas "holiday" that celebrates an event that happened in the summer (assuming it happened at all).
If people want to butt heads over the name, they should at least know where the fucking names come from. Christmas trees are both relatively modern, and were originally considered sacrilegious because their use wasn't Christian in origin.
|
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Nov 30, 2011 13:23:24 GMT -5
Regardless, in common parlance they are called "Christmas trees." They are a secular icon of the non-religious aspect of the Christmas celebration.
Calling it a "Holiday Tree" means that you think Christmas can only be celebrated by Christians and that it is purely religious in nature. Also, it artificially makes a symbol that is only associated with Christmas somehow applicable to other, non-existant (or at least non-observed) "winter holidays."
And again, the legal holiday is called Christmas Day.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickiknack on Nov 30, 2011 13:27:17 GMT -5
Has anyone ever noticed that the idiots that get their panties in a twist over this shit are same the assholes who act insane over a some stupid toy or whatever on Black Friday, and are the ones cheering at the fact that people die because of a lack of decent healthcare?? You know what, grow the fuck up over this shit, I don't care what the damn tree is called, there's bigger problems in the world than this tripe.
|
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Nov 30, 2011 13:28:56 GMT -5
I agree: either way is not the end of the world. However, it was previously called a Christmas tree so therefore it is Governor Chafee and the pro-"Holiday" side that is bringing the issue up.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Nov 30, 2011 13:42:30 GMT -5
And, as Yae pointed out, it was called a Yule Tree or a Solstice Tree. It's had a lot of names before this and will have a lot of names after Christianity dies out. Its how words work.
Ironbite-I for one don't care and I can't wrap my mind around why other people care either.
|
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Nov 30, 2011 13:46:16 GMT -5
Right, and in common parlance, it is called a "Christmas tree." The English language, unlike other languages like French or Spanish, does not have a deliberative body that authoritatively fixes the meaning of words. What is considered correct usage is based on common parlance, which I would say still leans heavily towards "Christmas tree."
In any event, the legal holiday is still called Christmas; there is no other holiday that puts up decorated tress; so it is absurd to think that a Christmas tree would be associated with anything broader than the secular Christmas celebration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tenfold_Maquette on Nov 30, 2011 14:42:21 GMT -5
In any event, the legal holiday is still called Christmas; there is no other holiday that puts up decorated tress; so it is absurd to think that a Christmas tree would be associated with anything broader than the secular Christmas celebration. As far as I know, "secular" is not a synonym for "widespread". I find it funny that people (not you, specifically) claim that we should call it a Christmas tree because no other common holiday of that season uses a tree as its decoration, then turn around and claim that the tree is secular because it's supposed to represent a holiday that isn't exclusively to one religion or another. Christmas (in its modern incarnation) is a Christian holiday - just because something like 70% of the USA identifies as Christian does not make the tree a secular symbol via commonality. And if people want to co-opt the tree as a universal symbol of the winter holiday, then you can't go and "but but but" over whether or not it's a Christmas tree. It is (representing the Christian faith) or it isn't (it's a universal "holiday" symbol); it cannot be both. |
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Nov 30, 2011 14:51:14 GMT -5
It is (representing the Christian faith) or it isn't (it's a universal "holiday" symbol); it cannot be both. Who says it can't be both? Symbols can easily mean different things to different people. |
|
|
|
Post by Tenfold_Maquette on Nov 30, 2011 14:53:40 GMT -5
Who says it can't be both? Symbols can easily mean different things to different people. I would presume because it's impossible for something to be representative of religion and not representative of religion at the same time? They're kinda mutually contradictory terms, if memory serves. |
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Nov 30, 2011 15:06:43 GMT -5
Who says it can't be both? Symbols can easily mean different things to different people. I would presume because it's impossible for something to be representative of religion and not representative of religion at the same time? They're kinda mutually contradictory terms, if memory serves. It depends on who put it up and who is looking at it. For me they represent the holiday which is about giving gifts and children waiting for Santa. For someone else they could represent the holiday celibrating the birth of Christ. |
|
