|
Post by SCarpelan on Dec 2, 2011 20:31:26 GMT -5
I don't typically do anything for halloween, personally. Also, I guess I have trouble understanding how jolly old Saint Nick isn't in any way christian related... Or how 'Holidays' in general (being derived from Holy Day) aren't in any way religious (of any denomination) either. Because Jolly Old Saint Nick is just as frequently called Kris Kringle, a jolly old elf, or Father Christmas (depending on where you are in the world) as he is Saint Nick. His origins are traceable to a Christian saint, yes, but the whole "Lives at the north pole with an army of worker elves and flying reindeer and visits all the children in the world on Christmas Eve using magic" thing has about as much to do with Jesus birthday as the price of tea in China. To further demonstrate your point: in Sweden Santa is called simply Julgubbe (Yule Old Man) and in Finland Joulupukki (Yule Goat). The Finnish name comes from a pagan boogey man. Not all that Christian roots in these cases.
|
|
|
Post by Tenfold_Maquette on Dec 2, 2011 21:27:06 GMT -5
Personally I have little problem with a cross as a memorial to fallen soldiers. Nor would I have a problem with a Star of David, or a Crescent Moon serving the same purpose. In the end the memorial is about honoring the fallen. The separation of church and state does not mean that religions should be treated as if non-existent. I have no problem with a cross being used as a war memorial for the Christian dead. I find the logic suspicious (at best) to say it's appropriate to honor the dead of every other religion, agnostics, and atheists, with the symbol of any given faith. Posting a symbol clearly associated with a singular faith as a memorial to ALL is, in a literal sense, claiming the dead for whichever group posts the symbol. I can't figure out how a symbol of Christ's sacrifice on the cross, of the redemption and salvation of mankind, of the fate of the faithful post mortum, is in any way appropriate for anyone who isn't Christian.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 2, 2011 21:40:04 GMT -5
Personally I have little problem with a cross as a memorial to fallen soldiers. Nor would I have a problem with a Star of David, or a Crescent Moon serving the same purpose. In the end the memorial is about honoring the fallen. The separation of church and state does not mean that religions should be treated as if non-existent. I have no problem with a cross being used as a war memorial for the Christian dead. I find the logic suspicious (at best) to say it's appropriate to honor the dead of every other religion, agnostics, and atheists, with the symbol of any given faith. Posting a symbol clearly associated with a singular faith as a memorial to ALL is, in a literal sense, claiming the dead for whichever group posts the symbol. I can't figure out how a symbol of Christ's sacrifice on the cross, of the redemption and salvation of mankind, of the fate of the faithful post mortum, is in any way appropriate for anyone who isn't Christian. And this is why some people have a problem with a Christian symbol, albeit a secularized Christian symbol, being used by a public official on public land. Just because some people sit down and take it doesn't mean that it's right, by the way. I'd have a problem with Yule being celebrated, too, because that's religious, too, albeit the original pagan version of Christmas. However, despite it being a secularized Christian symbol (albeit one that violates the "Good Book" itself... but then, that's nothing new for Christianity, so using that argument is a bit flawed), it's also a secularized Christian symbol, one I don't necessarily mind celebrating. So, after some thought, here's my opinion on the matter. Let the people celebrate what holidays they want, from whatever religious aspect or non-religious aspect, but the government can and should be completely neutral on this, and passing it off as a holiday tree is just lame. It's fine for the secular people to celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, or even Kwanzaa (which isn't necessarily religious but a cultural thing) if they so choose, but it's not fine for the government to do so in any specific capacity, unless they acknowledge ALL holidays equally. In other words, they can have a Christmas/"Holiday" tree up... as long as they have a Menorah/"Holiday" candelabra up and whatever candelabra Kwanzaa uses because I am uneducated about Kwanzaa and etc.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Dec 2, 2011 23:12:55 GMT -5
I don't believe you. I want to, but I don't. Partly because nothing you've posted in this thread looked like you were saying, "Well, this is what I think personally." Also partly because nothing you've posted in this thread hasn't turned out to mean the exact opposite whenever it was convenient.
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Dec 3, 2011 0:10:52 GMT -5
I say just create a conglomerate of holidays in one massive decoration. A menorah on top of a Christmas tree, for example. I've long tried to talk Mum into a black tree with pumpkin lights and maybe fake spiderwebs instead of tinsel, but she don't wanna listen. I'd like to have a yard decoration of Jack Skellington and his coffin sled.
|
|
|
Post by DarkfireTaimatsu on Dec 3, 2011 0:56:49 GMT -5
I've long tried to talk Mum into a black tree with pumpkin lights and maybe fake spiderwebs instead of tinsel, but she don't wanna listen. I'd like to have a yard decoration of Jack Skellington and his coffin sled. I also keep intending to make that tentacled wreath, which is the best character, but I keep not having ping-pong balls around. As for Tai, Tai quite obviously celebrates Halloween (in fact, it's the one day a year I take off from work). I have no problems with this as an atheist, because the holiday never had any religious connotation to me in the first place. It's a lovely day of creepy things and legal extortion. ^-^ Tai also celebrates Decemberween. It's basically Christmas without any of the religious parts. But Decemberween is not about getting people presents. It's about getting people good presents, GOOD presents! Not this last-minute discount crap you're trying to foist on us!
|
|
Kali
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by Kali on Dec 3, 2011 8:22:42 GMT -5
A lot of businesses decorate for the holidays, though. While holiday might be a generic term, "holidays" has come to mean December, at least in my area. Maybe government-run businesses shouldn't decorate at all, but I don't see the harm in putting up lights and a tree. Maybe an inter-religion display with a tree, a menorah, etc., would be better, though.
|
|
|
Post by Tenfold_Maquette on Dec 3, 2011 10:33:47 GMT -5
A lot of businesses decorate for the holidays, though. While holiday might be a generic term, "holidays" has come to mean December, at least in my area. Maybe government-run businesses shouldn't decorate at all, but I don't see the harm in putting up lights and a tree. Maybe an inter-religion display with a tree, a menorah, etc., would be better, though. If it's a private establishment, they can put up whatever they want. That's their right. Anything publicly run, or taking place in public space, can't give preference to anything associated with a religion. A lot of the more "secular" bits of Christmas - Santa Clause, the reindeer, snowmen, candy canes, etc - typically get a pass because it's such a wide-spread holiday, so there is still that I guess. Why not just decorate with a "winter" theme? Holly and pine decorations, liberally buckshot with as much silver/white glitter as we can stick to it...that sorta thing. I dunno. XD
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Dec 3, 2011 11:21:40 GMT -5
If it's a private establishment, they can put up whatever they want. That's their right. Anything publicly run, or taking place in public space, can't give preference to anything associated with a religion. Preference is the key word there. That does not mean you can't have any religious reference at all.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Dec 3, 2011 11:33:15 GMT -5
If it's a private establishment, they can put up whatever they want. That's their right. Anything publicly run, or taking place in public space, can't give preference to anything associated with a religion. Preference is the key word there. That does not mean you can't have any religious reference at all. And no municipality in their right mind would try to use this defense because this is the result. Once one religion is given space, if any other religious organization wants space it has to be provided or the municipality has to remove all religious references.
|
|
|
Post by gyeonghwa on Dec 4, 2011 16:15:26 GMT -5
From facebook:
facepalm
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Dec 5, 2011 3:30:29 GMT -5
Because I don't merely wish to personally call it a Christmas tree; I think it's a bad idea to call it a holiday tree. By calling it a holiday tree, you obscure the true origins of the Christmas holiday, essentially telling the Christians they're right ("Yes, Christmas is only a Christian holiday with purely Christian roots, which is why we have to find a different word."). It validates the falsehood that "Jesus is *the* reason for the season" when really he is *a* reason for the season. Rather than shirk away from the Christmas label, I would rather that non-believers embrace it and use the opportunity to educate people on the true history of Christmas.
People get too worked up over the fact that the word "Christmas" has the word Christ in it. But Christians are perfectly capable of celebrating "Easter," another Christian holiday with pagan roots (although this time the pagan name just happened to stick, deriving from the Germanic fertility goddess "Eostre") despite the etymological root of its name. Lots of other words in our language have religious roots (like the days of the week or some months of the year) but we are perfectly capable of seeing them in a non-religious light. The etymological roots of "Christmas" are fully reflective of only the word, but only partially reflective of the holiday itself.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Dec 5, 2011 3:34:09 GMT -5
"Easter" is the Christian name for that holiday as well, for Jesus came from the east. To see how this is the Christian name, if you start from anywhere on Earth and then travel east, you will eventually reach Jesus's birthplace! This only works going east. If you travel west you will reach California and be eaten by savage liberals.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Dec 5, 2011 11:24:59 GMT -5
Because I don't merely wish to personally call it a Christmas tree; I think it's a bad idea to call it a holiday tree. By calling it a holiday tree, you obscure the true origins of the Christmas holiday, essentially telling the Christians they're right ("Yes, Christmas is only a Christian holiday with purely Christian roots, which is why we have to find a different word."). It validates the falsehood that "Jesus is *the* reason for the season" when really he is *a* reason for the season. Rather than shirk away from the Christmas label, I would rather that non-believers embrace it and use the opportunity to educate people on the true history of Christmas. People get too worked up over the fact that the word "Christmas" has the word Christ in it. But Christians are perfectly capable of celebrating "Easter," another Christian holiday with pagan roots (although this time the pagan name just happened to stick, deriving from the Germanic fertility goddess "Eostre") despite the etymological root of its name. Lots of other words in our language have religious roots (like the days of the week or some months of the year) but we are perfectly capable of seeing them in a non-religious light. The etymological roots of "Christmas" are fully reflective of only the word, but only partially reflective of the holiday itself. That didn't address anything I said, it doesn't have fucking shit to do with your stance, it is with how you are defending it. It's how you cry foul when people attack you because you're expressing your opinion, as if that means your idea is immune from criticism (while you criticize their opinions). All those words you wrote there, they are irrelevant because you're not actually refuting what I said. Let's try it the other way, 'I don't see why you're so upset, I'm just posting my opinion that "Christmas" is inherently religious in nature." A statement like this doesn't further a debate, it just shuts it down, just like when you said, "Yes, I have a bias towards calling it a Christmas tree. But I'm not writing a newspaper article about it, I'm posting my opinion on an Internet forum." Statements like this kill a discussion instead of furthering it. It's obfuscating bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Dec 5, 2011 11:30:08 GMT -5
I thought I posted in here but it seems I didn't.
I forgot what I was going to say other than I hate when government buildings decorate for Christmas.
|
|