Athiests: Why not agnostic?

The point is that Christmas actually isn't a fundamentally Christian holiday since it is an usurpation by the early church of Pagan holidays to increase popularity of Christmas. Christmas is far more a cultural holiday than it is a religious holiday going back to its founding.

It is because it explains why most schools have their longest break, other than Summer, at that time. It is not just solely for Christmas but because Christmas is so close to secular New Years.

So in other words you are acknowledging that Christmas is very popular because of secular considerations.

 

I don't have time for a proper response right now. Fairness can be derived by giving everyone equal time for their "allowances" or not affording time for any allowance. You want your interest to be a privileged class. That's not gonna happen. It's not unConstitutional as this has already been debated heavily at the courts over a long long time.

You are well within your rights to pray. You can even pray at work, not sure what the consequences are, but you can. Group prayer on government grounds is a different thing.

 

Like I said, whatever floats your boat.

I couldn't care less what you or anyone else believes. That is between you and God. This discussion is about restricting people's first amendment rights. Which is what happens when a school (for example) prohibits students from religious expression.

 

The significance is not in the date. They can pick any date, it really doesn't matter. The significance is in the celebration of the birth of our Lord and Savior, and what it represents. To a Christian it represents a celebration of victory against death, and hope for life. To a non-Christian it is meaningless.

A non-Christian will focus only on the date. A Christian will see the deeper meaning behind it and recognize its significance. The fact that people who don't recognize the significance of the holiday to Christians are willing to dismiss it is disturbing, I think.

Oh, please. It's the "winter break" solely due to political correctness and school districts' fear of lawsuits by people like the posters in this thread. Until recent history it has always been understood to be the "Christmas break".

I am saying that there are certainly commercial aspects. It's a day to give presents and there is more money to be made on it than there is with Easter. It is still a religious holiday with significance beyond giving and receiving presents. But a non-Christian probably doesn't care about the non-secular aspects.

 

The date is significant, which is precisely why the early Christians co-opted the holiday. It was a lot easier, and smarter, to simply co-opt a pagan celebration (that had been going on for hundreds of years, mind you) than to try to create a whole new celebration season.

The arrogance of some Christians is really quite impressive. Jesus is not the reason for the season. Paganism is. And now, back to my ignore list you go.

 

Nonsense. The line is pretty clear. The examples you posted are examples of schools that did stupid things and had to pay the cost of lawsuits, so the idea that banning things for that purpose doesn't really cold.

They also have one other thing in common: they are anecdotal. They are random people doing random things. Schools have always had local leadership and local people do dumb things sometimes. The only difference is that now that you have the internet, you can now hear about an incident in Podunk, Kansas, whereas you'd just have never heard about it 20 years ago.

But that's my point - the state isn't restricting it. Some random local administrator is doing it. In fact, the state (in the form of courts) consistently defends it.

 

The problem is that the vast majority of people who want the Christian symbols on display don't want the other ones there when it really comes down to it - hell, some of them don't even want people to build a Mosque on private property because Muslims are evil terrorists. So while you rail on liberals destroying the imaginary world you want, the reality is that world never existed to destroy - secular liberals oppose an environment where Christianity is given clear and direct preference. If you tried to actually enact your version of religious freedom where Satanists and Muslims and Christians all are treated equally on government property, I suspect you'd get more liberal support than conservative.

 

As a freaky Jesus follower, I really don't want any correlation between the Cross and the flag. I don't want any confusion about the history of the United States and Jesus. I'm not interested in the perpetuation of Christendom, and wish it would die a quick death, frankly. Christianity is, from my perspective, a faith perspective from the margins...not from a position of dominance. When your object of faith is a king who washed the feet of his own disciples, it's difficult to square that with political power. Political power is the world's way of resolving issues....not Jesus'.

 

My thesis advisor in grad school is an orthodox Jew who lives in Jerusalem, but grew up in St. Louis (he often teased me for being an Astros fan). But once in his office we got off topic, talking about religion and he complained that living in a state where his religion was the state religion made his own religious practice feel less sacred, and far more banal, like a civic duty not unlike jury duty. He said he missed the tiny community in St. Louis he was from and said he felt a lot more reliigous when he lived there.

 

I've gotta spread rep around before giving it to you again.

I love it. I agree entirely.


EDIT: wait..one more thought. I don't want anyone to feel marginalized because they're a believer in Christ. That's what kills me about the Ten Commandments monuments in courthouses. The idea that Hindu guy could walk into a courthouse and feel like the system and the God of the Bible are so intertwined that there's no way he could get a fair shake makes me sick to my stomach. I hate that idea. The idea that it could be viewed that way...that they'd be seen as an outsider BECAUSE OF THE GOSPEL goes against everything the Gospel is to begin with.

My business partner had a little cross hanging from his rearview mirror. A while back he "adopted" a Bosnian family that was Muslim and was escaping persecution there. The family got into his car as he took them for dinner one night and the little girl got nervous seeing the cross. Yeah, that should never effing happen. My business partner took the cross down and smiled to the little girl and told her she about how good the food was where he was taking them. To me, that's where his faith is...in the smile and the gesture to bring her peace...the very concepts the cross should symbolize out of humility, love and respect.

 

I totally agree, well stated.

 

So taking over Saturnalia had nothing to do it? Right...

Yet Christians where willing to change the birth date of the primary figure of Christianity to coopt a popular Pagan religion. Basically make a big marketing job.

Yet we combine the vacation time with that and New Years. Once again though if the religious significance was so great why don't we celebrate Easter? Christmas is big because it comes within a week of New Years and has been heavily commercialized in our culture.

Is there any reason a Non-Christian should? Consider that Christians clearly thought Saturnalia was important enough to coopt it so why shouldn't non-Christians downplay the religious aspects of Christianity and consider it a primarily cultural holiday. In fact considering that most Christians put up things like Christmas trees, Yule logs, images of a jolly fat man in a red suit with reindeer (all symbols with Pagan origins) they are already emphasizing the non-Christian aspect of the holiday.

Anyway no one is stopping Christians from celebrating Christmas. Just because you can't display a Nativity scene in front of City Hall isn't preventing you from celebrating Christmas. Let me know when the government bans displays of Nativity scenes on private property and then you have an argument.

 

It was a nice gesture on your friend's part but I kind of find it sad that in America now things like that happen. In Minnesota we have a lot of Somali cab drivers and I've been in cabs where they have Qu'ran verses in Arabic displayed. It's never bothered me but there have been complaints. Granted the girl in your story came from Bosnia where not that long ago they fought a religious war.

Now there are some symbols and images that are completely intolerable not just on public property but also private property and I would never ride in a cab, patronize a business, or even visit a private home that displayed these:

Spoiler

 

A very minor point which doesn't really change the point you're making overall. But the change wasn't just for marketing. Christians were often persecuted, and made illegal by governments at the time. So it was in part to escape arrest, and persecution that they melded their celebration with the pagan celebration time of the year.

 

Sorry, I never said it didn't. Do you think that's a relevant motivation at this point? Me neither.

So? Do you want to change it back? I'm not actually sure Jesus' true birthdate is known for sure. As far as I know the actual date has never been fully agreed upon. Gotta pick something.

Convenience. It's still generally thought of as the Christmas holiday break. How can you honestly dispute that?

Er, again, we *do* celebrate it. And again, it always falls on a Sunday. So until we start holding classes on Sunday public schools are not going to celebrate it.

That is one aspect of it. Why are you denying the religious aspect of it? It is really hard to have an honest debate with someone who doesn't acknowledge that Christmas is a religious holiday, you know. It's quite disingenuous of you, really.

No, not really. As I said you guys probably ought to be working on Christmas.

You can downplay it all you want. I don't subscribe to Ramadan, but does that mean it is not a religiously-oriented period? Good grief, man. Your argument seems to be that because you are not religious you can completely discard all religious aspects of a clearly religious holiday and classify it as a non-religious holiday. OK.

And they also generally go to church on Dec 25, as well. Even if it's not on Sunday.

You still haven't explained fully why a nativity can't be displayed on public property? You still haven't explained how such a scene constitutes creation of a law regarding the establishment of a religion. Until I hear a good explanation for that you still have no argument.

And this questioning whether Christmas is a Christian holiday is frankly r****ded. Really, it's just dumb.

 

And I would not necessarily disagree with you on that. It is what it is.

 

And yet schools still do these things every day.

In at least some cases that is probably true, but in other cases they are following policy guidelines that leave them little other choice.

As someone who has worked in government for awhile I will say that common sense is very often not allowed to enter the decision-making process. Policies must be followed no matter how stupid they are. I believe that there is alot of that going on in public school systems today. Another reason why my kids goes to private school.

 

The girl was like 6 years old, so that probably changes your view. She saw it as a symbol of the oppression that had colored her life.

 

Yes, and we should also make allowances for Muslims to pray 5 times a day. So for instance, every light should turn red at 5pm for 2 minutes so that Muslims can get out of their car and face Mecca and pray. This is only 2 minutes, why does it matter if it forces everyone else to put their lives on pause for JUST 2 Minutes! This is your logic.

You already produced it here. I mean you are interpreting the constitution differently than THE SUPREME COURT. I think the onus is on your to explain why the constitution differs from the current interpretation of the highest court in the land.

I am rarely offended in these forums, and this is a time I am offended. It's absolutely arrogant and hubris of you to tell me the reason I don't want religion in the public domain is because I find it disgusting. That is a big lie - and I am surprised that someone who self-describes themselves as a Christian would jump to such a conclusion. There are many many Christians I deeply respect - who have earned my respect and I theirs. Where is your humility in judgment man? Isn't that one of the key tenets of your religion?

It is a absolutely lie that you would paint me as someone disgusted with religious displays. This is simply not true and I would hope you are adult enough to apologize for such a baseless attack.

That is true in the PRIVATE domain. But a child should not be made to feel pressure to adopt a religion in the class or feel like they are different if they do not conform. The school should not be giving privileges to any religion. A school is not a place of worship - it is a place of learning. If a child goes to learn, and has to stop and wait for others to pray, that is not right. A kid can pray during recess or lunch. They should take THEIR time to pray, not EVERYONE ELSES time.

Why do you keep putting words in my mouth?

Where did I say I was afraid. I actually don't mind looking at churches. The really nice ones in the city. I think St Patricks Cathedral is absolutely beautiful. I think pray is a scared and amazing thing for people to do. I myself meditate at times and can understand why people pray. It does not disgust me at all - this is the lie you've created to justify your world point of view and plug people into it. "Sweet Lou doesn't agree with me therefore he must be one of "those" rabid atheists who is "disgusted" with religion." That is a false narrative you are creating - it is not reality.

You are not using my words.

Are you serious? You think that it is unjust to make a ramp for a legless man to get into the library if it doesn't include the ability for that library to hang a cross?

Why stop at 2 minutes? Why not 5? or 10?

My right not to have my time or tax dollars wasted? I pay for the maintenance of that public ground - it should be used for events that are inclusive of everyone. Not to advance one religion's agenda.

Oh I believe in it very much - and know that the reason the founding fathers wrote it the way they did was because they were all too familiar with religious persecution. And for many of them, not being able to hang a cross in a courtroom was the whole point of coming to America - to escape being persecuted for who they were.