# Bill O'Reilly again... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 12, 2004, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416 "2004-12-12T05:45:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/41 "2004-12-12T07:14:03Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > And it was an insult to all Jews. Well, my wife has some Jewish people in her family that I am going to see tomorrow and I can run it by them. I don’t think they are going to take it the same way as you so you might want to hold on to a “few”, “several”, “a couple”, “1 or 2”, or “many” Jews in case that “all Jews” isn’t quite the most accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/42 "2004-12-12T07:16:14Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > Is giving someone a candy cane “proselytizing”? Is witnessing people exchange colorfully-wrapped boxes with candy or games (or sweaters) inside “proselytizing”? Come on. In a public school, yes. > [@](#): > > People do Christmasy stuff because they enjoy it. They aren’t trying to “convert” other people. That’s fine. They just need to keep it out of public institutions. > [@](#): > > They just like singing the carols, and dressing up in red and green, and giving each other gifts. Now, if this person said that they felt _left out_ that is one thing, but he said he felt like they were trying to “convert,” or that such activities are “setting up” kids to be converted. But converted to what? The fact that Christmas is fun? Well, hell, a lot of atheists are _converted_ to that notion, aren’t they? Not “left out” (why on earth would he feel left out?) but pressured to participate in a religious tradition other than his own. > [@](#): > > That may be technically true, but do you seriously think that it is “converting” kids to Christianity? Not successfully but I think it’s an endoresement of religion in public schools and I think it’s _offensive_. > [@](#): > > Do the atheist kids who enjoy a secular Christmas feel “left out” Nobody’s claiming to feel “left out.” You need to drop that. > [@](#): > > or worse yet, “converted”? Not converted, but definitely disrespected and often times proselytized. No, because they are exchanging gifts too. Do you seriously think that the atheist parents mind if their kids exchange gifts, [/quote] **I** mind if it’s done in my child’s school. > [@](#): > > if indeed the family celebrates Christmas? Do you seriously believe that atheist parents worry that exchanging gifts is going to “convert” their kids? I worry about it. My child has been given overtly Christian gifts and books at Christmas. As it happens, my wife wants to raise our daughter in the Catholic Church but I’m still not comfortable with people handing my kid their religious crap without asking my permission. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/43 "2004-12-12T07:20:49Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > Well, my wife has some Jewish people in her family that I am going to see tomorrow and I can run it by them. I don’t think they are going to take it the same way as you so you might want to hold on to a “few”, “several”, “a couple”, “1 or 2”, or “many” Jews in case that “all Jews” isn’t quite the most accurate. And what if they tell you that they _are_ offended by it (as I’m sure you’ll give them a completely objective and uncolored description of the exchange)? Will you consider that you might be wrong? The [Anti-Defamation League](http://www.adl.org/media_watch/radio/radiofactor_120804.htm) isn’t too happy about, btw. So there are at least some Jews who feel like it was an insult. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/44 "2004-12-12T07:22:11Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > In a public school, yes. It may be inappropriate, but it is a _conversion attempt?_ That is the question. > [@](#): > > Not “left out” (why on earth would he feel left out?) but pressured to participate in a religious tradition other than his own. Watching people participate in something that you do not believe in can make you feel left out. It is a complaint I have sometimes heard against Christmas in schools. > [@](#): > > Not successfully but I think it’s an endoresement of religion in public schools and I think it’s _offensive_. But is it an attempt to “convert”? That is my only question. That is what the caller was claiming. > [@](#): > > Not converted, Okay you answered the question. Not converted. But the caller thinks that this is a risk. The caller is a loon. > [@](#): > > but definitely disrespected and often times proselytized. Perhaps, but the caller didn’t bring that up, the caller talked about it being about _conversion_. > [@](#): > > **I** mind if it’s done in my child’s school. Do you worry that it will “convert” your kid? > [@](#): > > I worry about it. My child has been given overtly Christian gifts and books at Christmas. If they give your kid socks? Is that an attempt to convert? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/45 "2004-12-12T07:22:11Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > How? If I tell a rabid anti-smoker that they might be happier never leaving their house (because they can’t _bear_ to see anyone smoke, or see any evidence of smoking), am I insulting all anti-smokers? Hardly. Most anti-smokers are able to cope with the concept of smoking, so there is no need to suggest that they never leave their house. Lousy analogy. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/46 "2004-12-12T07:25:28Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Lousy analogy. Why? You’re talking to one individual, not a whole group. You can’t insult a whole group when you’re only talking to one individual, when that individual is not displaying traits that are shared by the entire group, and therefore would not apply to the whole group. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/47 "2004-12-12T07:29:57Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > It may be inappropriate, but it is a _conversion attempt?_ That is the question. Yes. I think it is. [quote] Watching people participate in something that you do not believe in can make you feel left out. It is a complaint I have sometimes heard against Christmas in schools.[/quopte] I’ve never heard it. If anything, non-Christians just feel run over and disrespected. But they don’t want to be _included_ in your religious rituals, that’s just a patronizing assumption. > [@](#): > > But is it an attempt to “convert”? That is my only question. That is what the caller was claiming. Yes. I think it is. > [@](#): > > Okay you answered the question. Not converted. But the caller thinks that this is a risk. The caller is a loon.Perhaps, but the caller didn’t bring that up, the caller talked about it being about _conversion_. I think the caller just didn’t articulate himself well. He was talking about proselytization and it came aout as “conversion.” > [@](#): > > Do you worry that it will “convert” your kid? My kid is already being raised as a Christian but there are all different kinds of Christianity. I don’t want people esposing their personal religious views to my kid. We’re taking a very cautious tack without how we expose her to this stuff and I want to be able to explain things in my own way. > [@](#): > > If they give your kid socks? Is that an attempt to convert? I take it as presumtuous if they don’t know our religious situation and yes, often times it is a subtle form of proselytization. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/48 "2004-12-12T07:31:35Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > Why? You’re talking to one individual, not a whole group. You can’t insult a whole group when you’re only talking to one individual, when that individual is not displaying traits that are shared by the entire group, and therefore would not apply to the whole group. That’s the point I am truly to make with evidence included. If we keep repeating the self-evident then maybe it will sink in but I doubt it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/49 "2004-12-12T07:33:24Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > Why? You’re talking to one individual, not a whole group. You can’t insult a whole group when you’re only talking to one individual, when that individual is not displaying traits that are shared by the entire group, and therefore would not apply to the whole group. Because the “anti-smoker” in your analogy is the one who wants to convert people. You have it backwards. It would be more apt to talk a smoker who was sick of being preached at about smoking everywhere he went but I don’t think it’s very accurate to compare a single habit to a religious faith in any case. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/50 "2004-12-12T07:35:13Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > That’s the point I am truly to make with evidence included. If we keep repeating the self-evident then maybe it will sink in but I doubt it. You’re wrong. O’Reilly said that this was a Christian country and that was just too bad for Jews. He insulted all Jews. It wasn’t just the Israel comment. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/51 "2004-12-12T07:40:40Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Yes. I think it is. > If anything, non-Christians just feel run over and disrespected. But they don’t want to be _included_ in your religious rituals, that’s just a patronizing assumption. That’s not what I meant. I meant that they felt that their beliefs were being left out, or that their sensibilities were being ignored. Left out. > [@](#): > > Yes. I think it is. Mind explaining how? > [@](#): > > I think the caller just didn’t articulate himself well. He was talking about proselytization and it came aout as “conversion.” Well, you think the caller wasn’t being articulate, but I think the caller meant what they said. They thought it was _"setting kids up for **conversion** _." That’s pretty specific. > [@](#): > > I don’t want people esposing their personal religious views to my kid. And it would be inappropriate for them to do so. Giving your kid socks isn’t quite in that category, though. Allowing your kid to _witness_ other people giving each other socks (or exchanging cards) isn’t either. > [@](#): > > I take it as presumtuous if they don’t know our religious situation and yes, often times it is a subtle form of proselytization. But do you feel that your kid **IS AT RISK** of being converted when someone gives them a pair of socks wrapped up on red and green paper? Or if you kid has to see them exchange red and green wrapped packages? Is your kid **BEING SET UP TO BE CONVERTED**? That is what the caller is claiming. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/52 "2004-12-12T07:42:35Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Because the “anti-smoker” in your analogy is the one who wants to convert people. But we’re talking about people who are _complaining_ about the behavior of other people. The analogy sticks just fine. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/53 "2004-12-12T07:44:21Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > You’re wrong. O’Reilly said that this was a Christian country and that was just too bad for Jews. He insulted all Jews. It wasn’t just the Israel comment. You have got to read the actual transcript before you post. It makes you look unprepared. I made that mistake in the beginning but now I know it well. O’Reilly said “You have a predominantly Christian nation” which is absolutley true. The U.S. has a majority Christian population. He goes on to say that Christmas is a federal holiday (also true). The only thing that is debatable is the statement that the U.S. was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy which probably has some merit but is more suited to a few book’s worth of analysis The reason that reply was given to the caller was to make the point that it is rather impossible for the caller to avoid all references to Christianity in this country. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/54 "2004-12-12T07:45:36Z")
I don’t think my kid is at risk of being converted. I said twice that’s she’s already being raised as a Christian [Hello? Is this thing on?]. I just don’t want people putting pressure on her about what to believe or not to believe. She doesn’t know how to defend herself yet. Proselytization is still offensive whether or not there is any real chance of conversion. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/55 "2004-12-12T07:47:01Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > But we’re talking about people who are _complaining_ about the behavior of other people. The analogy sticks just fine. No, we’re talking about a person who’s tired of being preached at and harassed. The caller wan’t complaining about what Christians did that didn’t affect him. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/56 "2004-12-12T07:47:42Z")
**Diogenes** , you never did acknowledge that most of the caller’s complaints were based on college experience and not grade school experience like you were pretending to be the case. That makes it a little different. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/57 "2004-12-12T07:48:45Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I don’t think my kid is at risk of being converted. **BUT THE CALLER WAS SAYING THAT.** (Hello? Is this thing on? ;)) _That’s_ why the caller was a loon. Saw a risk where no reasonable person (including you) would see it. Loon. One can complain about religious elements in school, one can complain in a _reasonable_ manner, and definitely have a case. But claiming that exchanging gifts is putting kids at risk for being converted is loony. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/58 "2004-12-12T07:51:30Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > You have got to read the actual transcript before you post. It makes you look unprepared. I made that mistake in the beginning but now I know it well. > > O’Reilly said “You have a predominantly Christian nation” which is absolutley true. The U.S. has a majority Christian population. He goes on to say that Christmas is a federal holiday (also true). The only thing that is debatable is the statement that the U.S. was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy which probably has some merit but is more suited to a few book’s worth of analysis > > The reason that reply was given to the caller was to make the point that it is rather impossible for the caller to avoid all references to Christianity in this country. He said it was a “_predominantly_ Christian country.” Excuse me. There is zero merit to his assertions that the US was founded on “Judeo-Christian” principles (I will say again that there is no such thing as a “Judeo-Christian” principle. The US was not founded on any religious principles whatsoever. The caller was not complaining that Christians were a majority but that they were constantly trying to convert Jews (which they are) and that he was sick of it. O’Reilly essentially told him that it was too bad and that if he didn’t want to be _proselytized_ that he should go to Israel. It was an insult to all Jews. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/59 "2004-12-12T07:54:02Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > **BUT THE CALLER WAS SAYING THAT.** (Hello? Is this thing on? ;)) _That’s_ why the caller was a loon. Saw a risk where no reasonable person (including you) would see it. Loon. > > One can complain about religious elements in school, one can complain in a _reasonable_ manner, and definitely have a case. But claiming that exchanging gifts is putting kids at risk for being converted is loony. The caller was just complaining that people kept _trying_ to convert him. The attempt in itself is offensive whether it’s successful or not. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2004, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416/60 "2004-12-12T07:57:36Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The caller was just complaining that people kept _trying_ to convert him. The caller said that exchaging gifts was **setting kids up to be converted**. Loony. Look, I understand that one can get fed up, and I can certainly sympathize. But if this person didn’t want to sound like a loon, they could have expressed themselves differently. When they said loony things, O’Reilly, as is his way, said some impatient, poorly-thought out things back. Because the person was a _loon_. Loon loon loon. Not to defend O’Reilly—I don’t give a crap about him—but I see this as basically a badly-worded reaction to a whiny loon. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-oreilly-again/279416.md?page=4)