Damn them for defending Constitutional rights! Just damn them to Hell! How dare they try to keep us free against the excesses of government!
Care to elaborate on what other reasons you have?
The idea of two Christmases is kind of what it’s about. There’s the commercialized aspect: Plastic snowmen, buying of gifts and all that, then there’s the religious part. I’ve always been of the belief that one’s religion should be unto themselves and their family and of course whatever religious services (church, synagogue). The very idea of Christmas in the religious context is a spiritual celebration. Anything beyond that is a materialistic thing that falls into commercialization and pretty much secular arena.
After all, the religious meaning of Christmas is not to be found in a wreath hanging on a door or a lighted reindeer on your lawn. If that defines Christmas to you, then it clearly is a secular holiday to you.
I enjoy the secular Christmas. Decorations, carols, the TV specials and all that, but I certainly understand those that feel these things are being thrust on them. Not unlike those damn Hare Krishnas at the airport.
I do not agree with displays of a manger or a menorrah for that fact on government property. However, I don’t have an issue with a Christmas tree, or as some PC mayors may say, a Holiday tree.
As was mentioned, if Christians are getting all bent about the seculariztion of Christmas, they should change the day to the more realistic time of Christ’s actual birth. Which would be more around late Spring/early Summer. Then treat it like Easter. A religious holiday that is not a national holiday.
No, the way you determine if Bush is lying is to see if his lips are moving. It’s a 1:1 ratio.
Oh, poppycock. “Christian Radio” is not representative of Christians as a whole. I majored in communications at a school where “fundamentalist” has no negative connotation. Ths school runs something like 40 radio stations; several of my freinds interned with the network, and the consensus among them– my fundamentalist schoolmates-- was that the listeners were primarily old people and weirdos.
I don’t know how universal that is but a quick crosscheck of Christian radio ratings compared to the total numbers of Christians in the country should serve to make the point.
I never said it did represent Christians as a whole. I made no generalizations at all about Christians as a whole. I was just talking about the ones who bitch about the “secularization of Christmas.” I know they’re a minority of Christians. I never said otherwise.
Just as a reminder of what I actually said:
[quote=Diogenes the Cynic]
What’s really pissing some of them off is that [blah blah blah][/quoting]
(Bolding mine)
Perhaps this will aid in the debate that Christmas as a holiday is a statement of religious preference by the government:
METZL v. LEININGER (1995), acknowledged that while Christmas was indeed religion in its origins, it and Thanksgiving* had “lost their religious connotation in the eyes of the general public that government measures to promote them, as by making them holidays or even by having the government itself celebrate them, have only a trivial effect in promoting religion.”
*Odd this was even put in the statement because so little documentation exists of this holiday’s origins. Any religious undertones are all speculation. As is any non-religious tones.
Heh, heh . . . nicely turned, acsenray. 
From a card-carrying member of the ACLU
So-called Christians have been whinging about the secularization/commercialization of Christmas for decades. It’s safe to ignore them.
The irony is that it is this very secularization/commercialization that made Christmas such a big deal worldwide.
This is what I’m talking about when I say that it creates an implicit imposition of a specific worldview. When you permit some holiday observances, you are de facto embracing them as the norm and making all others different. The crux of the matter is the idea that to a religious person, “Secular” does not equal “neutral.” To not mention the presence and effect of the Divine will on some relevant topic is to implicitly deny it. To celebrate a December 25th holiday all while scrupulously avoiding what it has been understood to represent for two millenia is not a “neutral” act; it is the deliberate excision of a specific worldview.
Which is not to say that putting up a nativity scene is neutral either; it obviously isn’t. There* is *no neutral ground, and the best we can hope for is that we all get along and give each other some elbow room. I take it as a given that no constitution, no law, no system of governance can permanantly bind together a group of people who are determined to be assholes to each other.
And as I suggested, I think as a general principle, most Christians do not object to the addition or inclusion of other traditions. It’s almost de rigeur in many places that alongside the Christmas decorations they have a Menorah, but when’s the last time you saw someone up in arms about it? The government often does things to honor other religions, and no one but the extremist dickheads gets bothered.
Which seems somewhat revealing.
I submit that if you were to ask a local government to have some recognition of a Hindu holiday, they might be amenable, especially in a community where there were many Hindus. Of course that’s assuming you are earnestly seeking to have your beliefs recognized and understood and not just trying to be an asshole to people different from you. There are plenty of other Hindu symbols which would be far less troublesome than Kali, and I would object to that on precisely the same grounds I’d object to a graphic picture of a Crucified Jesus.
I stand corrected.
That’s the problem, though. What we have is a secular “holiday season”, that incorporates various beliefs (although I’ll admit that ‘Kwanza’ is a little contrived. 
). Nothing wrong with that in my mind. You have your lights, trees, Santa, presents, getting drunk, and all that fun stuff. But then some Christians bitch and moan when we don’t call it “Christmas”; but if we do call it Christmas, they bitch about it being too secular. Well you can’t have your cake and eat it too. If you want your own religious holiday, don’t try to include everyone. If you want to include everyone, then don’t push your beliefs on them. You get mad when we don’t call it “Christmas” and you get mad when we do. It’s your own damn fault for stealing the holiday from the pagans in the first place.
By the way, I see nativity scenes all over the place. There’s one at the gas station right up the street. Nobody’s complaining about them. The only complaints are when the government is using taxpayer money to put them up.
I’m sure you’re not directing this at me personally, but for reference, I am NOT Christian.
I know this will come as a surprise for some of you.
Ah, time to put the You back in Yule!
I’ve never heard anyone reprimanded because they said “Merry Christmas.” When others make the comment to me, I have offered polite corrections. I don’t celebrate Christmas, as I’m not a Christian. I am Wiccan and do celebrate the winter solstice or Yule. When someone wishes me a “Merry Christmas” I politely inform them that I don’t celebrate Christmas but thank you for the good wishes, any way.
Wrath, I suppose I am your polar opposite. I am a Christian who firmly supports all efforts to preserve the separation of religion and state. The government has no business using my tax money to promote any relgion and citizens should have the right not to be influenced by the government in their religious training.
Most of the situations that you have described that are outrageous are the result of overly cautious and poorly trained professionals. These are the exceptions and not the rule. That’s why they make the news.
We Christians are allowed to celebrate, but we don’t do it with government money (which we don’t contribute to as churches) and we don’t need to take away from class time to do it.
If the joy is being sucked out of Christmas for some Christians, they have only themselves to blame. Some of them are having pouty snits because they cannot control everyone else all the time. They are becoming bitter even during those times when they could be celebrating the spirit of the season. As you acknowledged, no one is preventing them from enjoying and celebrating the season. So what is their beef?
They are wrong in their premise. No one is trying to remove religion from public life. We want the government to stay out of the religion business. And if they see our attempts to keep the government out of the religion business as an attempto “to implicitly create the de facto dominance of a specific worldview,” then they are being mislead or brainwashed. Or there is mass paranoia. Or they don’t understand the Constitution of the United States. There are a number of possibilities. At any rate, they are wrong.
Who is going to judge his motives? What if a group of Hindus want to present a program, must all measure up to this standard? Should all Christians involved with Christmas programs at school undergo evaluation to see if their motives are pure and that they are not just trying to be assholes to people different from themselves?
Merry Christmas, furt
This would be the coolest holiday display ever.
Correct. I meant it as a continuation of “some Christians”, but I switched from 3rd person to 2nd person in the middle there, the “you” being plural. Don’t worry, I wasn’t accusing you personally of stealing the holiday from the pagans.
Why even go so far as to “correct” them? I’m a Christian, but when somebody wished me “Happy Hannakuh” the other day, I simply returned his good wishes and went on my way. Not *every * moment has to be a teachable one.