slythe
That’s a fair statement.
Hmmmmmm, or is it a secular holiday with religious overtones?
I repeat-Any comment about the George Bush quote, John John? How about a comment about my definition of the difference between the celebration of Christmas and Halloween?
I suppose I would find abandoning Christmas, Easter, Valentine’s Day, Halloween, Thanksgiving, and other religious holidays in publicly supported institutions acceptable. That means work places too, of course. No Hanukah, No Yom Kippur, no Rosh Hashanah, or Ramadan, No Mithrasmas, or Solstice. No New Year, either, you know, most religions have a specific year ending or beginning day, and choosing one over another would be religious preference. I suppose we could keep the calendar, but the holiday is obviously not acceptable.
Closed Sunday is obviously out, and Saturday, as well. Government is pretty much going to have to be a seven day a week sort of thing.
Oh, wait. Seven days in a week? What was I thinking? That is going to have to stop, as well. Hmmm, a lot of months are going to have to be changed, too.
The entire concept of holiday is only going to be used to celebrate the political heroes of history, and only the most currently approved of history, as well. There won’t be any other kinds of holidays, since there is not much else that is entirely devoid of some variation in importance to one group of people over another.
I do not celebrate Christmas in the manner of most Americans. I find it almost a model of false worship. I would not feel badly if it were suddenly to end, and never be mentioned again in public. But I do not think it a matter of so great a concern to the continuation of the Republic that children might make pilgrimages to Santa’s workshop during school time. Candy worship at Halloween distresses me more, in fact, with the attendant lessons in extortion, and vandalism. But the real problems in our society concern me a whole lot more. I took great care to speak with my Children about what I wanted them to learn, about the holidays celebrated at school. I think every parent should do the same. I really wish that less time was spent on triviality at school, in general, but I have little concern with what trivialities are eliminated first. Football would be a good choice.
<P ALIGN=“CENTER”>Tris</P>
Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity has made them good.
–** H.L. Mencken**
slythe
Do you mean where I said I doubted that David was an atheist? I do. I think it is SDMB atheism.
The difference between Halloween and Christmas is that more fuss is made over Christmas because more money is spent over that Holiday. It is when retail has its climax, in more ways than one 
Yes, there is less religious connection to Halloween than Christams.
Y2K, BFD
Oh, you mean, where Bush said that he was not sure if atheist would be considered non citizens or patriots, or something like that? If he said that it is a dumb statement. I posted a response to that but I think you missed it.
Y2K, BFD
What possible reason could you have to doubt David’s atheism?
Yes, certainly there is less religious connection in Halloween than in Christmas. But there still is that undeniable connection. The whole witch image, is certainly not without a spiritual/religious connotation. Is it because it has no Christian connection that it is less offensive to non-Christians?
I mean, even though the Halloween witch image is a silly caracature (green skin indeed) witches do indeed exist, one of my coworkers was a self-proclaimed witch. She belonged to a legitimate religion, and took Halloween off as a religious holiday. No one can deny that the witch image is common in Halloween imagry. As common as Santa’s Hats and snow men.
I don’t have a problem with witches, (or with my former coworker) but some people do. And it certainly is a religious holiday to some, just as Christmas is. Just because it is less well-connected to it’s religious roots, does that mean that those religious roots should be ignored? How obvious do the connections have to be in order for a person to want to protest them? How do you measure these things, anyway? I mean, they are there in Halloween, too. And you can’t escape the witches thing.
Frankly, I don’t think 3 1/2 year olds connect witches with a religion, anymore than they do Santas. But most parents do know that witches are real, and there are legitimate religions that have witches. Also, just to make my own position clear, I see nothing sacred about keeping Santa in schools, anymore than I think Halloween and witches need to be in schools.
I also stil think that any holiday with “Saint” in the title cannot help but be connected with a religion. Even if the holiday is strictly celebrated as a secular event. If Christmas can be celebrated as a secular event and still offend, why would a holiday with “Saint” in it’s title not offend? Once again, where does one draw the line with this sort of thing?
And what about jolly old St. Nick - Saint Nicholas? Whether through historical fact or simply in the popular imagination (Christmas carols, etc.), it would seem that St. Nicholas is linked to the image of Santa Claus that we have today.
According to some, St. Nicholas was an actual Christian bishop in Asia Minor, c. 300 A.D., who was associated with gift-giving, blah blah blah. This could be mere legend, of course, but that’s beside the point.
If Valentine’s Day and Halloween can be regarded as non-secular in any meaningful sense, then I don’t see how Santa can so easily be regarded as a purely secular symbol.
Whoops, forgot to include these url’s on St. Nicholas, etc.
http://www.indianapolis.in.us/cp/xmas.html http://www.seattletimes.com/news/lifestyles/html98/chea_19991221.html
Well, sure. So they all have some religious connection, and yet are considered secular by many people. So where is the line drawn? Who gets to decide what is secular “enough” to not offend? At least “Santa” is a term one step distanced from “Saint”.
And what about the witches in Halloween? There are active and legitimate religions that have witches. No question about that. Why no big stink about the witches in Halloween? Just asking.
Frankly, I find nothing so sacred about Santa Claus, or snowmen, or green-skinned witches. Keep it or scrap it - I don’t have kids, I don’t go to school, I really don’t care. But I just am curious where the line should be drawn, who gets to decide what is not secular enough. Or what religious references are not a big enough deal (i.e. witches as opposed to Santa) to get upset about.
Court Jester said:
Depending on how long ago your children went to school, that may not be surprising. Kwaanza is a fairly new holiday. I’m thinking less than 20 years old (I’d like to say around 11-12, but I’m not that confident in the number).
Correct on both counts. In talking to the principal, she said they had had Jewish parents come in previously and discuss Hanukkah. But they never mentioned this before I called to talk about the problems I saw. Also, I would feel a bit hypocritical going in to teach about a Jewish holiday when I have agnostic beliefs. The fact is that, especially for 3 year olds, they shouldn’t need a non-teacher to come in. Show 'em a dreidel, let them spin it for a while. Let 'em cut and paste one on a piece of construction paper. Same with Kwaanza- and Ramadan-related things.
Probably not, unfortunately, until a new family moves in and realizes what kind of oppressive attitude there is towards their different religion…
Well, as I’ve mentioned previously in this thread (I know it’s been a long thread with several tangents, but again, I wish people would read the whole thing, but I see another message below in which somebody else asked essentially the same question and missed what I had said previously as well…) that was exactly what I was trying to do.
You may not have read the previous thread in which I tried to have a related discussion with Melin. Let’s just say it didn’t work out very well (I described it in a bit more detail in an earlier message here.) I have found this to be the case in a number of instances with her. And if you want childish, take a look at her post about me running to my mommy or whatever. So rather than be drawn into a flame war every time we disagree, I decided it wasn’t worth it this time.
Slythe said:
I can (obviously). But we appear to be in the minority here, alas…
Yosemitebabe said:
As I noted, they pasted a few pumpkins or the like. No witches. The only one allowed to say bad things about witches these days is Cecil.
I cannot (and will not) disagree.
I don’t think I said it doesn’t. Then again, I don’t think I addressed it, and I apologize for that (I focussed on the Halloween stuff and forgot about the rest). I was going to point out the “St. Nick” connection to Christmas, but I see that Mikan did that already.
In catching up this morning, I thought I saw a post of yours that also asked about how I’ve dealt with St. Valentine’s Day and St. Patrick’s Day in school, but now I can’t find it in the little quote window below. Anyway, presuming I’m not having hallucinations, the answer is that, because this is his first year, I haven’t had to deal with it at all yet. I’m hoping to hear back from the principal after break (she was going to bring up my points at a staff meeting over the break) and I hope this will lead to more discussions about what is or is not appropriate.
Apparently, you can add me to the list of people David does not respond to. This appears to be directly corrolative to the people who generally disagree with him. Color me surprised.
Jodi
Fiat Justitia
Jodi, I think David makes statements and does not like them challenged, or held up to the light of day. You’re surpised!?
Y2K, BFD
here’s that missing R
Or those that make him make himself look bad. If it weren’t for the inclusion of John John on his list, I’d say that David can’t deal with strong, intelligent women.
:shrugs, yawns::
-Melin
Perhaps, Melin, if you spent more time trying to discuss the issue at hand and less time trying to score points by proving Brother D wrong, we could progress. Obviously, you and he have differing opinions on how Christmas celebrations might effect school children. He bases his opinion on problems he has encountered or heard about concerning the toleration of non-believers, problems you may not know about since you are a believer and haven’t encountered said problems. He has a different outlook on the situation than you.
Small question for John John: Did you go to a public or a private school?
SLYTHE says:
See, I have a real problem with this, which is what prompted me to post in the first place. If Melin is being civil (which she was), who is David (or you) to go beyond the obvious questions contained in her post and decide what her motivations are for posting, and further decide that he will not bother to respond to her because he doesn’t like the motivations he himself has assigned her? This seems to me to be manifestly unfair. So she doesn’t agree with him; so she may be attempting to flesh out his position to prove it wrong; so she may be attempting to score “points” (as points are used in the context of debates) by pointing out the weaknesses or fallacies of his position. How on earth does that justify him announcing that he will only respond to those posters he finds personally acceptable? This is Great Debates, and if you can’t deal with the heat here (such as it is) from posters who are observing the minimum standards of logic and civility, they maybe you ought to post your problems in a kinder, gentler forum.
Look, I really have no bone to pick with David personally; but I think it’s ridiculous to simply say that he won’t respond to people because he doesn’t like the motivations he assigns them. Why bother to post a Great Debate then? Clearly he has a “different outlook” than some others of us, and undoubtedly that’s due in part to (a) his understandable protectiveness of his small child; and (b) his unique perspective as an essential outsider to all the Christmas “fun” – both the truly fun and the unsavory. But if he solicits opinions and a debate, he should respond to all those who take the time to respond to him in a reasonable manner or he shouldn’t solicit opinions in the first place.
Jodi
Fiat Justitia
David - a few questions:
-
I am really puzzled as to why your agnosticism would make you feel hypocritical in explaining the non-religious customs and traditions surrounding Chanukah. Surely, you didn’t mean that you were going to talk about a supreme being and miracles to impressionable 3 1/2 year olds? Who is going to do a better job explaining Jewish customs - a Christian teacher who read a little bit about it, or a person raised in a Jewish family who has lived it? If you really cared about the kids hearing the truth about holidays other than Christmas, this appears to be a no-brainer. Besides, the days when your child’s face will light with pride at seeing his dad talk to his class at school are definitely numbered - you should enjoy them while you can.
Oh, and I DO realize that this option was not offered to you. But sometimes, when you are in a minority, you have to be proactive if you are sincere in wanting to resolve these issues in a way that leaves everyone feeling good, and not just point fingers & create bad feelings after the fact. -
I have, as yet, seen no response from you as to what it is in my posts that you consider unreasonable. Since others have asked this same question of you, and you have answered with why you were ignoring Melin, but not answered about me, I am left to conclude that there is no credible excuse for ignoring me except that you don’t like the questions I’m asking.
PS - Yes, Melin’s post that you cited (after announcing you were ignoring her) as justification for ignoring her used language appropriate for pre-schoolers. But when you start figuratively closing your eyes and covering your ears and screaming “I’m not listening to you. I’m not listening to you. I AM NOT listening to you.”, maybe that level language is appropriate.
Sheesh.
Sue from El Paso
Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.
Majormd
Well, yeah, that is what it means.
Y2K, BFD