It’s still celebrating Christmas as if every single child there is expected to be of the dominant religion.
Besides, didn’t Rick Perry say children are forbidden to celebrate christmas in schools? 
If you’re appealing to Rick Perry to support your argument, you might want to re-think. 
I don’t really care either way, I was just being pedantic in that “Deck the Halls” contains no specific allusion to the Chrisitan holiday or religion except multiple references to “Yule” which historically is a Germanic pagan holiday unlikely to be celebrated by any of the students. If the kids were singing “O Holy Night” or “Joy to the World” I’d agree that those shouldn’t be sung in a public school setting.
But I’m just being contrary. I won’t complain if it’s left off the song list.
I’m not appealing to him, I’m mocking him 
Back in the early 90’s, when Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church were getting started picketing, I was part of a group of friends here in Topeka that, near Christmas, stood across the intersection from them(at 10th and Gage) and sang Christmas carols to them. Some of the carols were religious and some were secular. Some of us were religious and some weren’t. Some of us were gay, and some weren’t. (I’m religious and hetero myself)
Our favorite carol though was “Deck the Halls” because when it came to the line about “gay apparel” we REALLY belted that one out! By the second week the Phelps clan had a sign just for us, naming us “The Sodomite Singers” Good times, good times.
Because there isn’t another simple word that means gay. Homosexual is unwieldy and formal.
And I don’t believe you - if your name were being used to mean lame, and you weren’t bothered by that, then you would be, well, lame.
Yeah - you did. I was talking about someone continuing to use the term in my company even after I’ve politely asked them not to and explained why.
It depends where you’re from; I’ve heard people in their late thirties say it, in London, but not much older than that.
Nigger is an example of a racist word whose use people actively campaigned against. It was not actually always used in an expressly racist way - in some areas it was just the word for African-Americans. It was actively campaigned against and banned in many contexts. It is an example of action against a word’s use resulting in decrease in its use.
And slang often doesn’t move into general parlance. There’s no reason to be sure that this particular piece of slang will do so.
Aw man, teachers take away all the fun. Kids need to have something to giggle at.
No, seriously, completely stupid. Let the kids laugh. If they get too rowdy, don’t let them sing it. This is a legit instance of “kids will be kids”.
I can see your point about “O Holy Night”, but what on earth do you have against bullfrogs?
The most troubling thought in this thread is that a teacher would believe that it would be completely impossible to think differently about a subject than they would.
If I heard something that I disbelieved about a subject every day it would very much affect my perception of the those I heard it from not the subject itself. I don’t know what to think since that apparently is completely impossible yet from experience it has been the case. Well, aside from the literal every day thing; I’ve certainly lived in places where I am in complete disagreement with the prevailing thought on something and never changed my opinion on the subject.
On point, I wonder what that school does about “O come all ye faithful” which always got more snickers than gay apparel in my school.
Y’all got the wrong lyrics. They should be:
grin
What I came here to mention.
I say, let those who are gay have the word gay, as long as people stop pretending “ghey” is something different.
Ig The Sodomite Slingers isn’t a Band Name, I don’t know what is.
I suggested that “queer” might shed the last vestiges of negative meaning and move into its place. “Queer” is neither unwieldly nor formal, and has the benefit of being very inclusive.
That’s a process already somewhat underway. When universities offer courses in “Queer theory”, you know the word isn’t used in a perjorative manner:
http://www2.uregina.ca/yourblog/?p=1583
Seriously I would not be fussed, because if my personal name came into widespread use, it would be obvious it had nothing to do with me, personally.
So it is someone refusing to accomodate your wishes as to the language you prefer they use that makes them a homophobe.
I disagree that it is the campagn against the word, as opposed to the campaign against the attitude the word represents.
I agree. The word’s use in this manner could die out, or it could spread and become general. Both are possible. The process by which language changes is not easily predictable.
My point is that if it does spread and become general, “politely insisting” that those around you not use the word on pain of being judged homophobes will look, well, increasingly eccentric and curmudeonly. Picture some old dude around 1970 insisting that those homosexuals “have no right” to be called “gay”. 
In fact, by that point it won’t even be a debate. Look how readily we are both using the word “lame” to mean “inadequate, worthless, out-of-touch” even after it has been pointed out that this use could insult the physically disabled in exactly the same manner that using “gay” to mean “lame” insults homosexuals.
That’s what language evolving looks like.
Not at our school. My kids are singing a Hanukkah and Kwanzaa song for their concert and they spend a lot of time teaching the ‘other’ winter holidays but they aren’t allowed to talk about christmas of sing christmas songs.
(Aside: I did a poll and ALL the kids in BOTH classes will be celebrating christmas.)
I’m pretty sure Miss Vickie was his beard.*
I don’t suppose “don we now our ugly Christmas sweaters” would work?
*Only the old farts are likely to get that one.
Nonsense. My dad is missing one leg his entire life, and is in his 60s. I just got off the phone with him and he never once remembers being referred to or taunted as “lame,” in his entire life.
Lame as in “limping” is usually applied to animals, not people.
Well, I also think “o’er” is also intentionally being removed. But, yeah, it’s the word strains. It just doesn’t mean what it used to mean. The word strains, by itself, doesn’t mean “strains of music” to most listeners. And people have this thing about wanting popular songs to use current words.
My point of bringing this up is that the idea of changing the words with the times is far from new. I don’t really see any reason to get upset.
Yes, because it is offensive to apply it to humans. It didn’t used to be, as the King James Bible clearly indicates. The word changed, and no one got all up in arms about it.
I think that’s fine. At least it doesn’t change the rhythm of the song.
My son’s 2nd grade “winter concert” last year changed the lyrics to “We wish you a happy holiday”.
You made that up. I wouldn’t ordinarily think someone made something up out of whole cloth but you, I do not trust to speak the truth.
I have the DVD right here. If you doubt me, I will upload the particular song to youtube, but I wouldn’t do it for free. $100 to my favorite charity. Deal?