No, I understand perfectly how the world functions–acknowledge that Christians run the whole show, and allow them to indulge in religious rituals that lesser sects are prohibited from indulging in. I’ve got that perfectly. I’m just noting it, for those who maintain that no such discrimination goes on.
Sure. Next Halloween, hold a Halloween meeting. Give HR a heads-up, with a count of how many folks you expect to show up. Buy a reasonable amount of food for the reasonable number of folks you expect to show up. Be clear that this is a Satanic gathering, and given the reputation of Satanists, be clear that you’ll be doing nothing harmful or illegal. Be sincere that this is something you really want to celebrate, that you’re not just doing it to be obnoxious, and that there are enough likeminded employees that want to join you that it’d be worth using resources for the event.
That’s all it’ll take. Let us know how it turns out!
Daniel
I kinda wish PRR would do this, only leaving out the dead puppies, because that’s unsanitary and probably illegal, not to mention difficult to obtain. Really, if it’s just lighting candles, singing, and drawing a pentacle on the rug with chalk, they should have no problem with it. But I guarantee they would. Overall, it would be a rather hilarious social experiment.
Maybe we could pay him $500.
They’d probably have three problems with it:
- prr would be being an asshole, since he’s not a Satanist; he’d be intentionally stirring up shit for the sake of stirring up shit.
- He’d likely be alone in that room, and there’s a big difference between organizing something that makes the workplace fun for a bunch of co-workers, and organizing something that doesn’t.
- HR AND a lot of the staff might be uncomfortable being near a Satanist party. This is the least reasonable reason they might be upset, but you’re right that it’d probably be one of their reasons.
Either of the first two would be sufficient to deny such a request.
Daniel
A company allowing these meetings on their premises during working hours certainly constitutes approval and promotion of Christianity. Not to get too shrill or extreme, but this is a hill I would probably die on - a company that allows this for the Christian faith is not a company I would be comfortable working at. It indicates deeper issues that I’m not compatible with.
One of the reasons I think I irritate so many Dopers, including my fellow atheists, featherlou, is that so much of the domination of our culture by Christian ideologues stems from their passive hands-off, live-and-let-live philosophy. To my mind failing to challenge them on their rights to impose their beliefs on others is precisely what allows them to think that their beliefs are benign in nature. “But we’re mere Christians, espousing perfectly normal Christian positions that have been permitted for thousands of years–what’s your damage, PRR? What makes you so special that you object to our imposing our beliefs on others suddenly in 2008? Why haven’t we heard from you in 1908? Or in 1208, for that matter?”
I don’t find you irritating, prr. On the contrary, I find you very amusing. You compare the exchange of a few gifts and the eating of food with colleagues to the ritual sacrifice of babies and puppies, then don’t understand why nobody takes you seriously.
For the record, I believe you’re lying about being “forced” to sing Christmas carols. I can’t prove it, of course. Call it a hunch.
I agree with the “intentionally stirring up shit” part, but not the asshole part. I think it would make an interesting point to the people working there about the bias inherent in celebrating one religion’s holidays while turning up your nose at others’.
I agree, but would they attend a Hannukah party and sing Jewish songs? A Kwanzaa party? What about a Muslim celebration? I have a feeling they wouldn’t. And would those parties be paid for out of the office’s petty cash? Again, probably not.
I think this shows an ignorance of Satanism, frankly. One of my good friends is a Satanist, and he’s opened my mind about what it means. I personally don’t dig on any organized religion or practice thereof, but I don’t scoff as Satanism particularly, and I think it would be wrong of HR to have an issue with it based on their (very likely incorrect) perception of that religion.
Lord Ashtar: People are forced to sing Xmas carols all the time. Well, maybe not forced at gunpoint, but there is social pressure to participate. Like PRR, I won’t do it, but that’s mostly because a) the songs are terribly corny and overplayed, and b) I have a terrible singing voice. I wouldn’t be so quick to call someone a liar about this.
You don’t think so? I bet at a university, they probably would. The college I work at puts on celebrations of Hannukah, Kwanzaa, Diwali and the Lunar New Year that are paid for with college funds and attended by students and faculty, in addition to the cookies and carols service that they hold at the school chapel every year. They probably aren’t as well-attended as a Christmas party would be, but I know plenty of non-Jews, non-blacks, non-Hindus and non-Asians who attend all of these events. We don’t have an Eid celebration, but I don’t think people would mind if we did.
A non-asshole would politely approach them and talk about the issue. Intentionally stirring up shit at your workplace is, unless you’re really dealing with an issue that causes significant harm (and management has already shown itself unwilling to respond to polite approaches), asshole behavior.
If the workforce were primarily Jewish, I’d guess that they’d do the Yom Kippur party. If they’re basing it not on religious advocacy but on what makes their workforce happy, there’s no problem with that. Maybe I’m missing your point here.
Satanism is a fringe religion in many respects, and it’s practiced in many different ways, ranging from violent criminals looking for the awesome justification for their violence, through suburban teenagers confusing “frightening” with “sexy”, to Anton La Vey types, to odd little sects in rural Iraq. Absent an explanation of which type of Satanic party you’re talking about, it’s rational for folks to be alarmed: when you’re talking about Satanism, unlike when you’re talking about modern Christianity, the violent criminals using religion to justify violence are not a tiny minority of self-identified Satanists.
That said, positing an explanation to HR that the party would be legal and ethical (as I mentioned before), I agree that this would be a lousy reason to deny the party. The other two reasons would each be perfectly acceptable reasons.
Daniel
Well, I wouldn’t call him an asshole for something he only did in a hypothetical situation posed on the internet. He did not intentionally stir up shit in his workplace. All he did was vent about how irritating the work Xmas party is in MPSIMS, and he got attacked for it. Your response here is very telling, as if you’ve already indicted him for doing something that he has not done and really, has no intention of doing. It’s just a thought experiment.
Do you really think he should go to HR and complain about the Xmas party? Don’t you think he’d get a similar reception as the one he’s getting here? Far better for him to just vent and move on. But he’s not even allowed to do that here.
Maybe they would celebrate all the holidays in his particular office. However, overall, I don’t find all the holidays are equally commemorated or acknowledged anywhere. For instance, I don’t notice Jewish and Muslim and Kwanzaa songs being piped continuously into the mall or the grocery store PA system the entire month of December, the way Xmas carols are. But maybe in a college department, they would be more open-minded, as burundi said.
- The cleaning staff is probably not going to be happy about having to shampoo blood out of the carpets.
Whu? Huh? Lemme quote my phrasing again, the phrasing that set this off:
That’s the conditional mood: it’s what you use for hypotheticals. Please read more carefully.
Daniel
I wonder if someone else proposed an experiment of that nature, if you’d be so quick to slap the “asshole” label on them, even in the conditional mood. You’ve got a pretty big hard-on for PRR, as evidenced by your eagerness to attack him in this thread for simply airing his gripes in MPSIMS. Obviously he was being hyperbolic and humorous in his example, and you were a bit quick on the trigger with the conditional case name-calling. God, man, take it easy.
Actually, Rubystreak, PRR is allowed to vent here and move on. He just hasn’t chosen to move on. Others are also allowed to disagree with him.
PRR, if you were in a work place at least partially sponsored by the federal government, I would not only see your point, but join you in the protest. Just because I’m a Christian does not mean that I think that required attendance at religious activities is a good thing. To the contrary.
My understanding is that privately owned companies can do as they choose. If you disagree with the boss man, you are free to work elsewhere. I believe that if the company accepts any federal funding, they are not supposed to do that.
Of course, even government agencies try to get away with it. School systems run by fundamentalists did not take kindly to liberal Christians and any “rebels” when I was teaching. I suspect that is the case today even though the sermons and daily Bible readings have generally stopped.
But rights in a government job are different from those in the private sector. I doubt that you would have gotten into trouble for not showing up. But silencing others for your own satisfaction when you’re not the owner? Nyah.
The entire scenario sounds bogus except for a religiously based company (such as The United Methodist Publishing House) or for a fairly small company or where the owner or “the boss” would be certain that no federal funds mingled with private funds in the entire organization. The Board of Directors or the Board of Trust would also weigh in on such matters and they would have to clear it with the attorneys who would know better.
I would also have to believe that you are hesitant to speak up.
Anyway, I would have supported your cause.
The problem is not office parties in general, which even if they’re called Christmas parties, are usually not at all religious in my experience. For example I’ve never ever been to one where people sang religious carols. I did go to one where they had a karaoke device, and one woman’s choice was “Joy to the World”–but it was the 3 Dog Night version (“Jeremiah was a bullfrog,” etc.)
Some of them did involve Secret Santas. On a couple of occasions that wasn’t optional. That was the closest thing to religion I ever experienced (and no, I didn’t particuarly like it, until I got to open my gift, which was great). But I think Santa is an adjunct to, and not really affiliated with, religion. I’m guessing if he’s mentioned in any christian pulpits it’s a negative reference.
I do think office parties should go away. I resent being bored, and listening to my amateur coworkers sing karaoke is certainly boring no matter what kind of songs they’re singing. But I’ll show up for and cooperate with anything that relates to my paycheck. If I determine that it doesn’t relate to my paycheck, I’m outa there. But apparently a lot of people like them.
PS–the worst office party I ever heard of was a law firm where a friend of mine worked, where, for Secretaries’ Day, the head guy decided that all the secretaries would assemble at his house on Friday, after work–and they would bring the food. And he would assign what they were bringing. Way to show your appreciation, dude!
Sure they can. It would be nice if they could do that without personal attacks. But when even sven called him a jerk in MPSIMS, which is a violation of the rules of the SDMB btw, he Pitted her. That was an appropriate response to her rudeness. Then, of course, he gets piled on here by his many fans. Maybe he could have foreseen that pile on, but when people attack you, often you feel the need to respond to and rebut their arguments. Esp. when they seem not to be proportionate responses to his posts.
Bogus in the sense that PRR is lying, or bogus in the sense that it’s stupid that it happened? I can see the party being billed as “the holiday party” but devolving into a Christmas party, replete with the caroling, etc. Thus, the party organizers skirt the religion issue formally, but indulge in it during the party anyway.
I think you, and a lot of others, have assumed that PRR wants to take action and make a scene about this. I don’t think he does, thought experiments about Satanism aside. Really, this goes back to the OP of the original thread: he just wanted to vent. Probably thought the SDMB would provide at least a sympathetic venue for griping about a situation that he feels he cannot change without making more of a fuss than it’s worth, but which irritates him mightily nonetheless. I see nothing wrong with this, but it seems like a lot of posters are carrying negative baggage about PRR around with them that they bring to any thread that involves him. Whose fault that is is debatable, but the negativity he’s getting here is all out of proportion to what he’s saying. It’s more about the singer than the song, if you know what I mean.
You want us to play nice with PRR in the Pit?
Maybe he has become too delicate and sensitive for the Pit. He might want to reconsider posting here. Or maybe he should take up passive resistance and not bother to defend himself at all. After all, we know him. He could just address the issues.
As for matters of his integrity, I think he satisfied a lot of curiosity for Dopers when he got confused about what he had already said his doctorate was in. His sentence construction is still a wreck and his English grammar mistakes are glaring. But I wish he would apply himself. He does have a gift for the language and his writing is very colorful. I envy him that.
There’s a lot more too, but it doesn’t matter.
Permitting religious themed parties rather than banning religious themed parties is an example of tolerance and support for people of a wide variety of backgrounds.
Tolerance means just that – tolerance. Not supression.