If I could find it I’d give credit where it’s due, but since I can’t:
Somehow, the big bad ACLU has failed to eliminate all public acknowledgements of Christmas. I can only assume that either they’re not quite as big and bad as you think, or they’re not really trying that hard.
Moving thread from IMHO to Great Debates.
alright, thanks. although that’s where I originally posted it; then it was moved to IMHO.
Fuck the tree. I want a holiday burrito. Stop oppressing me!
you’re deflecting. I never singled out christianity… I mentioned all religions. Nice try though.
You opened the thread talking about Christmas and nativity scenes. What other religions have those?
To be honest, I’m totally perplexed by what you actually want to discuss. Seems like your posts are actually an excellent example of what I and a few other people are trying to say: the outrage is almost entirely* one-sided, and it’s on the part of those who, for whatever reason, feel oppressed because “Happy Holidays” somehow defiles their Christmas experience.
*Not entirely entirely, as I am aware that there have certainly been some attempts to move religious displays off of state or public property. I don’t agree with all of them - I think “public” should include the religious and the symbols that they like - but I don’t see it as the oft declared “War on Christmas”.
See the violence inherent in the system!
Stranger
then I continued on with this:
“I think the athiests should have a holiday tree without question; gays should have the same rights as straights; all religions should be treated with tolerance and understanding and so on and so forth…”
but never mind that part.
so much for missing the point.
To post credibly about atheists, one needs to be able to spell the word. IMHO, anyway.
But should atheists also have menorahs without question? Or even better, should they be allowed to have none of the above without question? Because the implication of your statement seems to be that everyone should be allowed to celebrate Christmas. Gee, thanks. That’s awfully big of you.
Perhaps people are missing the point because you’ve been a bit unclear on what, exactly, the point is?
No,atheists shouldn’t have anything they don’t want. They should merely be tolerant of non-atheists… just as non-atheists should be tolerant of them. It’s that simple.
No one’s suggesting that athiests should have a christmas tree or menorah or anything they don’t want. It’s their lives…
and…
Really, I’m not trying to be difficult here. Just tell me, plainly, what you want to discuss. I can’t figure it out.
Are intolerant people intolerant? Well, yes.
Are people who want to repress all forms of religious expression intolerant? Yes.
Is there a legitimate and widespread “War on Christmas” where people do and say stupid things in the name of tolerance, and in the process demonstrate intolerance? No, I don’t think so.
what I want to say, is anyone who is intolerant of the religious or objects to religious practices held public because it “offends them” is intolerant. Same goes for those who object the atheists having a holiday tree…
It’s intolerance, plain and simple… and I’m calling them on it. It’s my new buzz word. That’s right.
I thought it was just the annual “War on Christmas” goofiness.
How is it ‘intolerant’ for me to object to a use of tax-payer dollars? I do not object to churches use of their money or land. I object when governments use tax dollars in stupid ways.
Soooo, what you are saying is that intolerant people are intolerant and you in turn are intolerant of them for their intolerance? Good to know.
Ah, well, finally a point for discussion. If we limit the talk, for a moment, to putting up a Christmas tree or Hanukkiah (a menorah’s something else) in a state-sponsored space, like, say a courthouse or a town square owned by the village, then you are, in fact, suggesting that it belongs to the atheists in the town too. If that part of the town belongs to all of us, then anything we put in it represents all of us. That’s why I’m okay with multicultural displays, including a blank spot for atheists and a huge question mark for agnostics 
, because they allow expression of a more representative sampling of the populace, but if you limit it to a single display of a single religion without qualification, then I’m less supportive.
In other words, sure, put up your Christmas tree. Just leave room for my pentacle and the Jew’s Hanakkiah and the Satanist’s Head of Baphomet and the Voudoun priest’s chicken heads and…
How tolerant is your tolerance?
Okay, I agree, within the limits of what I posted above. Is this a widespread problem, in your experience?
like I said earlier regarding the “church and state” issue, point taken.
Although I don’t completely agree with the concept of “separation of church and state”. I think it’s beyond anal. But that’s another debate… yeah.
my tolerance is very tolerant. 
I just don’t condone hate speech or hate groups, that includes abortion bombings and jihadists.
Yes, it’s a widespread problem because too many people object over trivial irrelevant things that fall under the guise of “intolerance”. As they happen, I’ll point them out. But just this morning on the cable talk shows, the atheist holiday tree was discussed. And although I completely support it, some people did not. Why? Why not let them have a holiday tree? It’s pure intolerance not to… Are people threatened by beliefs that do not match their own? I think so…
Ya know, Johny ol’ bean, perhaps you could link us to an example of what you are concerned about before we get to far into this debate. Or is your concern just a general feeling of anxiety that you wanted to express?