I think the number of dyed-in-the-wool-real-self-proclaimed-Christians who are offended that American society hasn’t fully embraced Christian as a “birthday for baby Jesus” far outnumber the non-Christians who are offended that Christmas is sorta-kinda a federally-supported holiday. These are the same ditwrspCs who get miffed if you say “Happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”, and I suspect they’re trumpeting the “persecution” of Christmas just to satisfy their own self-martyr complexes.
If the federal government refused its non-Christian employees the opportunity to take off, with pay, on their particular religious high holidays, there may be a preference given to the Christian religion, and therefore violation of the Establishment Clause. But it does allow those days off - they do it through personal days that may be used for those holidays. So no preference to a particular religion is given.
If a large majority of your workers are going to take the day off, it simply makes sense to declare the day a holiday and shut down.
Well, Easter IS celebrated on Sunday, so you get that day off, usually.
Its such a long tradition, Xmas, and not everyone see’s it as religious. Renmaing it would be fine with me, but christians would be up in arms screaming that their religion was being destroyed. Myself, I hate holidays where theres no mail, no regular programming, etc.
I suggest we call it “Boxing Day’s Eve.” Then we can call “Christmas Eve” “Boxing Day’s Eve Eve.” And then we can all sit around tryng to figure out what the hell “Boxing Day” is.
Er, um, not according to my Merriam-Webster Collegiate which says it is derived from the Old English maesse which is assumed to ultimately derive from the Latin past participle of mittre(to send) which is missus or “sent.” It has to do with the dismissal of the group at the end of a religious service.
It’s not clear that everyone knows this, so we should make it very clear. Hell, this sort of turning of issues into soundbites is why there are people who think the ACLU is an anti-religious lobbying group. You hear things like “The ACLU wants to ban prayer in schools”, when in actuality, the ACLU would be a lot more like to defend a student’s right to pray in school privately.
As rude as Debaser is being here with his absurd and unwelcome stereotypes of the secular left, I hate to agree with him. But I do.
The state shouldn’t change its official documents. To do so would be the worst sort of political correctness: that is, the sort of political correctness that deliberately obfuscates meaning in order to achieve a hypothetical and unarticulated good.
For me, this gets at the central point, which is that the holiday isn’t called Shmooday. It’s called Christmas. That’s what everyone calls it, and by everyone I mean 99.99% of English-speaking Americans. For the government to say, “We’re giving you December 25 off because a lot of you celebrate it as some holiday, but we’re not going to tell you the name of the holiday!” is just ridiculous.
Everyone knows why Dec 25 is a holiday. The governmnet, by referring to the holiday by its universal name, isn’t endorsing anything. They’re just using the language in an efficient, effective manner.
I disagree. The “Christ” part in “Christmas” has zero meaning for me, and for quite a few other people. The name proclaims itself a religious holiday. For me and for others like me, it isn’t. The “'mas” part is rather like “holiday” in that most people probably don’t know, and don’t care at all, where it came from or what it means. Call it Mas Day! Then the argument can be about how to pronounce it. Fun!
Seriously, I don’t see this as that big an issue. If some Newdow wants to pursue it, he’ll be doing it without my help.
While I understand the word’s etymoogy, its etymology and its current meaning are two separate things. Let me ask a couple questions:
On what day do most Americans celebrate Christmas?
What do most Americans call the holiday celebrated on December 25?
The answer to these two questions ought to determine what term the government uses in its official documents to refer to the holiday it provides its workers on December 25.
As another analogy, if the government is charging the Christian Coalition with unlawful campaigning, they ought to refer to the Christian Coalition, not to the Shmoo Coalition. They ought to use the common name for their referent, not pussyfoot around it.
Diogenes was clear with what he meant. I was also clear in an earlier post that I understood his meaning and was responding to that which he said. There was no confusion between us, and shouldn’t have been for anyone who read our posts.
I think it is fair to characterize the ACLU as an anti-religous lobbying group. They are a lobbying group. Their interpretation of the 1st ammendment can be called “anti-religious”. You might disagree with this sentiment, but it’s hardly a stretch for somebody to make such a claim.
If the stereotypes are absurd and unwelcome then why don’t you attack those on the secular left who exhibit them! All I’m doing is pointing out the absurdity of these beliefs. Blaming me for pointing out the absurdity of secular leftist beliefs is like blaming the weatherman for the storm.
Now you’re calling the ideas of the secular left rididulous. Does this make you as rude as I? :rolleyes:
