|
Post by Kitten on Dec 5, 2005 19:19:29 GMT -5
What three wise men? What is bethlahem? What are you talking about? Some children story? A star is this thing in the sky that shines in the night if its not cloudy. There is alot of them if you leave the city. That I know for sure, and thats enough to make beautiful decorations and put them on a tree. I don't care for any wise men. OK for all of you who obviously don't know. The STAR in the east lead the three wise men to where JESUS CHRIST was born in Bethlehem. December 25 is Christs b-day. That is why the star is on the Christmas tree. Here is some more stuff you probably don't know. www.webtol.com/tolxmas/xmas15.htmlPeople aren't saying that a star isn't a symbol of Christmas, they're just saying it's not exclusive to Christmas alone--yea the star on the tree may symbolize the Star that led the three Wise Men to Hey-susse but that star, along with billions and billions of other stars were burning in the sky damn well long before humans even existed. Stars can also symbolize many different things like astronomy and astrology and hope. A star is in no way a Christian symbol itself, although if you put it on a tree it may--though I think most people just put it up there cuz it looks pretty.--But anyone who would be offended by a star on a tree needs to have their head examined. I think the whole Politically Correct crap has gone too far. Who the fuck is offended by "Merry Christmas?"! I'm not a practicing Christian, I sometimes think I'm an atheist but I don't give a shit if someone else wants to celebrate Christmas or Haunukah (sp) or Boxing Day or whatever the hell it is they celbrate. If people want to put religious stuff up in front of thier house, by all means, let them and go on your merry way. (heh I said merry) Same with stores and merchants. People should be able to celebrate what they want. I thought we had something called freedom of religion in this country but lately with all this Anti-Christmas bullshit I'm not so sure. If you're offended because your local Macy's has Christmas type stuff, don't shop there. Period, end of fucking story. That drives me insane. They want you to come in and spend money on CHRISTMAS presents but they can't acknowledge the holiday?? Come on! I've heard of stores banning Santa and Rudolph, even RED and GREEN, traditional Christmas colors, are now offending people. Why shoudl the stores haveto change everything around that they've done for years and means so much to so many other people just to please a whiny few? These symbols may have religious meaning, yes, but it's more tradition, and they're symbols of the season. It's all getting to be too much. On the other hand, a religious symbol in front of say, a courthouse or public federal place is iffy. Whole nother ballpark there.
|
|
|
Post by shypsychologyguy on Dec 6, 2005 0:15:16 GMT -5
there are two debates 1. the commercialisation of Christmas: raised by religious extremists who do not believe in celebrating christmas at all in the way we celebrate it. I once knew one of those.
2. The name of Christmas : by athesists who do not want to respect a holiday celebrated by the majority that celebrates the birth of a moral being who, at least, is inspirational.
this was on the O'Reilly Factor tonight as well as a contreversy over a cross display honoring police officers killed on the job. So sad that its coming to this.
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Dec 6, 2005 0:32:36 GMT -5
im pretty shure history shows jesus exhisted right Russ. I single out russ because he is the one with masters degree in History. Well, no one disputes he existed. Both Jewish, Greek, and Roman sources from the time all identify that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified on the cross for stirring up trouble in Palestine under Roman Rule during the reign of Tiberius. The issue is whether he was the Christ or not. I say yes, but i can see why some would question this. Oh, by the way SPG, i won't have my Master's for another four months.
|
|
|
Post by pansy on Dec 6, 2005 5:41:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pnoopiepnats on Dec 6, 2005 5:56:17 GMT -5
LMAO! Gotta love Foamy! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Samantha on Dec 10, 2005 16:57:58 GMT -5
I think the whole Politically Correct crap has gone too far. Amen. Soon people won't be allowed to be happy incase it offends depressed people. People won't be able to have friends incase it offends lonely people. Nobody will be able to have an opinion incase sombody else disagrees. Some people are such stupid assholes in my opinion that offending them means you are doing something right. I've heard of stores banning Santa and Rudolph, even RED and GREEN, traditional Christmas colors, are now offending people That's possibly the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard !!!
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Dec 11, 2005 0:35:35 GMT -5
I've heard of stores banning Santa and Rudolph, even RED and GREEN, traditional Christmas colors, are now offending people That's possibly the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard !!! Amen to that, PapLuther. However, the radicals are getting to this point in our country. Now they're working on removing crosses from state and federal cemeteries for fallen war veterans because the cross is a Christian symbol. In my opinion, these radical proposals are going to be the political death of the radical liberals, because time and again Americans have traditionally rejected any such forms of Atheistic radicalism, ranging as far back as the 1890's with the rise of the American Socialist Party, and hence, its quick demise, hint hint. The radical liberals will simply lose all credibility in the eyes of the law.
|
|
|
Post by Samantha on Dec 17, 2005 9:21:09 GMT -5
Radicals, atheists, liberals, hmmm. I think you are being rather generous with your titles. Lets be honest, they are fuckwits.
Multicuturalism should be just that.
|
|
|
Post by Bodhi on Dec 17, 2005 11:09:14 GMT -5
Radicals, atheists, liberals, hmmm. I think you are being rather generous with your titles. Lets be honest, they are fuckwits. Multicuturalism should be just that. Come on now, I think everyone is going a little over board with this liberal bashing. I could say a few choice things about radical conservatives and how they are ruining the country. But I won't because I think we need to rise above stupid political stereotypes. Having two sides fight against each other and call each other names gets the country nowhere. Parties seem to exist now simply to get reelected. They care less about making the country better, than their poll numbers. Most things are done because they are political advantageous to the politician, rather than they are good for the country. I find it absurd when a politician complains how another politician is "playing politics' with an issue. As if not every single politician plays politics every single day, just look at what we call them, politicians. I just heard a congressman brought this whole holiday/Christmas issue up on the floor of Congress. Now if thats not just pure political grandstanding I don't know what is. I could go on with my rant, maybe later. I just think lining up on only two sides is stupid and doesn't work very well.
|
|
|
Post by Samantha on Dec 17, 2005 11:26:37 GMT -5
Come on now, I think everyone is going a little over board with this liberal bashing. I could say a few choice things about radical conservatives and how they are ruining the country. But I won't because I think we need to rise above stupid political stereotypes. Having two sides fight against each other and call each other names gets the country nowhere. Parties seem to exist now simply to get reelected. They care less about making the country better, than their poll numbers. Most things are done because they are political advantageous to the politician, rather than they are good for the country. I find it absurd when a politician complains how another politician is "playing politics' with an issue. As if not every single politician plays politics every single day, just look at what we call them, politicians. I just heard a congressman brought this whole holiday/Christmas issue up on the floor of Congress. Now if thats not just pure political grandstanding I don't know what is. I could go on with my rant, maybe later. I just think lining up on only two sides is stupid and doesn't work very well. I couldn't agree with you more Bodhi. Sorry if it looks like I was calling liberal etc fuckwits, I wasn't. At least I didn't mean to. I was saying or meant to say that, their political persuasion is irrelevant. It's the fact they are fuckwits and not liberal, or atheist etc. Not all liberals, atheists etc want to ban Christmas. I am both of those, to some degree, so I wouldn't call myself a fuckwit. An idot sure, a twat definately but not a fuckwit ;D Sorry if I confused things. Please go on with your rant because it's a good one.
|
|
|
Post by shypsychologyguy on Dec 17, 2005 16:06:15 GMT -5
think of it this way
the conservatives can be as conservative as they want but will reach a point where they cannot be any more conservative
the liberals can be as liberal as they want forever
the reason is in the way the groups interpret the constitution. If the constitution is no longer sound then the liberals will just create something new .
that is the problem with the democratic party because there is such a range to be liberal they are the catchall of non conservatives which includes some really "out there " groups. The extremly liberal are not in the majority for the democrats but because they are associated it causes problems for the democrats image.
that is why president bush won a second term because the majority of america was turned off by the extreme liberals in the dem. party because they hold nontraditional views . Social issues are what brought many to the poles .
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Dec 17, 2005 23:20:38 GMT -5
Come on now, I think everyone is going a little over board with this liberal bashing. I could say a few choice things about radical conservatives and how they are ruining the country. But I won't because I think we need to rise above stupid political stereotypes. I'm not bashing liberals; i'm bashing the radical liberals nutjobs that want to erode some of the rights built into our Constitution in favor of their ordered society based on conformity. Now, mind you, these present a very small fraction of the actual liberal groups in our country. But they are using the law in their favor, pushing for radicla progams that hardly anyone wants, but they have the law on their side. Radicals such as these once banned liqueor in our country; that fell through the hole after a few years. But now they want to ban guns. And religion. And even free speech, of the type that they don't agree with. All of these are Constitutional rights that we all enjoy. I am not in favor of any group, no matter what their politics or beliefs, taking away my right to say what i want in my homeland. Nobody is going to keep me from saying Merry Christmas, or Happy Haneukah to my Jewish boss, who says Merry Christmas to me in return. But i'm telling, these radicals will do their very best to keep us from saying what we feel if we let them.
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Dec 17, 2005 23:30:58 GMT -5
that is why president bush won a second term because the majority of america was turned off by the extreme liberals in the dem. party because they hold nontraditional views . Social issues are what brought many to the poles . Actually, you're not wrong here SPG. I watched a session on CNN that interviewed some of the heads of the Democrat Political Part Committee, asking them why they thought they lost the 2004 election. They stated that they lost the election because polls were taken showing why people voted for the Republicans. Number one reason, Bush and Cheney's stance on terrrorism. But the number two reason was that the Democratics leaned so much towards simple anti-Bush criticism in their campaign, which lost a lot of conservative and moderate Democrat votes. The committee felt that had they focused more on their federal spending programs, with more emphasis on the positive, then they would not have lost so much of the vote. Remember; Bush won with 51% of the popular vote, Kerry 48%. That's close, but not unusual in Presidential elections. Rarely do candidates get more than 55%. I can only think of a few, most noteworthy FDR in 1940 and Truman in 1944, and Harding in 1920. Perhaps there are others as well. But few candidates will recieve much more than half the popular vote. So had the Democrats focused more on their progams, perhaps they would have won in 2004 and not lost. The committee plans on playing this strategy in the 2008 election.
|
|
|
Post by sushiboat on Dec 18, 2005 11:57:34 GMT -5
Battles rage in US over celebrating holidays By Ellen Wulfhorst, Reuters December 18, 2005
Ebenezer Scrooge would enjoy Christmas in America this year.
Drowning out the sounds of sleigh bells ringing and children singing are the sounds of arguing. At issue is how to greet people, how to decorate main street and how to sell gifts -- all without offending someone.
Religious conservatives are threatening lawsuits and boycotts to insist that store clerks and advertisements say "Merry Christmas." Countering are those who argue they are being inclusive and inoffensive with the secular "Happy Holidays."
In the middle seem to be most Americans, who not only aren't offended but find the whole spat rather ridiculous.
"You'd think there might be some Christmas spirit around Christmas time around the issue of Christmas," said Paul Cantor, a popular culture expert and professor at the University of Virginia. "It's one time you really wish people really could live and let live."
Alas, that's not what this Christmas is all about.
Sparks flew when U.S. President George W. Bush sent out cards referring to the "holiday season," a leading Republican declared the decorated tree on the Capitol lawn a "Christmas Tree" and not a "Holiday Tree" and the logger who cut down the tree for the Boston Common was so upset when officials called it a "Holiday Tree" that he said he'd rather see it fed into a wood chipper.
"HANGING OF THE GREENS"
Conservative groups have marshaled the forces of lawyers volunteering to help anyone fighting for Christmas displays and launched boycotts of retailers whose advertisements fail to say "Merry Christmas."
A school system in Texas found itself in court after teachers asked children to bring white -- rather than red and green -- napkins to a party, while Annapolis, Maryland raised hackles by calling its evergreen boughs and ribbons on public buildings the "Hanging of the Greens" rather than "Christmas decorations."
Fanning the flames are conservative talk show personalities bemoaning the secularization of Christmas. Fox News anchor John Gibson chimed in with a book "The War on Christmas: How the Liberal Plot to Ban the Sacred Christian Holiday is Worse than You Thought."
"'Happy Holidays' and 'Season's Greetings' are not a substitute for 'Merry Christmas,"' said Manuel Zamorano, head of the Sacramento, California-based Committee to Save Merry Christmas, which organizes store boycotts over holiday advertising.
"Christmas is the holiday and 'Merry Christmas' is what we want to hear," he said. "It's political correctness gone amok."
BLAME POLITICS
Bah humbug, said radio talk show host Bill Press, author of "How the Republicans Stole Christmas."
"People have been saying 'Happy Holidays' for a hundred years at least," he said. "This is nothing new. It just celebrates the diversity of America."
He blames politics.
"It is all by design," he said. "The more people are talking about who's saying 'Happy Holidays' and who's saying 'Merry Christmas,' the less people are talking about Karl Rove, torture, Tom DeLay, the war in Iraq and other hot issues.
"And the more they stir up their evangelical Christian base over this issue, the more likely they are to get out and vote Republican in 2006," he said.
The debate has become comic grist.
"Every time you say 'Happy Holidays,' an angel gets AIDS," warned television comedian Jon Stewart.
The satirical newspaper The Onion wrote a spoof about a judge who declared Christmas unconstitutional, with a photograph purporting to be workers dismantling the famed tree at Rockefeller Center to comply with the judge's ruling.
Making the rounds on the Internet is a series of mock memos from a fake company inviting employees to a Christmas Party, complete with open bar, gift exchange and tree lighting.
By the last of the memos, the increasingly beleaguered company is forced to apologize to its Jewish employees, the office alcoholics, Muslims, dieters, pregnant women, gays and lesbians, union members, management, cross-dressers, diabetics and vegetarians. In the end, the party is canceled.
RETAILERS IN THE MIDDLE
Stuck in the middle of the debate are retailers, whose seasonal selling campaigns seem to raise particular wrath.
"When someone says 'Happy Holidays,' they're saying something very nice to you. There's no ill intent behind any of this," said Dan Butler of the National Retail Federation. "When you're dealing with the public you'll get positive comments and negative comments about everything in the world."
Perhaps, added Peter Steinfels of the Center on Religion and Culture at Fordham University, there isn't a war on Christmas after all but a more sensitive religious right.
Conservatives are using the super-fast Internet and e-mail to publicize what they see as extreme examples of "super politically correct conduct," he said. "It gives the impression that there's a great deal of political correctness ... when in fact it may not really be so different from the way it's always been."
|
|
|
Post by albetross on Dec 19, 2005 20:28:58 GMT -5
|
|