Separation of Church and State?

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:50 pm

After briefly debating with someone on it recently, I came to the conclusion that making everything equal in America with regard to local laws/holidays is an anti-Christian, possibly bordering on anti-American (in some cases) agenda hiding behind the legitimate-looking veil of "separation of church and state". The key is, who is complaining, do they have a legitimate reason to complain, and are we still using common sense in government after their complaint is through. If a vocal minority is trying to change local laws to trump tradition based on nothing more than their inability to be tolerant (woohoo, we find the other edge of the (s)word!) of said laws, which cater to the majority without causing people who don't appreciate them any great harm or inconvenience, I would call that trouble-making, no matter how noble a face they try to put on it.

Started in response to topic deviation in Baptist group kills Jewish teacher!

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:10 am

So you are not a fan of Thomas Jefferson?

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:46 am

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I came to the conclusion that making everything equal in America with regard to local laws/holidays is an anti-Christian, possibly bordering on anti-American (in some cases) agenda...

So, all the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, Jains, Sikhs, Bahá'ís, Unitarians, Wiccans, and non-religious are colluding to make America less Christian and less American too?

Oh. Makes perfect sense.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:12 am

for what it's worth, Thorne, some of the most ardent advocates of a very strong wall between Church and State that I've ever encountered are my Dad and many,many of his Masonic Brethren. These guys tend to be both Christians(strong ones in most cases), and rather Conservative, but their organization was founded from persecution by a 'Religious' society.
Basically, I think your conclusions need a serious re-think.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:28 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:After briefly debating with someone on it recently, I came to the conclusion that making everything equal in America with regard to local laws/holidays is an anti-Christian, possibly bordering on anti-American (in some cases) agenda hiding behind the legitimate-looking veil of "separation of church and state". The key is, who is complaining, do they have a legitimate reason to complain, and are we still using common sense in government after their complaint is through. If a vocal minority is trying to change local laws to trump tradition based on nothing more than their inability to be tolerant (woohoo, we find the other edge of the (s)word!) of said laws, which cater to the majority without causing people who don't appreciate them any great harm or inconvenience, I would call that trouble-making, no matter how noble a face they try to put on it.

Started in response to topic deviation in Baptist group kills Jewish teacher!

So I take it you agree with the pastor from my other post I started, that if one is not a Christian, then one is not a true American and should just get the hell out if they don't like that fact? That's the most self-centered, arrogant, uncompromising and disrespectful attitude towards others I've heard spouted in a long time. The essentially 40 or so percent of people in this country who are NOT Christians are at the mercy of a repressive religion they don't agree with. Why is that even right? Jefferson feared that any one religion would subvert the power of the people if it became powerful enough. Well, that looks like it's starting to come true with Protestantism in the U.S.

Christians have their beliefs and are free to follow them. The government does not interfere. The government is not there to promote a particular religion either. Why is it such a hardship for Christians to respect the traditions, beliefs and lives of others that do NOT want to be followers, do NOT want to be subjected to particular state-sanctioned traditions and yet are citizens of this country and part of the process?

The question really is, why should one religion's long standing traditions be dominant in any pluralistic society, to the point that all other religion's or people's traditions and beliefs, slightly less than half of the people in the U.S. right now, be trampled by overwhelming force by those with a bare majority and an attitude to match? Don't you think that's going to create resentment and ill will? Do Christians want to make enemies, or create friends and respect in the world? Right now, they aren't garnering any respect amongst non-followers, only ill will, or perhaps even hatred.

Yes, we were founded by Christians, but the smartest amongst the founders realized after writing the Constitution that even those beliefs could be used to gain power and repress others.

Thomas Jefferson wrote:... I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

Now, instead of the Church of England, we have the Many Churches of Evangelicals and the new Prosperity Theology.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:16 am

You all missed it. Go to O.P., go directly to O.P., do not pass "GO", do not collect $200. I was not speaking disparagingly of the separation between church and state, I was saying that a community consisting mostly of Christians should not be bullied into not being able to observe their holidays by a minority that comes in to spite them in the name of "separation of church and state". I mean once a community is no longer largely Christian, as the case may be in some places, it doesn't make sense to hold onto such traditions which no longer have meaning to the people observing them, but up until that point there is no common-sense basis for troubling Christians about their holidays, IMO. To approach it from an angle that may allow you all to see it apart from your knee-jerk anti-fundamentalist tendencies: If I walk into a neighborhood that is predominantly Jewish, or Muslim, I might expect them to have various holidays they observe officially. If I try to use "separation of church and state" to shut them down, when the only thing being forced on me is a holiday--a day off of work, isn't that just a lack of tolerance on my part in not wishing to recognize that the majority in the community observe these holidays?

If the opposing argument being made is that the government (should be local government, IMO) cannot sanction religious holidays, then I disagree, and frankly so do a great many people throughout our history.

And I make this argument, not necessarily from a knowledge that EVERY TIME "separation of church and state" is used it is happening like this, but because it became apparent that the person I was debating with the other day did not recognize, in their argument, WHY a local government or school should sanction a particular holiday. These holidays are not tools for proselytizing, or a means of forcing people to observe rites which mean nothing to them, like some of these folks seem to be decrying--they are common-sense official breaks in social activity in recognition that a large part of society is going to be absent or occupied on those days anyway.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:24 am

To the degree that people in public office are caving on this topic they are losing hold of common-sense, and that is what I find most troubling.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:06 am

Sergeant Thorne wrote:You all missed it. Go to O.P., go directly to O.P., do not pass "GO", do not collect $200. I was not speaking disparagingly of the separation between church and state, I was saying that a community consisting mostly of Christians should not be bullied into not being able to observe their holidays by a minority that comes in to spite them in the name of "separation of church and state".

since when is anyone, of any faith(save perhaps Rastafarians) 'not able to observe their holidays'? Seriously, that just doesn't happen, but it ISN'T the role of the Government to celebrate one type of religious holiday over another, and the government really shouldn't have any role in celebrating any religious events in my opinion. Sure,you can, out of common sense, tradition and plain old practicality, give folks off if a large number of them are going to be celebrating a religious holiday, but that is true for employers and businesses. I guess what I'm saying, Thorne, is that I see no current issues around this sort of thing.

roid · Post by **roid** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:13 am

i'd expect a public office to have a holiday because "a critical mass of our staff have a prior arrangement on this day, and an off-day eases the expectation to continue business while short-staffed". This seems preferable rather than... well rather than any other reason really.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:08 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:You all missed it. Go to O.P., go directly to O.P., do not pass "GO", do not collect $200. I was not speaking disparagingly of the separation between church and state, I was saying that a community consisting mostly of Christians should not be bullied into not being able to observe their holidays by a minority that comes in to spite them in the name of "separation of church and state". I mean once a community is no longer largely Christian, as the case may be in some places, it doesn't make sense to hold onto such traditions which no longer have meaning to the people observing them, but up until that point there is no common-sense basis for troubling Christians about their holidays, IMO. To approach it from an angle that may allow you all to see it apart from your knee-jerk anti-fundamentalist tendencies: If I walk into a neighborhood that is predominantly Jewish, or Muslim, I might expect them to have various holidays they observe officially. If I try to use "separation of church and state" to shut them down, when the only thing being forced on me is a holiday--a day off of work, isn't that just a lack of tolerance on my part in not wishing to recognize that the majority in the community observe these holidays?

If the opposing argument being made is that the government (should be local government, IMO) cannot sanction religious holidays, then I disagree, and frankly so do a great many people throughout our history.

And I make this argument, not necessarily from a knowledge that EVERY TIME "separation of church and state" is used it is happening like this, but because it became apparent that the person I was debating with the other day did not recognize, in their argument, WHY a local government or school should sanction a particular holiday. These holidays are not tools for proselytizing, or a means of forcing people to observe rites which mean nothing to them, like some of these folks seem to be decrying--they are common-sense official breaks in social activity in recognition that a large part of society is going to be absent or occupied on those days anyway.

I read the O.P. A Christian was murdered because someone thought he was proselytizing. I did not follow the whole thread. Maybe my bad for not following the six degrees of Kevin Bacon, as most threads go here. The problem with many of our major holidays is that they are Christian based and preferentially state-sanctioned that EVERYONE has to deal with, while the traditions of other religions or groups are not given any state importance and thus relegated to personal preference on when and how follow them. And that's the problem, tradition that's ingrained in a culture and a culture resistant to alter those traditions to include others that are not of main body of our society.

Maybe since a lot of these traditional holidays have been around so long, it's ridiculous or stupid to even try to change things as the mix of society changes. Just let any new immigrants deal with it since it's tradition and that's the way the majority wants it. Conform or leave. You've got to wonder though, as other religions and people move into the U.S., what's going to happen. Do things change to respect and be inclusive of minority traditions, or do Christians keep demanding that since they were around first, the Founding Fathers were Christian and thus their traditions are first and foremost in importance and by default everyone else can go suck it up and deal with it? See the problem for a country that prides itself on freedom and freedom of expression when the group in the majority assumes they are in the right and thus deserving of state sanctioning?

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:38 pm

tunnelcat wrote:The problem with many of our major holidays is that they are Christian based and preferentially state-sanctioned that EVERYONE has to deal with

Hummmm…I count….ONE.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:55 pm

Forgot Easter, although that's only on one Sunday. And that big single ONE you don't name, Christmas, usually ends up being 2 weeks long for most schools, whether you're Christian or not. That's quite a chunk out of December for a state-sanctioned holiday. But hey, as a kid, it was great to have 2 weeks off.

What I don't like are all those signs my Christian neighbors put out on their lawns to "remind me", like I'm some idiot heathen; "Tis the reason for the season. Jesus". Well, I'm not stopping them from using that reason for celebrating Winter Break. It's a free country. However, why do they feel the need to remind me and everyone else that drives by their sanctimonious house that they're Jesus freaks and we should be too.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:02 pm

Since when is Easter a state sponsored holiday?

JFTR http://www.opm.gov/Operating_Status_Sch ... l/2012.asp

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:06 pm

tunnelcat wrote:

The problem with many of our major holidays is that they are Christian based and preferentially state-sanctioned that EVERYONE has to deal with, while the traditions of other religions or groups are not given any state importance and thus relegated to personal preference on when and how follow them. And that's the problem, tradition that's ingrained in a culture and a culture resistant to alter those traditions to include others that are not of main body of our society.

Here's a thought...why not enact other religions holiday's instead of removing everything. The Russians tried the State is God routine and banned religions but it didn't seem to work very well.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:18 pm

tunnelcat wrote:What I don't like are all those signs my Christian neighbors put out on their lawns to "remind me", like I'm some idiot heathen; "Tis the reason for the season. Jesus". Well, I'm not stopping them from using that reason for celebrating Winter Break. It's a free country. However, why do they feel the need to remind me and everyone else that drives by their sanctimonious house that they're Jesus freaks and we should be too.

well first off it's called freedom of speech and it's protected by the first amendment, just and the right to practice their religion is also protected by the first Amendment. sorry if that offends you.
And could you please post a pic of the sign they have on their front lawn that says
"TC you need to be a Jesus Freak"
I'd like to see how they are are reminding you that you also need to be a Jesus Freak. maybe it's you that is making a show of being morally superior to other people and not them. they have a right to express their beliefs in the non violent way that they wish. just as you have a right to ignore them.
I thought you were a liberal TC? isn't the mantra of the left to be Tolerance for other peoples beliefs and life styles?? you seem to be lacking in that quality

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:39 pm

Say it aint so.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 7:18 pm

still waiting......please, tell me who, in the US, cannot practice their religion, or observe their holidays?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:09 pm

And I'm waiting to see where allowing the Ten Commandments in a court house prevented any athiest from getting a fair trial.

Flatlander · Post by **Flatlander** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:19 am

woodchip wrote:And I'm waiting to see where allowing the Ten Commandments in a court house prevented any athiest from getting a fair trial.

*atheist*

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:52 am

CUDA wrote:
tunnelcat wrote:What I don't like are all those signs my Christian neighbors put out on their lawns to "remind me", like I'm some idiot heathen; "Tis the reason for the season. Jesus". Well, I'm not stopping them from using that reason for celebrating Winter Break. It's a free country. However, why do they feel the need to remind me and everyone else that drives by their sanctimonious house that they're Jesus freaks and we should be too.
well first off it's called freedom of speech and it's protected by the first amendment, just and the right to practice their religion is also protected by the first Amendment. sorry if that offends you.
And could you please post a pic of the sign they have on their front lawn that says
"TC you need to be a Jesus Freak"
I'd like to see how they are are reminding you that you also need to be a Jesus Freak. maybe it's you that is making a show of being morally superior to other people and not them. they have a right to express their beliefs in the non violent way that they wish. just as you have a right to ignore them.
I thought you were a liberal TC? isn't the mantra of the left to be Tolerance for other peoples beliefs and life styles?? you seem to be lacking in that quality

"First off", there is uncertainty over the date of Jesus' actual birthday, so why should the originally Roman Pagan Winter Solstice Festival, specifically centered around Mithras (the Sun Deity), be even associated with that of Jesus? It's kind of a creepy association anyway. Even the Christmas Tree is Pagan.

And Christians are being the sanctimonious ones here, not me, if they feel the need to remind me and everyone else that we should be all celebrating Winter break for one reason and one reason only, Jesus. Are they so threatened by all the other non-believers in this country that they need to put their admonitions in words like political sign eyesores just to rub in our faces every time we drive by? Why not just put up a nice manger scene or cross to celebrate Jesus instead? It'd be much prettier. All these signs do is to point out that the people living inside are Christians and that they think there is a war on Christmas and that we heathens need to be reminded of that fact. It's not very Christian-like, but instead more bully-like. Are Christians that insecure?

http://atheism.about.com/od/christmasho ... Reason.htm

http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additi ... eason.html

You call me intolerant CUDA. That's not the case. If I were "intolerant", I'd be out there at night burning or destroying their stupid "politicized" signs.

Spidey wrote:Since when is Easter a state sponsored holiday?

You're right, it's not a national holiday. But next time you're in a store, just try an avoid all the Easter displays. But I can't gripe. Chocolate Bunnies and Peeps are to die for.

TechPro · Post by **TechPro** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:44 pm

tunnelcat wrote:...
And Christians are being the sanctimonious ones here, not me, if they feel the need to remind me and everyone else that we should be all celebrating Winter break for one reason and one reason only, Jesus. Are they so threatened by all the other non-believers in this country that they need to put their admonitions in words like political sign eyesores just to rub in our faces every time we drive by? Why not just put up a nice manger scene or cross to celebrate Jesus instead? It'd be much prettier. All these signs do is to point out that the people living inside are Christians and that they think there is a war on Christmas and that we heathens need to be reminded of that fact. It's not very Christian-like, but instead more bully-like. Are Christians that insecure?
...

And you're not being sanctimonious? Perhaps the Christians should remind you of the many many times they are being prevented from their right to worship by the atheists who don't want to see the Christians following their beliefs. Are the Atheists that insecure?

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:28 pm

Well, in true libertarian fashion, my solution would be for the government to be a minimally involved as possible.

If a government office wants to be closed (or not closed) for Memorial Day, Christmas, Kwanzaa, Yam Kipper, or whatever other holiday what do I care? It may be inconvenient for me, but I can deal with that for a few days a year in the interest of the convenience of the workers in the office. If the government wants to try to say that I can't take a day off for Easter, I care very much.... but I don't think anyone's really proposing that.

To be honest, I'd be perfectly fine if each government office was given a "floating holiday" allowance - where the members of the office could pick whatever set of holidays they wished... it would vary from area to area and that would be fine. In fact, if they wanted to make it an individual decision, and just keep the office officially open all the time, I'd be fin with that, too.

We get into trouble because things like the post office and the public schools pick days to have off that affect the populous... so how do I realistically handle that? I'd let the school boards and individual post offices decide... from a separation of church and state standpoint, I don't particularly have a problem with that.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:05 pm

woodchip wrote:And I'm waiting to see where allowing the Ten Commandments in a court house prevented any athiest from getting a fair trial.

I'm sort of ambivalent, speaking as at least an agnostic. Tradition is tradition......still, I suspect it might have appalled Jefferson and many others of his time, as it does dance real close to 'State Sanction' of at least of specific religious branch. Close call.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:52 pm

TechPro wrote:And you're not being sanctimonious? Perhaps the Christians should remind you of the many many times they are being prevented from their right to worship by the atheists who don't want to see the Christians following their beliefs. Are the Atheists that insecure?

Christians are free to practice as they please within their churches, group gatherings and homes. I can't speak for Atheists, maybe TB ought to pipe up instead of ranting about Islam for once, but little ol' me has never wanted to nor tried to stop the freedom of any Christians to congregate and worship in peace. It's when it involves the public square and the public view that things get murky. How far do your freedoms to practice as a Christian extend into mainstream society's business and affairs when not all are Christian, nor want to be? Who is trampling on who's rights in that instance?

vision · Post by **vision** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:04 pm

woodchip wrote:And I'm waiting to see where allowing the Ten Commandments in a court house prevented any athiest from getting a fair trial.

There is at least once case I know of several years ago where a judge scolded an atheist in court for not believing in god and told him "he had no rights." The judge later lost her chair for that, of course, and it took a while for justice to be served (can't find the article right now). But it's not like atheists enjoy the same rights as everyone else. Look at how hard it is for an atheist to get elected. Some states have totally unconstitutional laws forbidding atheists from holding office. I would definitely say this is injustice in favor of a certain religious institution (can you guess which one?).

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 11:57 pm

My favorite part about that link is that Pennsylvania is so ass-backwards, we've even managed to invert the wording of an old shitty law.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:47 am

tunnelcat wrote:"First off", there is uncertainty over the date of Jesus' actual birthday, so why should the originally Roman Pagan Winter Solstice Festival, specifically centered around Mithras (the Sun Deity), be even associated with that of Jesus? It's kind of a creepy association anyway. Even the Christmas Tree is Pagan.

And Christians are being the sanctimonious ones here, not me, if they feel the need to remind me and everyone else that we should be all celebrating Winter break for one reason and one reason only, Jesus. Are they so threatened by all the other non-believers in this country that they need to put their admonitions in words like political sign eyesores just to rub in our faces every time we drive by? Why not just put up a nice manger scene or cross to celebrate Jesus instead? It'd be much prettier. All these signs do is to point out that the people living inside are Christians and that they think there is a war on Christmas and that we heathens need to be reminded of that fact. It's not very Christian-like, but instead more bully-like. Are Christians that insecure?

You call me intolerant CUDA. That's not the case. If I were "intolerant", I'd be out there at night burning or destroying their stupid "politicized" signs.

I know the history of the holiday.. but that's not the issue here is it? you did everything you could to avoid the topic with that comment. the FACTS are you don't like them talking bout their religion, just admit it and move on. .

Are Christians that insecure?

are you that insecure that someone posting a sign on their property saying "Jesus is the reason for the season" is a threat to you?

Christians are free to practice as they please within their churches, group gatherings and homes. I can't speak for Atheists, maybe TB ought to pipe up instead of ranting about Islam for once, but little ol' me has never wanted to nor tried to stop the freedom of any Christians to congregate and worship in peace. It's when it involves the public square and the public view that things get murky. How far do your freedoms to practice as a Christian extend into mainstream society's business and affairs when not all are Christian, nor want to be? Who is trampling on who's rights in that instance?

AH .you're free to practice your nice little beliefs just do it in a closed room where nobody can see it. how Chinese of you

I'm glad to see you're a proponent of equal rights for all, free speech for all and freedom of religion.

World English Dictionary
intolerant (ɪnˈtɒlərənt)

— adj (foll by of )
1. lacking respect for practices and beliefs other than one's own
2. not able or willing to tolerate or endure:

Examples see Tunnelcat.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:11 am

TunnelCat wrote:It's when it involves the public square and the public view that things get murky.

Holy ★■◆●, TC! Freedom of speech must also cover religious expression in the public square. It's not murky. You can express your beliefs in public, period. So far this is still America. Religious expression can and should only be limited by non-related, common-sense laws. We have laws against assault, theft, slander, ...

TunnelCat wrote:How far do your freedoms to practice as a Christian extend into mainstream society's business and affairs when not all are Christian, nor want to be?

The answer is simply as far as you want them to, or as far as they can before it causes people to turn against you. Most associations are at-will...

The answer to your question is that you are wanting to trample my rights.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:45 pm

CUDA wrote:I know the history of the holiday.. but that's not the issue here is it? you did everything you could to avoid the topic with that comment. the FACTS are you don't like them talking bout their religion, just admit it and move on.

That's not it at all. I don't like them telling ME that their religion is the correct one, and that I should be following it, or doing things a certain way, or else shut up and leave.

CUDA wrote:are you that insecure that someone posting a sign on their property saying "Jesus is the reason for the season" is a threat to you?

Those signs only appeared as public nasty-grams AFTER Christians decided that some kind of culture war was being waged against their freedoms and AFTER Christians started getting political en masse and forcing their beliefs into the process. This modern concocted culture war was just a tool created by Republicans and Religious Conservatives as a strategy to divide, conquer and win. Right-wing politicians the likes Pat Buchanan are not Christian, they are power seekers.

Pat Buchanan at the 1992 Republican Convention wrote:"My friends, this election is about much more than who gets what. It is about who we are. It is about what we believe. It is about what we stand for as Americans. There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself. And in that struggle for the soul of America, Clinton & Clinton are on the other side, and George Bush is on our side."

Don't forget that other culture warrior, Pat Robertson, who said this at that same convention, and was referring to Bill Clinton here:

Pat Robertson wrote:"a radical plan to destroy the traditional family and transfer its functions to the government."

I say to them, f**k you and the horse you rode in on! Not everyone is a Traditional Christian Family. I see this whole Modern Culture War as a feint, attacking anyone not following conservative or religious values as a way to foment resentment and division. Their ultimate goal is to obtain control and power over everyone. Now, with the unholy alliance between Plutocrats and Theocrats, they may attain their goal and finally destroy democracy.

As for those stupid signs, a cross or manger scene on private property, even in the public view, is a sign of their faith, not a moronic sign saying we need to follow what it says or we're in the wrong if we don't. And a cross or manger scene put on public owned property, that we all pay for and maintain, is also a calculated stick in the eye of everyone who does not hold Christian beliefs. Those signs are meant to be aggressive, not as a sign of Christian Faith.

CUDA wrote:AH .you're free to practice your nice little beliefs just do it in a closed room where nobody can see it. how Chinese of you
I'm glad to see you're a proponent of equal rights for all, free speech for all and freedom of religion.

That's not what I meant either. I was talking about Christians doing political activism in the public arena that eventually affects everyone else. We aren't all Christians, and they need to realize that the war they're waging in the political arena is being taken as a direct assault on the freedoms of non-Christians, plain and simple.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 5:21 pm

tunnelcat wrote:That's not what I meant either. I was talking about Christians doing political activism in the public arena that eventually affects everyone else. We aren't all Christians, and they need to realize that the war they're waging in the political arena is being taken as a direct assault on the freedoms of non-Christians, plain and simple.

so you're saying Christians don't have a right to voice their opinions in the public arena???? isn't that discrimination?????

HRM The War on Non-religion, where have I heard a saying similar to that before?????

TC wrote:
I wrote:I know the history of the holiday.. but that's not the issue here is it? you did everything you could to avoid the topic with that comment. the FACTS are you don't like them talking bout their religion, just admit it and move on.

That's not it at all. I don't like them telling ME that their religion is the correct one, and that I should be following it, or doing things a certain way, or else shut up and leave.

you still haven't explained or shown HOW by them posting a sign on their from lawn proclaiming "Jesus is the reason for the season" affects you in anyway shape or form. to them Jesus IS the reason for the season. for you maybe turkey loaf is the reason for the season, should I take offense if you put a sign saying "Turkey loaf is the reason for the season" on your front lawn?

AGAIN your intolerance for anything with a religious overtone is showing through. your attitudes towards Christians is almost as bad as TB's is towards Muslim

TechPro · Post by **TechPro** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:18 pm

Looks like we've got people on both sides of that "culture war".

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:53 pm

callmepersistent wrote:still waiting......please, tell me who, in the US, cannot practice their religion, or observe their holidays?

callmeslick wrote:
Sergeant Thorne wrote:You all missed it. Go to O.P., go directly to O.P., do not pass "GO", do not collect $200. I was not speaking disparagingly of the separation between church and state, I was saying that a community consisting mostly of Christians should not be bullied into not being able to observe their holidays by a minority that comes in to spite them in the name of "separation of church and state".
since when is anyone, of any faith(save perhaps Rastafarians) 'not able to observe their holidays'? Seriously, that just doesn't happen, but it ISN'T the role of the Government to celebrate one type of religious holiday over another, and the government really shouldn't have any role in celebrating any religious events in my opinion. Sure,you can, out of common sense, tradition and plain old practicality, give folks off if a large number of them are going to be celebrating a religious holiday, but that is true for employers and businesses. I guess what I'm saying, Thorne, is that I see no current issues around this sort of thing.

Ok, just a few things to establish before I answer. First off, historically, people like to take a day off to observe a holiday. We could discuss the reasons why, and propose theoretical reasons why this may not absolutely need to be the case, but it is an established practice. Now we should recognize that no one has a problem with a holiday because of the day itself, or the inability to work instead of taking a paid day off--their issue is with the publicly sanctioned observance of a popular holiday which they do not observe.

So the answer to your obtuse question is "no one". Your argument is as accurate as it is irrelevant. The truth that I'm trying to draw attention to and debate in this topic is that there is no common-sense reason to disallow the government sanction of Christian holidays unless Christians are in the minority, and that indeed there is ample reason to allow the existence of a civilly sactioned Christian holiday without jumping to the conclusion that Christianity is being supported by the state (and where this is not the case, I do not protest a change in official holidays). The idea that government sanctioned holidays are in violation of a separation of church and state by definition needs to be picked apart and examined, and specifically in recognition of the people and circumstances that spawned and do spread it. These people, as evidenced by TC, are antagonistic towards Christianity, and draw on this rather than common-sense for their crusade. People like my friend from work accept their slight-of-hand arguments at face value, without ever considering what I have presented here. They sweep common sense under the rug and claim it never existed because it does not suit their agenda! Other people cannot countenance "Church" and "State" in the same sentence because of the "separation of church and state"...

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:36 pm

This "turkey loaf" you speak of intrigues me, Cuda.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:56 am

In agreement with many of the others, I don't see a problem with the government closing an office on a religious holiday if most of the employees would have taken the day off anyways. The government isn't saying what you have to do on the day off. However, I do see a problem with the government sponsoring the particular celebration of a religious holiday though. It's not the role of government to establish one person's religion at others' expense.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:10 am

How about allocating religious days off? Kinda like sick days but you get a certain amount of days for special religious events. This way govt. not sponsoring any particular religion but allows you the time off to attend services. If enough people put in for a particular day off then the office closes down.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:31 am

I'm against it.
There is such a thing as Vacation. if you want special time off use it.
of course I'm against sick days too. in 30 years I've only missed 2 days because of illness, and too many people abuse the sick day system

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:01 am

The signs are seen as a political statement from Christians that speaks volumes to all other non-Christians loud and clear. Since you're a Christian CUDA, I doubt you'd even admit that, let alone see it that way. All this political nonsense and friction from a religion that has lost some of it's political privilege in this country and is trying to find ways to get that privilege back. That's my "opinion", without the concrete proof that you seek. I'm also not alone in this country with this "opinion" either.

http://atheism.about.com/od/christmasho ... asWars.htm

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:56 pm

A political statement is "NO on Obama Care"

the sign you are complaining about IS NOT a political statement. it's a belief or a personal stance. and FYI quoting an atheist website backing your position against Christianity really establishes your opinion as unbiased

is putting a sign on your front lawn saying "Happy Halloween Ghouls are the reason for the season" or how about a sign on the Memorial day saying "Thank you Veterans for your sacrifice" Political statements??? your argument is so full of holes that is it was a boat you'd drown. TC you are refusing to look at objectively.
76% of the population in this country profess their faith. that's 228 million Americans, and you expect them to not talk about, profess, or be involved with politics, unless it's behind the closed door of their Church or home???? your delusional

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:18 pm

CUDA wrote:A political statement is "NO on Obama Care"

We agree on that.

CUDA wrote:the sign you are complaining about IS NOT a political statement. it's a belief or a personal stance. and FYI quoting an atheist website backing your position against Christianity really establishes your opinion as unbiased

is putting a sign on your front lawn saying "Happy Halloween Ghouls are the reason for the season" or how about a sign on the Memorial day saying "Thank you Veterans for your sacrifice" Political statements??? your argument is so full of holes that is it was a boat you'd drown. TC you are refusing to look at objectively.
76% is the population in this country profess their faith. that's 228 million Americans, and you expect them to not talk about, profess, or be involved with politics, unless it's behind the closed door of their Church or home???? your delusional

It's not the signs per se, but the timing of when those signs started appearing, right about the time all those right wing pontificating mouthpieces were screaming about a "War on Christmas" and that Christmas needed to be saved from all those evil secular liberals. Coincidence? Maybe. But I've taken insult that me being liberal is somehow treading on your religion's tradition and so I now associate those stupid signs with the whole right wing culture war. That's my position, take it or leave it.

Separation of Church and State?

Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?

Re: Separation of Church and State?