Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (90691)	12/4/2004 4:19:32 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Grainne, Grainne, Graine! A hunter at heart, after all. I guess I should be chasing a chicken around the backyard with a hatchet

To: Grainne who wrote (90691)	12/4/2004 7:58:53 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Respond to of 108807

"Was it not you who was arguing for Christian Christmas displays in schools, and carols being sung there, and saying that only a very small percentage of Americans were not Christian?" Nope. And percentages are irrelevant. "First, like I think I was telling you, Christmas trees (and most of the symbols we associate with Christmas) are not actually Christian--they are pagan." Then why on earth would you object to their display? "I always enjoy good discussions about pagan symbols and the way the Christians glommed on to them." "Glommed" is such a petty, ugly kind of word, wouldn't you say? It would be more appropriate (both more accurate and less judgemental) to simply say that a cultural tradition was adopted by many Christians for incorporation into a holiday intended to celebrate the birth of Christ. "Then the second thing in the article is that so many Americans seem to be so confused about what is, or is not, okay to decorate public places with these days, that it is almost comical." Agreed. It is comical. "Well, it would be comical ... if so many people weren't being offended each time." Some people take offense at the most ridiculous things and should just grow up. Sometimes, however, people are actively looking for things at which to take offense. In the context of religion, some seem to wish they could just stamp it out altogether and will take any opportunity to make an issue out of someone else's religion. The constitution's language regarding religion exists to protect religion from government and from citizens acting through government, not to quash religion. In fact, I'd generalize that - the constitution exists to limit government, not to give government more ways of restricting people. And as I've posted here repeatedly, there is nothing in the constitution that prohibits government from acknowledging religion. In fact, the constitution itself acknowledges God while it restricts government from getting into the "God business." "and for goodness sake most of us have houses or even palatial estates and can put nativity scenes everywhere that we own, so why not just do it that way?" Why not take the next step and get rid of churches, temples and mosques. Why should people who might be offended have to drive down public streets lined with religious symbols on buildings and signs. After all, we all have our homes and can worship there in private where we can't offend anyone. Just as long as we don't put any holiday decorations up outside.