The war on Christmas?

It is more a war on the religious side of Christmas.

Blazer Bob wrote: Who would have ever thought “A Charlie Brown Christmas” was such subversive propaganda of religious indoctrination?

Who would have thought that the Christmas program, which has run national on television every season since 1965, would become the new battle line over America’s religious liberties? A church in Arkansas recently canceled a play based on “A Charlie Brown Christmas” when a group called the Arkansas Society of Freethinkers threatened a lawsuit against Terry Elementary School.

The school had organized a field trip to the church to view the play, where Charlie Brown complained about the commercialization of Christmas, but the Freethinkers railed about its religious theme.


http://www.jconline.com/article/BY/2012 ... nav%7Chead

Let me ask you this, what would your opinion be if the school were taking a field trip to a local mosque? Just wondering if you would support such a trip on the tax payers' dime? I think you're post demonstrates a very hypocritical stance, and is another attempt by conservatives to portray themselves as the victim (oh boo hoo, the majority has to recognize they aren't the only people in this country and own it no more than anyone else).

Freakin' Arkansas...somebody please invite this state and it's residents to the 21st century.

FredHayek wrote: It is more a war on the religious side of Christmas.

Or perhaps it is a war against having religion forced upon us. Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. Why can't you just keep your stupid hocus pocus myths to yourself? Religion is a deeply personal thing - keep it that way, because I have no interest in hearing about your foolish archaic fairy tales.

Christmas has nothing to do with religion to 99.9% of 'Christians'...it's about stuff. "Be a good little Christian and consume, consume, consume...here, you need some more plastic garbage...here, you need some more sugar...here, you need some more money since I'm too lazy and uninterested in actually getting to know you or what material item you covet, so I'll just give you money to waste on your own - because I'm such a good Christian!

Jesus preached against materialism. Holy crap you people are messed up!

plaidvillain wrote:

FredHayek wrote: It is more a war on the religious side of Christmas.

Or perhaps it is a war against having religion forced upon us. Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. Why can't you just keep your stupid hocus pocus myths to yourself? Religion is a deeply personal thing - keep it that way, because I have no interest in hearing about your foolish archaic fairy tales.

Christmas has nothing to do with religion to 99.9% of 'Christians'...it's about stuff. "Be a good little Christian and consume, consume, consume...here, you need some more plastic garbage...here, you need some more sugar...here, you need some more money since I'm too lazy and uninterested in actually getting to know you or what material item you covet, so I'll just give you money to waste on your own - because I'm such a good Christian!

Jesus preached against materialism. Holy crap you people are messed up!

No one is forcing religion on you. I support your right to be offended and offensive but you have no right to impose your POV on everyone else.

There is a war on the religious side?

humorous thing to say ---

I'm a serious evangelical Christian - and I think we should have a war against Christmas.

Christmas has almost nothing to do with Christ!

I no longer believe in a Christian god but am not offended by Christians celebrating Christmas around me.

Ironic that they protest a Charlie Brown Christmas which is really a protest against the commercialization of Christmas.

Tax paid trips to mosques? When I was in Catholic grade school, some of our field trips took us to Jewish synagogues and Buddhist temples to learn about other faiths. And in high school, we were required to study other faiths, even interview the leaders of other non-Christian congregations.

Blazer Bob wrote: No one is forcing religion on you. I support your right to be offended and offensive but you have no right to impose your POV on everyone else.

I am not forcing anyone to live by my demands...I expect society to conduct itself according to the requirements of the Constitution, which demands a separation of the public government from any religions, and I would fight to maintain this separation.

As far as people celebrating their religion their way, putting up their own decorations, puking their 'religion' all over the place...I'm not telling people they can't. I'm just saying it's really tacky, but I tolerate it. I'm not trying to restrict their right to be tacky. But I will point out how it's not 'religious' to put electrically illuminated Frosty the Snowman on the porch. It's not 'religious' to put the giant generator driven inflatable snow globe on the lawn. In fact, it's not just tacky, it's an insult to Christianity's Messiah, who preached against materialism and ostentatious wealth. But again, we already know many conservatives will just pick and choose the parts they like and disregard the inconvenient parts. A truly religious Christian would be opposed to the over the top commercialism of the modern style of the holiday.


*Fred, the Charlie Brown special is about not getting consumed with the commercialization of Christmas, and to remember the Christian reasons. It has a very strong Christian message, and while I enjoy the show and story, I would expect you'd support the rights of the Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu or Muslim parents to decide whether their kids should be subjected to it...especially whether they should be bussed to a church to watch it.

If you actually look at the Constitution, it is more a requirement that there is no official endorsement of one religion over others. What constitutes an endorsement is where it gets hairy. Back in the day, our founders were looking at the Church of England as an example of state endorsed religion over other Christian faiths.
Nowdays I can see where some people believe that Christianity is endorsed over other religions, we even have a national holiday for Christmas, would that count as an endorsement?

Should the athiests demand that Christmas no longer be a national holiday?

an endorsement of Christmas is not an endorsement of Christianity, since Christmas has almost nothing to do with Christianity.

Hell, atheists should celebrate the fact that Christians observe Christmas! It proves the groundlessness of the faith.

I used to consider Christmas a Christianized Winter Solstice.

Thinking about it, though, it's really more Christianesque than Christianized.

FredHayek wrote: If you actually look at the Constitution, it is more a requirement that there is no official endorsement of one religion over others. What constitutes an endorsement is where it gets hairy. Back in the day, our founders were looking at the Church of England as an example of state endorsed religion over other Christian faiths.
Nowdays I can see where some people believe that Christianity is endorsed over other religions, we even have a national holiday for Christmas, would that count as an endorsement?

Should the athiests demand that Christmas no longer be a national holiday?

The 1st Amendment in regard to religion states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

It does not say that no law respecting an establishment of a religion or a particular religion but religion period. Thus, it is clear that the Constitution intended to keep the government and religion entirely separate, thus a "wall" between them. It was not just intended to prevent the favoring of one religion over another, but from the government and any religion. this is also clear from the writings and thoughts of Jefferson and Madison.