US Congress to declare Xmas is important

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1207/Congress_to_say_Christmas_is_important_Sun_and_Moon_declared_good_too.html

The war on Xmas has been lost.
(Not sure if this is Onion or not. Don't think so.)

 

Yeah, i dont really not like christians but super christians drive me insane, but yet i celebrate christmas, more for the reason its turned into a holdiay where you spend time with family.

 

It's from the Onion.

 

wow good idea lol

 

So as it turns out... it isn't.

And now, we cry.

 

Why is this in SFA again?

 

We can debate whether this is constitutional, or whether they "should" be doing it.

 

Why is it not? What makes this not worthy of discussion?

In my opinion, it's something I find wrong... but there are wronger things.

 

Owned.

 

You didn't introduce any topic of discussion. You never said your opinion on the matter until just now, which even then was briefly and untelling.
You just post an editorial (a lame one at that) with no other links to articles that actually describe the matter.

No law is being made.
Owned.

Oh, here's a couple other resolutions that were already passed. One in favor of Islam's Ramadan and another for Diwali (which most people in the US know nothing about):
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/d...&x=20071003165444mlenuhret0.9762384&m=October
http://hinduism.about.com/od/diwalifestivaloflights/a/diwalisenate.htm

But hell, let's only talk about how wrong it is to support the religion and holiday most people in the country celebrate/follow.
Your thread sucks and I won't have any part of it unless I'm referred to or replied specifically. kthx

 

Favoring one religion over another would be violating your first amendment right...

 

Why does Congress need to pass a bill to announce that Christmas is important? Don't they have better thing to be doing, such as NOT approving the $70 billion they just granted Bush for the "war" in Iraq?

 

But if you take into account the possibility of a loose interpretation of the constitution, this could still fit into the first amendment.

 

Sadly, people posting their opinion isn't needed in SFA. I see many threads (including the one by verryberry10 who posted in here earlier and at least 3 others just like it) where the topic can't even be argued! The standard is so much lower, at least this one can be argued and is original. Who are the SFA mods?

I think that nationally recognizing Christmas would be a fix to the sick levels of political correctness we are employing today. 4 years ago, my school district has banned the use of signs celebrating only one religions holiday. Even if Merry Christmas and Happy Hannukah (sp?) were used with all the other holidays under the sun, it wasn't allowed. Teachers could only have signs saying happy holidays (which couldn't have only the red + green, a Christmas tree, or anything). THIS year, they can't even put up their "Happy Holidays" signs because it "offends atheists" because it isn't a holiday for them.

Now I think this is outrageous. Most of you have read my rants on things like people making a huge deal about other people being "racist" if they don't use the term "African American" to refer to a black person (which is a racist phrase itself), yet musicians can say "nigga/er" or "cracka/er" in their lyrics and sell millions of albums. [SARCASM] Chappelles show and Mind of Mencia can run just fine, and we have events like "Black History month" because "Jewish History Month" would be too fair because white people can't have just as much persecution if not more (I think it's the latter). People who offer scholarships to minorities or women are empowering them, but people who offer scholarships to whites or men are racist or sexist. Celebrating the primary beliefs holiday (or at least recognizing it) is horrible. Taking "God" out off our currency, out of the pledge, and out of certificates is the right thing to do. And geez, I'll be damned if a woman becomes President before a black guy, because black and latinos are SO unrepresented in government that they need the next President to be a minority. What, WOMEN are actually grossly underrepresented while minorities actually have legislative members relative to their population? Aww, shit.[/SARCASM]

The Government should SUPPORT people in practicing whatever they want. If atheists don't want to say "Under God" when reciting the pledge, nobodys gonna make you. Skip it. But we need to learn that ACCEPTING THE MAJORITY isn't racist. Condeming the minority is. If we forced the minority to follow the beliefs of the majority, that would be condeming them. If we allow everyone to pratice what they'd like and stop denying the majority of people the privledge to freedom of religion (or show it) then this wouldn't be such a hot button! You believe that gay marriage is against the bible? Fine, then let them go to hell if that's what you think, you're not the one getting married. You think it's horrible for a Jewish teacher to wish kids a happy Hannukah (sp?), it's THEIR DAMNED CHOICE. Your kid can take it as Christmas or nothing if they want. Just like when people from the south say "y'all" and I think mentally it's "you folks", why can't Christians substitute "Happy Kwanza" for "Merry Christmas" and atheists take "Merry Christmas" as "Happy random month in December when we have school off, stores are empty, and everyone is hugging relatives they don't like"? If we keep trying to make sure everybody is included I'm going to go out and found a religion where it is against my religion to not recognize a God (Freemasonry to the max). What then? I'll be a minority, and I'll moan and bitch until they figure out whether the atheist minority or mine is the one to ignore.

Who are they to say people can't have the freedom to pick whether my teachers can pratice their religion by spreading some holiday cheer. As long as we aren't saying "no", whats the big problem? If something is the majority, then it can't be helped that more teachers will be wishing Merry Christmas than "Happy Winter Break". That's like saying everyone needs to get their skin dyed blue so nobody feels left out. NO. By Congress doing this they're adding to those other resolutions they gave to lesser practised religions. If anything, blocking something similar or Christmas would be prejudcided. YOU CAN'T FIX BIASES BY DISCRIMINATING AGAINST THE MAJORITY. It just pisses the majority off and heats up all the conflicts we see throughout history.

dpunk, take a civics class. Only joint resolutions have the potential for any power of law. As I recalled they issued a resolution to the winner of the MLB playoffs (excuse my lack of Baseball knowledge to know the actual term or team). They aren't violating the rule that "Congress Shall Make No Law Respecting An Establishment Of Religion" because 1) it's not a law and 2) accepting all religions and the belief in none at all isn't establishing a religion.

I could go on forever, but few people will take the time to read (and even less to refute, and beyond that even less will refute it intelligently) as is, so I'll save my breath for more posts.

~Gnome