The ACLU is going after Christmas as usual! (1 Viewer)

So I see you are AGAINST the separation of Church and State part of the Constitution...hmmm. I guess you guys are more in the know of how to run the place than the foundation of our government.. :rolleyes:

What's worse, Matin, is the denial of people being able to celebrate their beliefs in public! Next thing you know crosses outside of churches will be banned because the public can see them from the sidewalk or street. "Oh I'm offended I saw a cross!!"

Matin, call the ACLU with that idea. I'm sure they would run with it." Wait till we get what's basicly sheria law wraped in liberalism. That's where we're headed and even you liberals won't like it after a while.

Matin, If folks like you had your way christians would be worshipping god in basements!
 
Last edited:
What's worse, Matin, is the denial of people being able to celebrate their beliefs in public! Next thing you know crosses outside of churches will be banned because the public can see them from the sidewalk or street. "Oh I'm offended I saw a cross!!"

Matin, call the ACLU with that idea. I'm sure they would run with it." Wait till we get what's basicly sheria law wraped in liberalism. That's where we're headed and even you liberals won't like it after a while.

Matin, If folks like you had your way christians would be worshipping god in basements!


...small minds....SO annoying.

The nice thing about people like me (practicing Catholic, father of two, son of a Pastor..) is that, yes, I would have people worshipping in basements. And on mountaintops. And in beautiful churches. And doing so with others that worshipped with them, together as brothers and sisters. And in as many places that are a community of people worshipping the same way. Schools, oddly enough, Rich, aren't those places. ALL religions have to attend public schools- and not all of those religions are Christian-faith based.

I WOULD NOT have them using words to create fear, and twisting the words of others for the greater gain of sensationalism. I WOULD NOT have my religion force-feed the idea that "mine is better", as so many "pop-up Christians" run around trying to do in this country. I WOULD (and have) educate, to the best of my abilities, my children, to have understanding of the beliefs of others and to give respect and tolerance for those that practice a different faith.

Ric.. No one really wants to take away anything your religion has. It just would be nice if every once in a while you practiced ANY of your Christian values and understood that Yours is no better than Mine in the eyes of the Lord.

Merry Christmas
 
the idea that "mine is better", as so many "pop-up Christians" run around trying to do in this country.

Interesting comment from the 'son of a preacher.' I'm wondering from what Bible the preaching comes from?

My Bible says, ""I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).

That doesn't imply that "mine is 'better', it states clearly it is the only way.
 
As much as I appreciate the separation of church and state... Having a national holiday founded upon commemorating the birth of a major religious figure, it would seem appropriate to allow events to occur that substanciate the reason for the holiday in the first place.
 
It's very simple.....

As much as I appreciate the separation of church and state... Having a national holiday founded upon commemorating the birth of a major religious figure, it would seem appropriate to allow events to occur that substanciate the reason for the holiday in the first place.

Ted................Great post! And it didn't take a page or two!! 'Nuff said!!

Late.................Mitch
 
Interesting comment from the 'son of a preacher.' I'm wondering from what Bible the preaching comes from?

My Bible says, ""I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).

That doesn't imply that "mine is 'better', it states clearly it is the only way.

Same Bible, Jackee... But tell me that you haven't seen some horrible things done in the name of religion lately. These men of God have done things that is an embarrasement to ALL organized religion.
I am just tired of seeing men and women hide behind the word of God to advance their own agenda, twisting His Word to meet their own personal gains.
 
As much as I appreciate the separation of church and state... Having a national holiday founded upon commemorating the birth of a major religious figure, it would seem appropriate to allow events to occur that substanciate the reason for the holiday in the first place.

And so far, I haven't seen anyone really try to eliminate Christmas (like someone REALLY could....). With the exception of some retailers and businesses :rolleyes:

The fact that all religions celebrate at some point a major event is still allowed in this Country. But I think that popular thinking isn't going to gracefully accept Ramadahn (sp?) or a National Buddhist holiday in this country, even though there are participants that reside legally here. And with that said, the ability for those to celebrate those events freely, without making others unwilling participants, is what the whole point about this lawsuit is. It is NOT about negating Christmas- it seems to be about allowing those that choose a different path to do so without persecution.
 
And on that note, I retire from this thread, before I get into a NitroLand-style pi$$in match with anybody.

Always good to discuss Religion and Politics with ya'll- nice to see such a wide range of thought out here.

And truly, for those of you that celebrate it, have a Very Merry Christmas :)
 
What cracks me up is that when Christians stand up for their 'civil liberties' it's a bad thing.

From what I'm seeing and hearing and reading, y'all liberals can expect a fight from Christian's for their rights.
 
Interesting comment from the 'son of a preacher.' I'm wondering from what Bible the preaching comes from?

My Bible says, ""I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).

That doesn't imply that "mine is 'better', it states clearly it is the only way.

..............enough said, thank you Jackee :cool:
 
Would have made it better for Fran to sign off with a "Merry Christmas".

Here's an article from USA Today. Perhaps you'll like this better:

A fictional 'war on Christmas'

By T. Jeremy Gunn

Last December, a group called Public Advocate for the United States (which claims to defend America's traditional family values) sent some Christmas carolers over to sing in front of the ACLU offices in Washington.
Carrying signs reading "Merry Christmas" and "Please Don't Sue Us!" — they also seem to have carried with them some rather strange imaginings about an assault on Christmas. (Related: Law doesn't mandate a secular Christmas | The year's dust-ups)

I don't know what the carolers thought might happen.

To tell the truth, the ACLU is not often serenaded by Christmas carolers. So it was with some excitement that the staff went outside and joined in the singing. They brought with them cookies and warm drinks to share. One staff member, who is an ordained Baptist minister, did a little witnessing about his faith to some astonished proponents of family values.

Fox News did broadcast the event (as a part of its "war against Christmas" campaign). Although the visiting singers were shown, the cameras failed to include any footage showing that everyone had participated in the caroling. Rather than reporting the facts, the anchor preferred the propaganda: "We believe the ACLU heard the message loud and clear, but they don't care."

The battle cries

This year, several groups are once again introducing the Christmas season with some heated and misleading military rhetoric. Some declare, "There is a war against Christmas!" One group launched a "Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign." One particularly bizarre charge is that there is "a thorough and virulent anti-Christmas campaign." Without a shred of evidence, they pretend that there is an effort afoot to remove "God" from the Declaration of Independence. Two groups even announced that they have assembled hundreds of lawyers to protect Christmas against this imaginary threat.

Make no mistake about it. These warrior-lawyers are not asking us to love our neighbors (and certainly not our enemies), nor to turn the other cheek, nor to be peacemakers, nor to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.

Nor is this a joyful effort to encourage the Christmas spirit in the millions of places where it can be promoted without any conflict: in people's hearts, in their homes, with families, in churches, or with friend and neighbors.

No, this is a campaign of military-infused rhetoric demanding that everyone accept one politically correct version of "Christmas."

For example, this year in Boston — the same city where Puritans once prohibited the pagan-inspired "Christmas tree" — the new Puritans now demand that the city call its evergreen spruce a "Christmas tree," and they threatened a lawsuit if the city didn't comply.

Another group charges that there is a "campaign of fear, intimidation, and disinformation" against seasonal symbols in Raleigh, N.C. — and they offer to provide a defense for the city against any threatened lawsuit. Yet they give no evidence that anyone is threatening a lawsuit. Before accusing others of engaging in "disinformation," perhaps these Christmas warriors should first take a look in the mirror.

Why this desire to manufacture controversy — about Christmas?

Guidelines already exist

Rather than engaging in propaganda about a "war on Christmas," all who want to promote the spirit of Christmas should remember a couple of simple guidelines.

First, Christmas displays — including nativity scenes — are perfectly acceptable at homes and churches. This religious expression is a valued and protected part of the First Amendment rights guaranteed to all citizens.

Second, governments should not be in the business of endorsing religious displays. Religion does best when government stays out of the business of deciding which holidays and religions to promote. Religion belongs where it prospers best: with individuals, families and religious communities.

And finally, as a seasonal greeting to all Christians: Merry Christmas from the ACLU! And for believers in all other traditions: Thank you for enriching our world!

T. Jeremy Gunn is director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief.
 
So I see you are AGAINST the separation of Church and State part of the Constitution...hmmm. I guess you guys are more in the know of how to run the place than the foundation of our government.. :rolleyes:

Martin, exactly, where does it state that in the Constitution?
 
Exactly, WHERE in the Bill of Rights does it state that?

I'll be happy to answer that just as soon as you address my earlier posts on that same subject:

I would not disagree with you on this. However, I would maintain that it is still a false argument that doesn't hold water. For instance, many of the religious conservatives who make this argument are evangelical Christians who hold to orthodox Christian doctrines, including the doctrine of a Triune God. Can one likewise make the argument that this basic Christian belief is wrong because the word "trinity" does not appear in the Bible? I don't think so. And the reason why I don't think so is that when taken as a whole one can reasonably deduce from the Bible itself that it does indeed validate a Trinity doctrine. Likewise, one can study the Constitution and reasonably conclude separation of church and state is a part of that document even though the words themselves do not appear there.

How about it?
 
Ways To Support Nitromater

Users who are viewing this thread


Back
Top