Another Irksome Seasonal Experience

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Stosh writes:

People came to the New World to escape state religions of Europe. They wanted relgious freedom and so the Constitution reads the US government cannot establish a state religion. Doesn't say anything about States or any local governmental assemblies being able to do that.

 

Nope, not until the 14th amendment. The last state to have a state religion (hey, look at that - a state religion, something people wanted to escape) was Massachusetts in 1833.

 

After all, many of the states were established on religious principles in the first place, i.e. Utah, Pennsylvania, Georgia, etc.

 

Many were based on slavery as well, but that doesn't justify fewer rights for the descendants of slaves.

 

Having a group of kids in school sing a Christmas carol as part of their "holiday" concert doesn't establish any religion.

 

Not having them sing one doesn't establish any religion.

 

What we have done with all the subsequent "interpretations" is turned our country from a institution that promotes tolerance of all religions into an institution that tolerates no religions.

 

Complete and utter hogwash. Having the government stay out of the religion biz is the best thing to happen to religion.

 

We have turned our country into one of those godless nations that we used to read about 50 years ago that were the scourge of the world.

 

Wow, you're completely insane. Really. That's the babblings of someone disconnected with reality.

 

I guess I don't worry too much about it, after 2,000 years, the persecuted Christian church always thrives under oppression, it seems to have waned when that persecution went away.

 

Yeah, the "persecution" of having 90% of government offices occupied by Christians.

 

Here, I'll play a real sad song on a tiny violin...

[Tampa Turtle]

I agree it is all a bit ridiculous. I grew up in a almost-all jewish neighborhood. In elementary school we had Hanukkah songs, dreidels, gelt the whole deal. Because only 2 of us out of 17 kids were not Jewish. It was no big deal--it seemed fun, kinda of exotic. I stayed Catholic and the other boy Baptist. I think we got to decorate a "Christmas corner".

 

At my local government we still get Good Friday off but they label it "Good Friday/Spring Day" which seemed a reasonable compromise.

[SSScout]

 

Welcome to the F&C forum...

 

As a Quaker, I can sympathize with Merlin. Really. Our faith was founded on the ability of the worshipper to connect directly with the Divine (thru Christ Jesus) without benefit or need of another human intercessor. No "need" for ordained clergy. As such, yep, early Quakers were often persecuted for daring to be "different".

I often meet folks in the Quaker world that have come to the conclusion that ANY interrruption , or "stumbling block", in that journey to the Divine, be it Christ, the Bible, someone else's revelation, is to be ignored and even actively avoided. Only the silent worship, the opening of one's heart and soul and mind to that spark/spirit is necessary. The actual history of our faith is irrelevant. The experience of others is irrelevant.

I knew one fine old woman, whom I had grown to greatly respect as a great example of Friendly Devotion,a pillar of our Meeting, who told me that we had "finally gotten past all that Christian stuff". I frankly didn't know what to respond, so I said nothing. She would have denied that our faith had been founded on Biblical statements, that the language of George Fox was just because he had no other way to express his faith. But George Fox took his Bible very seriously and reminded the priests of his time of their hypochrisy quite often. How had my friend forgotten this?

So when I say I empathize with friend Merlin, I mean that his stand on being governmentally neutral when it comes to faith is fine, but not allowing people the ability to give voice to their faith , even as indirectly as wearing a red and white fuzzy hat, is sadly wrong.

If I am a sub teacher (hello skeptic) and mention (when asked) that I do not recite the Pledge of Allegiance because I view it as idolatry (promising to be loyal to a piece of cloth) and a loyalty oath (counter to Quaker truth testimony), I COULD be asked to stop with my religious language (yes, not speaking is language). Or not. My expression of faith is NOT a teacher PROMOTING a state/government requirement. The reciting of the PoA is NOT required in our schools. It is a "tradition" and one that needs to be reviewed by the kid's parent, not by me.

I actually had a class of 6th graders remind me, when the PA was not operable one day, shouldn't we be saying the PoA ? I said sure, who wants to lead it? I stepped back and let one of the boys lead it.

So Merlin's frustration and dissapointment is understandable. It appears that the fuzzy hat may be a religious expression and if on a teacher's head, could be viewed as a (because the teacher is a government agent) government promotion of religion, and should be disallowed. But then too, it may be a personal expression and should be allowed.

Is the playing of the Messiah a promotion of Christianity or is it merely a great , soaringly wonderful piece of music? See

and you decide.

 

Mery Christmas and be healthy.

 

 

 

[Brewmeister]

The same anti-theists whose sensibilities are offended by a Christmas concert at school or display in the public square have no problem with intentionally mocking religions and religious symbols, and cannot see the bigotry and hypocrisy in their actions.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

The same people who think this is about "offensiveness" (which is not illegal) are failing to distinguish between private actions and government actions/endorsement, and cannot see that they're comparing apples and oranges.

[Twocubdad]

This is actually one of the rare instances where I agree with Merlyn and, oh by the way, the Supreme Court. The line was crossed, skeptic, when you accepted the insanely small check from the school and became an agent of the government for the day. Frankly, given the pay (about $55/day 'round here), I'd have put my Santa hat back on and told the principal "sorry, today's my day to be Santa."

 

And where it crosses back over the line is when they try to tell private individuals they can't wear Santa hats. I'm with Da Beav. After telling the principal to pound sand, I'd have bought all the Santa hats I could find, stood on the sidewalk and given one to every student willing to wear them. When the principal complains, tell him that by his own words the wearing of a Santa hat is a protected religious expression.

[Brewmeister]

Just went to the public grade school Christmas concert this afternoon where we got treated to all the classics. Started with a solemn Silent Night, segued into Hark the Herald Angels Sing...lots of other favorites too. The principal closed it by wishing everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

[Brewmeister]

The same people who think this is about "offensiveness" (which is not illegal) are failing to distinguish between private actions and government actions/endorsement, and cannot see that they're comparing apples and oranges.

 

If it wasn't about offensiveness you anti theists wouldn't get your panties in a wad every time you didn't like what a private citizen does.

 

 

[Woapalanne]

Twocubdad said "the wearing of a Santa hat is a protected religious expression". Which? Protected, or a religious expression??

 

IMO, neither. Santa is undeniably secular.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

If it wasn't about offensiveness you anti theists wouldn't get your panties in a wad every time you didn't like what a private citizen does.

 

We don't. We get involved when there's government involvement. You might have noticed that there are never lawsuits against religious displays in front of churches or private homes.

[Twocubdad]

You are still talking about SAINT Nicholas, right?

 

But I never said this isn't stupid. In my opinion, the vast majority of stupid rules like this are the misapplication of SCOTUS rulings by idiot school administrators who either don't understand the law, are paranoid of being sued or are too lazy to reasonably apply the law so they just ban everything.

[qwazse]

No offence TC, but the really annoying part of this all is the equating of this figure to the stature of Nicolas of Myra, or that poem to the level of scripture.

 

Pretty soon the works of Tolkein will be banned because too many parents are naming their kids after dwarves and hobbits.

 

P.S. - Skeptic, you know I've said elsewhere don't ask for a rule, someone will make one for you? There's got to be a coralary for substitute teachers.

[Brewmeister]

We don't

 

Yeah, yeah you do. Your cabal of anti-theists takes your "equal access" rights and uses it to mock religious displays. Specifically Christian religious displays to be precise. Hence, panties in a wad.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Yeah, yeah you do. Your cabal of anti-theists takes your "equal access" rights and uses it to mock religious displays.

 

That's called free speech. You'll still notice this only happens with displays mixed with the government.

 

Specifically Christian religious displays to be precise.

 

Those are pretty much the only kinds of displays that get mixed with government endorsement, with the ocassional menorah. And if you want examples of people getting their "panties in a wad", just compare which displays get vandalized.

[SSScout]

 

Friend LeRoi is right, in that we are fortunate to have lived in a country where (by law) no one can be co-erced to worship (or not) God(s) in any particular way. He and I are both, I dare say, grateful for that. Many other nations around the world have taken the US of A's lead in that and adopted similar requirements or guides or what ever thay may be called. Their populations benefit and prosper thereby.

 

And there are many countries where the jealousy of some over the freedom of others denies the ability to worship (or not) as one pleases. The result is not a peaceful if heated debate, but the torture and death of many.

 

If the only thing we have to worry about is whether or not our chidren are forced to see their teacher adorned in a fuzzy red and white hat, I say God bless'm. The King James Bible is studied as the great english writing that it is, and the human ethicist movement will be allowed to remind us that it is good to be logical, and to question, even if the answers are not terribly easy to discern.

 

Some will trust to their senses, some to their intellect, some to whatever seems to inspire them. Ultimately, as the carny barker said, "Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer cherce". That all anyone can do.

 

Muslim, Hindu, Jew, Christian, Athiest, Zoroastrian, we all have our choices to make. Some were offered by our family, some by folks we met along the way, some we figured out ourselves. The laws we inherit or agree to or help enact are there so we don't all try to drive on the same side of the road at the same time. If they are felt to be unfair or not appropriate to the situation, then here, at least, we have the right and ability to point them out and see if they can be changed or re-interpreted.

 

In the mean time, I say where thy fuzzy red and white hat as long as thy canst.

 

 

 

It is part of human nature, afterall.