RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Yet another political tard fest

Quote:

---

theory9 said:


Please cut out the drama--you aren't really interested in freedom of religion, just your freedom. If you came out and said I'd actually have more respect for your opinion.

Christianity, in all its strains, has a history of preserving its freedoms to the exclusion of others. You speak of tyranny as if someone has invaded your home and stolen everything from you.

---

Quote:

---

Theory9 said :

That someone should express an opinion different from yours must be your ultimate form of imagined reprssion. Your "Christian majority" will survive just fine if a few pews are empty on Christmas Eve.

---

Christmas in America is an exuberant display of human ingenuity, capitalist productivity, and the enjoyment of life. Yet all of these are castigated as "materialistic"; the real meaning of the holiday, we are told, is assorted Nativity tales and altruist injunctions (e.g., love thy neighbor) that no one takes seriously.

In fact, Christmas as we celebrate it today is a 19th-century American invention. The freedom and prosperity of post-Civil War America created the happiest nation in history. The result was the desire to celebrate, to revel in the goods and pleasures of life on earth. Christmas (which was not a federal holiday until 1870) became the leading American outlet for this feeling.

Historically, people have always celebrated the winter solstice as the time when the days begin to lengthen, indicating the earth's return to life. Ancient Romans feasted and reveled during the festival of Saturnalia. Early Christians condemned these Roman celebrations -- they were waiting for the end of the world and had only scorn for earthly pleasures. By the fourth century, the pagans were worshipping the god of the sun on December 25, and the Christians came to a decision: if you can't stop 'em, join 'em. They claimed (contrary to known fact) that the date was Jesus' birthday, and usurped the solstice holiday for their Church.

Even after the Christians stole Christmas, they were ambivalent about it. The holiday was inherently a pro-life festival of earthly renewal, but the Christians preached renunciation, sacrifice, and concern for the next world, not this one. As Cotton Mather, an 18th-century clergyman, put it: "Can you in your consciences think that our Holy Savior is honored by mirth? . . . Shall it be said that at the birth of our Savior . . . we take time . . . to do actions that have much more of hell than of heaven in them?"

Then came the major developments of 19th-century capitalism: industrialization, urbanization, the triumph of science -- all of it leading to easy transportation, efficient mail delivery, the widespread publishing of books and magazines, new inventions making life comfortable and exciting, and the rise of entrepreneurs who understood that the way to make a profit was to produce something good and sell it to a mass market.

For the first time, the giving of gifts became a major feature of Christmas. Early Christians denounced gift-giving as a Roman practice, and Puritans called it diabolical. But Americans were not to be deterred. Thanks to capitalism, there was enough wealth to make gifts possible, a great productive apparatus to advertise them and make them available cheaply, and a country so content that men wanted to reach out to their friends and express their enjoyment of life. The whole country took with glee to giving gifts on an unprecedented scale.

Santa Claus is a thoroughly American invention. There was a St. Nicholas long ago and a feeble holiday connected with him (on December 5). In 1822, an American named Clement Clarke Moore wrote a poem about a visit from St. Nick. It was Moore (and a few other New Yorkers) who invented St. Nick's physical appearance and personality, came up with the idea that Santa travels on Christmas Eve in a sleigh pulled by reindeer, comes down the chimney, stuffs toys in the kids' stockings, then goes back to the North Pole.

Of course, the Puritans denounced Santa as the Anti-Christ, because he pushed Jesus to the background. Furthermore, Santa implicitly rejected the whole Christian ethics. He did not denounce the rich and demand that they give everything to the poor; on the contrary, he gave gifts to rich and poor children alike. Nor is Santa a champion of Christian mercy or unconditional love. On the contrary, he is for justice -- Santa gives only to good children, not to bad ones.

All the best customs of Christmas, from carols to trees to spectacular decorations, have their root in pagan ideas and practices. These customs were greatly amplified by American culture, as the product of reason, science, business, worldliness, and egoism, i.e., the pursuit of happiness.

America's tragedy is that its intellectual leaders have typically tried to replace happiness with guilt by insisting that the spiritual meaning of Christmas is religion and self-sacrifice for Tiny Tim or his equivalent. But the spiritual must start with recognizing reality. Life requires reason, selfishness, capitalism; that is what Christmas should celebrate -- and really, underneath all the pretense, that is what it does celebrate. It is time to take the Christ out of Christmas, and turn the holiday into a guiltlessly egoistic, pro-reason, this-worldly, commercial celebration.

Quote:

---

Wonder Boy said:

No invasion of my rights and freedoms?

As I said in the Canada allows same-sex marriage topic, repeatedly, Canada has already outlawed the ability to publicly or on the airwaves criticize homosexuality. Which also means publicly or on the airwaves quoting the verses that condemn homosexual acts as immoral.
Those lobbying for similar expansions in U.S. law are treading on the Biblical concept of marriage, in addition to similar laws in the U.S. banning any Biblical objection to gays as a "hate-crime".



I know you don't share that perspective, but it is a valid argument.
That such liberal "freedoms" for gays are an invasion of my space and stealing from me, giving rights to gays while simultaneously taking rights and religious freedoms from Christians, and anyone else who objects to homosexuality and would publicly debate the issue.

Gradually eroding religious freedoms, but still seeking to twist the law to take away rights from me and every Christian.

---

Quote:

---

Then came the major developments of 19th-century capitalism: industrialization, urbanization, the triumph of science -- all of it leading to easy transportation, efficient mail delivery, the widespread publishing of books and magazines

---

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
In other words, we owe Christmas to the Sears Wishbook.

"Christmas...it's really just a catalog."

---

Some of said, though Snopes disagress, that image of Santa we know and love came from a Coca Cola ad



And the character of Rudolph was created for Montgomery Ward department stores.

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:

Quote:

---

Then came the major developments of 19th-century capitalism: industrialization, urbanization, the triumph of science -- all of it leading to easy transportation, efficient mail delivery, the widespread publishing of books and magazines

---

In other words, we owe Christmas to the Sears Wishbook.

"Christmas...it's really just a catalog."

---

Quote:

---

rex said:


Does anyone care which one it is called? Is calling it Christmas season offensive to non-christians?
Is calling it holiday season offensive to christians? Or does it matter?

---

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
No, it's true, lil black buddy.

---

Quote:

---

winged creature said:

Quote:

---

rex said:
Does anyone care which one it is called? Is calling it Christmas season offensive to non-christians?
Is calling it holiday season offensive to christians? Or does it matter?

---

i dont really care which one people say, anyone who takes offence to either one is a fucktard

---

Quote:

---

Lor said:
shoot the christmas tree isnt even religious.

---

Quote:

---

really in my opinion, atheastis, dont even have a religion, all they have is beliefs and ideas. so to me they really dont have any ground to stand on in the issue of religion.

---

Quote:

---

sneaky bunny said:

Quote:

---

Lor said:
shoot the christmas tree isnt even religious.

---

actually, the christmas tree comes from paganism "candlemas" or "saturnalia" i believe. it like many things was taken during the roman push of catholicism.

Quote:

---

really in my opinion, atheastis, dont even have a religion, all they have is beliefs and ideas. so to me they really dont have any ground to stand on in the issue of religion.

---

atheism isn't about beliefs nor a religion. and those who take it as bitching about god this and god that have their own set of problems. atheism is to not fall into the "brainwashing" that is of not just christianity but eastern religions. believing that facts and science are more correct tha some book of fairy tales.

---

Quote:

---

sneaky bunny said:
atheism is to not fall into the "brainwashing" that is of not just christianity but eastern religions. believing that facts and science are more correct tha some book of fairy tales.

---

Quote:

---

sneaky bunny said:
facts and science have already disproven many of hte stories in your book of fairy tales.

---

Another holy war erupted on Long Island yesterday after a Huntington lawyer filed suit arguing that a Nativity scene and menorah in the center of town violated the constitutional separation of church and state.

Mitchell Pashkin sought a court order to take down both seasonal symbols because they indicated the town was promoting religion.

"This isn't an attack on Christmas. It's not about Christianity itself. This is solely about respect for the law. This is about the Bill of Rights," he said.

"A government shouldn't endorse religion," said Pashkin, who sought a temporary restraining order. "It makes some people feel left out, and that's not OK for the town to do."

The dispute threatened to cast a pall over last night's tree-lighting ceremony at Huntington Village Green, where officials were to switch on lights on a 50-foot tree, just above the Nativity scene and menorah.

But in court, U.S. District Judge Leonard Wexler urged the two sides not to make a federal case out of it and reach a compromise instead.

They did: Town officials agreed to post signs showing clearly that both symbols were not provided by the town but donated privately — the Nativity by the Knights of Columbus in East Meadow and the menorah by Chabad-Lubavitch in Melville.

Quote:

---

The right to freedom of religion is so central to American democracy that it was enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution, along with other fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

This mini-site contains materials explaining some of the current challenges to religious freedom in America.

For over 90 years, the Anti-Defamation League has been ardent advocate for religious freedom for all Americans - whether in the majority or minority. We believe the best way to safeguard religious freedom is through the separation of church and state embodied in the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. As a leading religious freedom advocate, ADL continues to meet challenges to religious freedom through friend of the court legal briefs, lobbying and legislative activity, and grassroots education.

America's founders mandated the strict separation of church and state to guarantee an atmosphere of religious liberty. Largely because of this prohibition against government regulation or endorsement of religious, diverse faiths have flourished and thrived in America since the founding of the Republic. Indeed, James Madison, one of the fathers of the United States Constitution, once observed that "the [religious] devotion of the people has been manifestly increased be the total separation of the church from the state."

Today, there are ever increasing legal, legislative, and grassroots challenges to our founding father;s revolutionary vision of the separation of church and state. Ongoing for several decades, these challenges have regrettably weakened church-state separation to the detriment of religious freedom for all Americans.

---

Quote:

---

The ‘December Dilemma’
December Holiday Guidelines for Public Schools

Every December, public school students, parents, teachers and administrators face the difficult task of acknowledging the various religious and secular holiday traditions celebrated during that time of year. This pamphlet is designed to inform members of the public school community about the current state of the law regarding constitutionally permissible religious holiday observance in the public schools.

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion to all Americans — including young schoolchildren — by prohibiting the government from endorsing or promoting any particular religious point of view. This prohibition has led courts to ban such plainly coercive religious activities in public schools such as organized prayer and the teaching of creationism. The law is less clear regarding the limits on holiday celebrations in public schools, but a number of guidelines should be followed in order to adhere to the requirements of the First Amendment.

Religion as an Educational Lesson

While there are appropriate educational benefits to teaching about the diverse religious traditions and cultures of our country, school officials must be sure they do not give students the impression that one set of holidays or beliefs is more important or more acceptable than others.

Courts have stressed that “[r]eligion is a pervasive and enduring human phenomenon which is an appropriate, if not desirable, subject of secular study.”1 In fact, “it might well be said that one’s education is not complete without a study of comparative religion or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization.”2

However, there is a critical difference between practicing religion and teaching about religion. Most importantly, it is constitutionally permissible for public schools to teach about religion but unconstitutional for public schools to observe religious holidays or practice religion.3 School officials and parents must be careful not to cross the line between “the laudable educational goal of promoting a student’s knowledge of and appreciation for this nation’s cultural and religious diversity, and the impermissible endorsement of religion forbidden by the Establishment Clause.”4

The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on issues related to teaching about religious holidays in public schools, but its rulings in other cases involving religious freedom and lower court rulings about religious holidays in public schools are instructive regarding which activities are permissible or impermissible.

The Supreme Court has said that religion may only be studied when it is “presented objectively as part of a secular program of education.”5 Such study must have a distinctly nonreligious purpose.

For example, public school students in an English class may study passages from the Bible to better understand a work of literature that draws on Biblical sources. A course on American or European history might also include an in-depth study of the role of religion in shaping important historical events. It is important to remember that in any context, the study of religion must not be coercive and must neither promote nor be hostile towards religion.6

It is often appropriate to teach about the historical, contemporary and cultural aspects of religious holidays. From these lessons, young children often gain understanding and respect for the diverse cultures and beliefs in our country. Appropriate lessons about religious holidays could include discussions of the origins and meanings of holidays and how and when they are celebrated.

However, teachers should make sure not to cover a single holiday or religion, but instead to teach children about the holiday celebrations of a number of different traditions.

For example, in any given year a number of holidays may occur in December — Christmas, Chanukah, Kwanzaa, Bill of Rights Day, and Bodhi Day (a Buddhist celebration) — and may be appropriate for a lesson on various celebrations held in the winter season.7 In this context, it is permissible for teachers to display religious symbols, so long as they are used solely as a teaching aid and are displayed temporarily as part of an educational lesson.8

Holiday Assemblies and Other Public School Activities

The study of religious holidays may also include “more than mere classroom instruction.” 9 For instance, public performances or presentations of music, literature and art are permissible, as long as they are “presented objectively as part of a secular program of education.”10 A permissible purpose for such a program may be advancing students’ knowledge of society’s cultural and religious heritage.11

However, religious music, literature, art or other religious activities should not dominate school activities. These activities are permissible only if they make up a small portion of a school-sponsored event.

For instance, it may be permissible to have students act out a play which contains one scene where a family is shown opening presents on Christmas morning. However, school-sponsorship of a play about the birth of Jesus would be impermissible because such performances are inherently affirmations of a certain religious point of view.

School-sponsored activities should also focus on more than one religion and religious holiday. Depicting a diversity of beliefs and customs is important to teaching public school students about religion and culture. It also helps to ensure that public schools remain neutral and do not promote or denigrate any particular denomination or custom.

It is also important to provide students the opportunity to choose not to participate in activities they find offensive to their religious sensibilities.12 School administrators must be sure that students have the option to make this choice and not be forced to participate out of embarrassment or peer pressure.

Public School Students Performing Religious Music

School-sponsored singing of religious music poses slightly different concerns because so much choral music is religious.13 Due to the dominance of religious music in serious choral music and the legitimate secular reasons for having public school students sing choral music, courts have been more lenient about allowing public school choirs to sing religious music.14

Additionally, forbidding choirs to sing any music that is religious has been found to be hostile, not neutral, toward religion.15 Therefore, it is usually permissible to allow public school groups to sing some religious music as part of a choral performance.

However, to avoid First Amendment violations, school choirs should not sing only religious music and should not focus on a particular holiday or denomination. Also, similar to school assemblies and other activities, school officials should allow public school children to be excused from singing religious music without fear of embarrassment or peer pressure.

For instance, at a winter public school choral concert, it is permissible to include some songs based on holidays such as Christmas or Chanukah. However, it would not be appropriate for a public school choir to perform a concert dominated by the songs of a single religious tradition.

It is also not appropriate for public schools to lead students in singing prayers, just as it is improper for schools to lead students in spoken prayer.16 Courts have found no distinction in singing versus speaking prayers and have found that songs which “call on God for His blessing and contain an avowal of divine faith” are not appropriate for public school students to sing.17

Public school students may be allowed to perform at churches, synagogues or temples because courts have recognized that these venues often provide excellent acoustics and atmosphere for the singing of choral music. However, a public school choir should not sing exclusively at religious sites or only at venues of a particular denomination.

As with other public school activities that involve religion, school officials and parents should consider the effects of teaching religious music to impressionable young children.

Decorating Public School Classrooms and Grounds With Holiday Symbols

Public school officials may decorate classrooms and other areas of public schools to recognize certain holiday seasons. But they must be careful not to send a message through these decorations that a certain religion is endorsed or favored by the school.

The Supreme Court has never ruled specifically on holiday displays in public schools, but its decisions on such displays on public property, like parks and courthouses, are instructive in this area.

In the context of displays on public property, the Supreme Court has ruled that a Christmas crèche standing alone is impermissible, but a Christmas tree is permissible because it has become such a secular symbol of the winter holiday season.18 It also has found that a Chanukah menorah is a symbol with both secular and religious meanings, and its display on public property within a predominantly secular display is permissible.19

Due to the impressionability of school children, the Supreme Court has noted that a holiday display of a Chanukah menorah and secular symbols such as a Christmas tree could raise additional constitutional concerns.20 However, lower courts have not invalidated such displays and it’s likely that they are permissible.

Thus, the particular symbols used and the context of the display are vitally important to determine whether the decorations are permissible. As one court has put it, “The context in which a symbol appears is critical because it may determine what viewers fairly understand to be the purpose of the display, and may negate any message of endorsement that the religious symbol might otherwise evoke.”21

If schools choose to recognize holidays through decorations, they should represent the diversity of the season and should avoid symbols with patently religious meanings to avoid sending the message to students that a religion or a particular denomination is preferred.22

Additionally, symbols depicting religious holidays are most appropriate when accompanied by both secular objects and symbols from holidays of other religions. This combination of faiths and of secular and sacred helps to neutralize messages of favoritism and concerns about religious coercion.

For instance, on a board filled during the winter months with images of snowflakes, candles and evergreen trees, it might be appropriate to add images of Santa Claus and even a Chanukah menorah because the overall message is clearly a celebration of the season, not the promotion of a religious point of view. However, a nativity scene, crucifix or other undeniably religious symbols are not appropriate for a public school display, especially when they are the only objects displayed.23

If a school wishes to recognize seasonal holidays, temporary secular displays that recognize secular aspects of the season and perhaps also holidays with a religious origin are the most appropriate and permissible.24 If symbols that depict religious holidays are used, the display should visually represent holidays of several religions and should also include secular decorations of the season.

Conclusion

The December holidays present public schools with the challenge of acknowledging the diverse religious beliefs of their students while avoiding the kind of divisiveness that the constitutional mandate of separation of church and state is designed to prevent. Teachers, administrators and parents should try to promote greater understanding and tolerance among students of different traditions by taking care to adhere to the First Amendment’s prohibition against school-sponsored endorsement or promotion of religious beliefs of any kind. By following this great American tradition, our public schools can best celebrate the religious freedom upon which our nation was founded.

Endnotes
1 See Clever v. Cherry Hill Township Bd. of Educ., 838 F. Supp. 929, 939 (D. N.J. 1993).
2 See School Dist. of Abington Township, Pa. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225 (1963).
3 See Abington, 374 U.S. at 225.
4 See Clever, 838 F. Supp. at 932.
5 See Abington, 374 U.S. at 225.
6 See Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97, 106-107 (1968); Altman v. Bedford Central School Dist., 245 F.3d 49, 75-76 (2nd Cir. 2001). 7 See Clever, 838 F. Supp. at 933-34, 939.
8 See Florey v. Sioux Falls School Dist. 49-5, 619 F. 2d 1311, 1317 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 97 (1980); Clever, 838 F. Supp. at 939-40.
9 See Florey, 619 F.2d at 1316. See also Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203, 477 (1948) (Jackson J., concurring).
10 See Abington, 374 U.S. at 225.
11 See Florey, 619 F.2d at 1316.
12 Id. at 1317.
13 See e.g., Doe v. Duncanville Indep. School Dist., 70 F.3d 402, 407 (5th Cir. 1995).
14 Id. at 407-08.
15 Id. at 407-08.
16 See Doe v. Aldine Indep. School Dist., 563 F. Supp. 883, 888 (S.D. Tex. 1982).
17 Id. at 885, 888.
18 See County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 492 U.S. 573, 602, 616 (1989).
19 Id. at 613-14, 618.
20 Id. at 629 (footnote No. 69).
21 See Clever, 838 F. Supp. at 937 (citing to Allegheny, 492 U.S. 573 (1989)).
22 See e.g., Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980); Washegesic v. Bloomingdale Public Schools, 33 F.3d 679, 684 (6th Cir. 1994).
23 See Washegesic, 33 F.3d at 683-84. See also Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 598-99.
24 See Florey, 619 F.2d at 1317; Clever, 838 F. Supp. at 939.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Pariah you might want to explain a bit more what your getting at. Are you saying that all the old Pagan stuff is Christian based?

---

Quote:

---

sneaky bunny said:
facts and science have already disproven many of hte stories in your book of fairy tales.

---

In the Greece NY school district, "O Come, All Ye Faithful" is a no-no but "Silent Night" is OK.

The fine line between the two Christmas carols is one that school board members walked Oct. 11, when they voted 5-4 to adopt a resolution that clarified and somewhat loosened their policy regarding religious observances and holidays.

"The board was kind of interested in reversing the pendulum that had swung all the way to 'you could have winter scenes (but) you could not have Santa Claus or Christmas,'" said school board President Ken Walsh.

Greece is one of many school districts that continue to deal with the challenge of balancing First Amendment concerns with the feelings of those who say holidays such as Christmas have been robbed of their religious significance.

The goal that school officials are striving to achieve, according to a random survey of suburban districts

"Some selections, those in which the text particularly implies or encourages worship, would not be appropriate in school settings," she said in her memo and gave "O Come, All Ye Faithful," as an example. However, "Silent Night," because it is "descriptive in nature and doesn't request a particular religious behavior," would be acceptable with the educational text, she said.

Officials also made a distinction between "what was Christmas and what was religious," Walsh said. "Christmas trees, Santa Claus and things associated with the national holiday of Christmas were OK. What was not allowed was religious symbols" unless they were used in teaching situations.

The sign at McDonald's on the corner of Falls of Neuse and Spring Forest Road reads: "Merry Christmas, Jesus is the Reason for the Season." It is a holiday message that Amanda Alpert thinks comes on a little too strongly.

"It offends me because it specifically talks about Jesus, Merry Christmas. It doesn't give credit to anyone else," Alpert said.

Alpert called the McDonald's corporate office in Atlanta and requested that the sign be changed to the politically correct Happy Holidays.

"I care because I'm Jewish, and the reason for the season is upsetting to me," Alpert said.

Quote:

---

magicjay38 said:
G-man, this should be moved to the Canada/Gay marriage thread

Quote:

---

Wonder Boy said:

No invasion of my rights and freedoms?

As I said in the Canada allows same-sex marriage topic, repeatedly, Canada has already outlawed the ability to publicly or on the airwaves criticize homosexuality. Which also means publicly or on the airwaves quoting the verses that condemn homosexual acts as immoral.
Those lobbying for similar expansions in U.S. law are treading on the Biblical concept of marriage, in addition to similar laws in the U.S. banning any Biblical objection to gays as a "hate-crime".



I know you don't share that perspective, but it is a valid argument.
That such liberal "freedoms" for gays are an invasion of my space and stealing from me, giving rights to gays while simultaneously taking rights and religious freedoms from Christians, and anyone else who objects to homosexuality and would publicly debate the issue.

Gradually eroding religious freedoms, but still seeking to twist the law to take away rights from me and every Christian.

---

No one is taking away your right to personal prejudice. You can say whatever you wish. It's the social acceptability of the remarks that's changing. You can still talk about the 'fuckin' niggers' or 'Jew bastards' if you want. You might find people shunning you, though. You object to the same thing happening with regards to queer folk.

---

??!??

Where have I ever said anything anti-Semitic ?

On the contrary, I'm one of the most pro-Jewish and pro-Israel people you will ever meet.
The Jews are the instrument through which God created the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.
God protects them like no other people.
And their history as a race and a nation is the instrument through which fulfilled prophecy foretells the second coming of Christ.



Likewise (and I feel stupid for having to even answer the specious allegation) I have no animosity toward blacks as a race either.

There are certain political groups within the liberal black community I'm critical of, who (along with many liberal whites) who cultivate a "victim culture" mentality within the black community, to exploit them for votes, and divide America in the process.

I've previously quoted articles that cite comparisons between the career success of foreign blacks who immigrate to the U.S., as compared to American born blacks.
Which shows that it is not racism in America (as liberals allege) that keeps blacks from acheiving in education and economically, and not inherent inferiority of blacks ( as the KKK and other anti-black racist and white supremacist groups allege), but that it is a cultivated victim-culture mindset within the black community that stifles the success of many black Americans.

I'm not saying that racism against blacks, or many other minorities, or even against white Americans doesn't exist, at least in pockets.
But for every place that such racism occurs, there are a hundred others that it does not. And thus, while existing, is not a factor that keeps any racial or ethnic group out of a job, or anything else.

Quote:

---

Magicjay said:

You can preach against us if you want. But if you incite others to commit violent acts, you may have a problem.

---

Again... ??!??

You're the one who constantly expresses that you wish your political opposition would die.

And that you expressed glee at the thought that President Reagan might have been killed during the assassination attempt on him in 1981.

And that our volunteer soldiers in Iraq are "dumbasses, who deserve to die."

Quote:

---

Magicjay said :
Gay people mostly just want to live their lives in peace, without the threat of violence. Some want to form life relationships and sanctify them with marriage vows. No one is demanding that you or your church accept or participate in the process. There are many Christian and other churches that will.

---

The bible clearly states how Jews and Christians are to regard homosexual acts. See the Canada Allows Same-sex Marriage topic, where I printed out those verses:

Genesis chapter 13: v 13
Genesis 18 and 19
Leviticus 7:21, 18:22, 20:13
Romans 1:18-32
2 Peter 2:1-22
Jude, v 5-10
1 Corinthians 6:9

But that, of course, is another topic. If you really wish to discuss homosexuality as it relates to Christianity, it makes sense to discuss it in the appropriate topic.




And by the way as I've said in another topic:

HERE

Quote:

---

Wonder Boy said :
Do I not approve of the gay lifestyle or gay activism, which seeks to smother religious freedom, by preventing others from voicing their opposing beliefs about the immorality of homosexuality ?
No, I don't approve, and am thus open to labelling as a "homophobe".

Do I still have friends, co-workers and family members who are gay, who I still associate with and treat no differently despite their views I disagree with ?
Yes, I continue to interact with them, and therefore am not a "homophobe".

---

So I don't hate gays either.
I simply dissent from their social/political viewpoint.

Quote:

---

Magicjay said:

Merry Christmas, Happy New year and a Super Saturnalia to you, Wonder Boy!

---

Awwwwww. Merry Christmas to you too !

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
McDonald's sign creates controversey:

The sign at McDonald's on the corner of Falls of Neuse and Spring Forest Road reads: "Merry Christmas, Jesus is the Reason for the Season." It is a holiday message that Amanda Alpert thinks comes on a little too strongly.

"It offends me because it specifically talks about Jesus, Merry Christmas. It doesn't give credit to anyone else," Alpert said.

Alpert called the McDonald's corporate office in Atlanta and requested that the sign be changed to the politically correct Happy Holidays.

"I care because I'm Jewish, and the reason for the season is upsetting to me," Alpert said.

---

Quote:

---

Captain Sammitch said:
Granted, Batwoman's spelling may be far from impeccable, but what percentage of your response was inspired by her spelling and what percentage was pretty much the product of your own individual level of hostility toward religion in general?

---

Fixed it for ya

Quote:

---

Captain Sammitch said:
Granted, Elisa's spelling may be far from impeccable, but what percentage of your response was inspired by her spelling and what percentage was pretty much the product of your own individual level of hostility toward religion in general?

---

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
Learn how to spell "fairy" before blathering on with the rest of your mularkey.

---

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
Learn how to spell "fairy" before blathering on with the rest of your mularkey.

---

Quote:

---

Batwoman said:

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
Learn how to spell "fairy" before blathering on with the rest of your mularkey.

---

You realize of course I could make some kind of crack about how of course you of all people would know how to spell fairy.

---

Good to see you of all people know how to spell crack. I guess you are a crimson avenger!