pooh@oddjob.UChicago.EDU (soggy and hard to light) (01/04/88)
In article <10024@mimsy.UUCP> mangoe@mimsy.UUCP (George Orr) writes: [Charley moans and wails about how misunderstood he is.] > >Here we have the apotheosis of modern argument. It is not sufficient for me >to be accused of wrong thinking and having my facts wrong; no, I must also >be convicted of narrow-mindedness. Charley, you DO think wrong, have your facts wrong, and are narrow-minded. >There is no such right, either in law or anywhere else. The law recognizes >religious freedom; It also guarantees freedom FROM religion, Charley. It guarantees that you may celebrate whatever you want in your church and in your home; it also guarantees that I may go about in public spaces without being imposed on by your religious practice. >Not at all. It's easy enough to see here that Christianity is under attack >for demanding a larger place in life than "nice" religion ought to claim. >Christianity is simply too rambunctious and cannot keep its nose out of the >affairs of others. The fact of this "obviousness" is simply shared >perspective-- a rather majoritarian perspective too, I might add. Yep. It means that Christianity should be kept to its practitioners, just as most other religions keep to THEMSELVES. The problem is, Charley, people like you can't be satisfied with celebrating Xmas however you want to, on your own desk, in your home, in your yard, in a hall rented with your own money with like-minded people. You insist that everyone else celebrate it too, so much so that you begin to see it as shared by people who aren't even Christian. Calling it secular as well as religious gives you a pretext for imposing it on the a-theistic as well as those of other religions. >It's interesting how several people have said "I'm Jewish, and I don't >celebrate Christmas", with the implication that this means something. What >it means is that, in retaining their Jewishness they choose to be out of >the mainstream to this extent. So what you're saying is that if you're Jewish, you're not normal. CAN YOU BELIEVE THE INCREDIBLE ARROGANCE OF THIS GUY??? >Why they, as Jews (and I note that our >jewish neighbors celebrate christmas), have a veto over the holiday >celebrations of everyone else is something which has yet to be adequately >justified. Because most of us Jews, Charley, keep our holidays to ourselves. We go home at 5.00 and have parties at home, invite friends over who WANT to share our celebration with us. We go to our own place of worship. AND WE ARE DEMANDING THAT YOU DO THE SAME. Get out of OUR space and into your own. Once you're there, you can celebrate whatever you damn well like. ANYONE can celebrate however much or little of Christmas as they like and call it Winter Solstice. But they may NOT assume that it is celebrated by everyone; that anyone who doesn't is "out of the mainstream"; they may NOT take over the places where I have to work, shop, and conduct business. All I can say, Charley, is that I am very thankful that your dreams DON'T come to pass. I have never suggested that anyone should practice the customs that I learned; you would have yours so established that anyone who didn't want a part of them would be abnormal. You think that if you can't celebrate your holiday in MY space, in the space that everyone must share, that you're not being allowed to celebrate it at all. Grow up, Charley, and learn that you can't always have your way. Pooh pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu Caesar: Forgive him, Theodotus: he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the law of nature. -- George Bernard Shaw
wlinden@dasys1.UUCP (William Linden) (01/05/88)
In article <14196@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu.UUCP (soggy and hard to light) writes: >It also guarantees freedom FROM religion, Charley. It guarantees that >you may celebrate whatever you want in your church and in your home; >it also guarantees that I may go about in public spaces without being >imposed on by your religious practice. You appear to have confused the American and Soviety constitutions, as what you have stated is the Soviet version of "religious freedom" ("freedom of religion and anti-religious propaganda", but not "religious propaganda", so you have complete "freedom of religion" provided you confine it to your own room and don't do something like _talk_ to anyone about it.) My copy of the First Amendment says "... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Along with things about "freedom of speech, or of the press", and assembly, etc. You seem to believe that free speech and assembly do not apply to "religious" speech, etc. Now if you really find it so painful to be reminded of Christmas in public, try thinking about ways to take the d______ commercial profit motive out of it, so the stores will no longer have a vested interest in promoting Christmas. -- Will Linden {sun,philabs,cmcl2}!phri\ Compuserve 72737,2150 {bellcore,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!wlinden MCI Mail WLINDEN {portal,well,ihnp4,amdahl}!hoptoad/
jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan Isaiah Kamens) (01/05/88)
My mind is getting quite befuddled with all of the arguments and
cross-arguments and flames and cross-flames and points and
counter-points. I am therefore going to attempt to state my opinion
in this matter in a way that will logically explain what I want to say
while not flaming at anybody. It's tough, but I just might be able to
manage it if I struggle with all my strength.
_1_. _I_s _C_h_r_i_s_t_m_a_s _a _C_h_r_i_s_t_i_a_n _a_n_d _a _R_e_l_i_g_i_o_u_s _h_o_l_i_d_a_y_?
This, I think, is at the crux of this entire argument. My opinion, as
I have already stated, is that Christmas is a religious holiday. I
will concede that the majority of Christians in the world today
practice it in a mostly secular way. However, I will not concede that
because most Christians treat it as secular, it therefore is secular.
Analogy: cruise on over to rec.puzzles, where a puzzle about three
boxes was recently posted. In the original wash of answers, a
considerable majority of people said that the correct answer is 1/2.
In fact, the correct answer is 2/3. The correct answer does not
become 1/2 just because more people said it is. I submit that people
who treat Christmas as a secular holiday are WRONG. Christmas, by its
nature of the celebration of the birth of Christ, is a religious
holiday. If you say that Christians have a right to decide whether or
not to treat Christmas religiously, then I submit that Jews and other
non-Christians have a right to decide whether they wish to consider
Christmas religious, and therefore whether or not they are offended by
public displays of its observance.
In the same way, even if most Christians do not consider a creche a
religious symbol (and in fact I think that if pressed most Christians
will would state that the creche is, indeed, religious), Jews have a
right to decide whether or not they consider it religious and
offensive to their religious beliefs. If they do, then they have the
right not to be subjected to viewing it, or to seeing their government
support it openly through public displays.
If you strongly disagree with the conclusion that Christmas is a
religious holiday, then we will debate forever and we will never
convince each other of anything. So, why argue?
_2_. _I_s _t_h_e _f_r_e_e_d_o_m _F_R_O_M _r_e_l_i_g_i_o_n _p_r_o_t_e_c_t_e_d _i_n _a_d_d_i_t_i_o_n _t_o _t_h_e _f_r_e_e_d_o_m
_O_F _r_e_l_i_g_i_o_n_?
Certain people around here seem to like seeing legal citations in
posts, and I will therefore base my answer to this on a legal
citation. I take you down to the southeastern United States, where a
district court judge recently ruled that "secular humanism" is a
religion. According to him, and he stated this explicitly in his
opinion, the desire NOT to practice a religion is, in and of itself,
religious. Therefore, atheists, who are such secular humanists, are
in fact practicing a religion. They are therefore protected from
participating in religious activities of other religions. They have a
right, under the freedom of their religion, to be able to be free of
religion in public areas.
Alternate answer: It is, in fact, AGAINST many people's religion to
participate in the singing of Christmas carols whose words are
religious, even if every Christian singing considers the songs to be
secular. It is, in fact, AGAINST many people's religion to view a
creche, even if others refuse to recognize the religious intent of the
symbol. This is not a question of tolerance, this is a question of
your violating my religious freedom by forcing me to do something that
I cannot do, and by forcing me to recognize the validity of something
which I do not consider valid.
_3_. _W_h_a_t_'_s _t_h_e _p_o_i_n_t_?
I would not protest to the display of Christmas trees or Santa Claus
on public property, although they make me uncomfortable, because they
are not, in essense, religious in nature. I will, however, protest
the display of a creche, which is religious in nature.
I would not protest to a party being called a "Christmas Party," as
long as it stays secular in everything but the name.
I will protest when someone tries to convince me that Christmas is not
a religious holiday, or that the creche is not a religious symbol,
simply because "most Christians" do not view them as such. Here, I
think, we have the Christian majority forcing their opinions on the
observing Christian minority and on non-Christians.
*************************
If you are just going to refute all of these points, then post to
/dev/null, OK? It's enough already.... we disagree, and it's clear (I
think) that no one's mind is going to be changed!
-=> Jonathan I. Kamens | "There is no expedient to which man will not go
MIT '91 | to avoid the real labor of thought."
jik@ATHENA.MIT.EDU | -- Thomas Alva Edison