Christmas without Christ? Huh?

[RedPop4]

The Western culture's celebration of Christmas has been occurring since the mid 300's A.D. Chirst's Mass. The coming of Christ.

Christ Himself preached love thy neighbor as thyself, although this is often quite difficult.

I see the original question of the thread as this. If this has been happening continuously this long, why does it seem that it gets excluded in the name of "diversity?" The "Holiday Program" etc. with everything BUT Christmas is just that. It's no longer "inclusive" it's "inclusive of everything but Christmas," to the point of changing the name of the season.

I wonder about this as well. I could really go political about agenda groups and inclusivity, but that's not allowed and I don't want to ruin a good deeply intellectual discussion.

Another really good example of this phenomenon, is the recent news that the ChristKindelFest (Christ Child Festival) in Chicago will not include the new film "The Nativity." If that doesn't put the grass right down where the cows can get at it, nothing does.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I see the original question of the thread as this. If this has been happening continuously this long, why does it seem that it gets excluded in the name of "diversity?" The "Holiday Program" etc. with everything BUT Christmas is just that. It's no longer "inclusive" it's "inclusive of everything but Christmas," to the point of changing the name of the season.

That's exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks!


.

 

[olive bleu]

Thanks REDPOP4...you said exactly want i have been trying to spit out and not doing a very good job of it. I am not so narrow-minded that i think everyone needs to celebrate for the reasons i do, but the fact that my kids take part in a holiday concert and get to sing songs about everything BUT Jesus just seems a little lopsided to me.

 

[koopkooper]

I think it's very simple really...it's called Christ-mas.....not secular-mas.
It's a Christain holiday, not a Jewish or Muslim holiday. They have their own holy holidays and we have ours, simple as that.
Could you imagine in this PC world demanding Jews and Muslims "tone down" their celebrations and make theirs more PC secular, I don't think so.
It's time as Christians we stand up for our own traditions and tell everyone else to go kiss a duck.

 

[olive bleu]

I think it's very simple really...it's called Christ-mas.....not secular-mas.
It's a Christain holiday, not a Jewish or Muslim holiday. They have their own holy holidays and we have ours, simple as that.
Could you imagine in this PC world demanding Jews and Muslims "tone down" their celebrations and make theirs more PC secular, I don't think so.
It's time as Christians we stand up for our own traditions and tell everyone else to go kiss a duck.

Love that.."Kiss a Duck"!!lol lol lol very nice..:eusa_clap :eusa_clap

 

[Mr. Lucky]

Originally Posted by RedPop4
I see the original question of the thread as this. If this has been happening continuously this long, why does it seem that it gets excluded in the name of "diversity?" The "Holiday Program" etc. with everything BUT Christmas is just that. It's no longer "inclusive" it's "inclusive of everything but Christmas," to the point of changing the name of the season.

That's exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks!


.

But the FACT is that it's not! You are both making GIANT assumptions! You seem to be operating under the assumption that every Christmas Program is now a Holiday Program and that EVERY nativity scene and manorah has been removed! That is just patently false! If you'd like, I would happily provide examples - from Buffalo, NY to Oklahoma City to Seattle to LA - where Christmas Plays, Nativity Scenes, The Festival of the Candles, a menorah, etc. can be found! And, yet, there is still room for Solstice Celebrations, et all! This is a big and wide and, yes, DIVERSE, country! And the components of this country keep changing and changing and changing. No one is being left out! That's the point. And the FACT of the matter is is that if you are feeling left out, well, maybe you're just not trying hard enough.

What you want exists: maybe not at the bookstore right around the corner. But, so what! Hop in the car and head to Rite Aid, they got plenty of Nativity Scene cards!

No one said living in a free and open society, a society that was/is built on its changing dynamic, would be easy or that you would like it ALL the time. All that is guaranteed is Life, Liberty and the PURSUIT of Happiness. The getting it is YOUR job.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

No one is saying anyone can't celebrate Christmas - all that is being said is that NOT everyone has to.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Lets see....A national holiday was happily instituted to celebrate only the birth of Christ. In recent years some insist that must surely be unfair and that it should include everyone's "religious" symbols publically.....or,uh..none. But why?? Then we notice something missing rather than something added. Yet,still a drive to celebrating what(?),"for all" then? All religion? Why not make Anything But Christ Day..like Presidents Day...only in the spring celebrating everyone's idea of creation..evolution...or self improvement..or not...and still celebrate the only one who claimed saviour status on Dec 25? The one who also claimed that goodness,kindness and just being a nice guy wasn't being a Christain...or getting anyone into heaven. Rather the idea that recognizing and accepting just who the savior is and what he did...would insure anyone life forever. It seems he opened that up for everyone..no exclusions. On top of that!...we get to choose whether to realise and decide that we are easibly eligible. Simple enough! Certainly quite a birth into humanity to commemorate. Sadly..the only thing that can make it so confusing and seemingly foolish is...self....more commonly known as ego. Can always be quite conceitedly disagreeable to surrendering to such freely offered simpleness. IMHO..but of course....
HD
I say..MerryChristMass..with good cheer!..no matter other's current flavor.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

Lets see....A national holiday was happily instituted to celebrate only the birth of Christ. In recent years some insist that must surely be unfair and that it should include everyone's "religious" symbols publically.....or,uh..none. But why?? Then we notice something missing rather than something added. Yet,still a drive to celebrating what(?),"for all" then? All religion? Why not make Anything But Christ Day..like Presidents Day...only in the spring celebrating everyone's idea of creation..evolution...or self improvement..or not...and still celebrate the only one who claimed saviour status on Dec 25? The one who also claimed that goodness,kindness and just being a nice guy wasn't being a Christain...or getting anyone into heaven. Rather the idea that recognizing and accepting just who the savior is and what he did...would insure anyone life forever. It seems he opened that up for everyone..no exclusions. On top of that!...we get to choose whether to realise and decide that we are easibly eligible. Simple enough! Certainly quite a birth into humanity to commemorate. Sadly..the only thing that can make it so confusing and seemingly foolish is...self....more commonly known as ego. Can always be quite conceitedly disagreeable to surrendering to such freely offered simpleness. IMHO..but of course....
HD
I say..MerryChristMass..with good cheer!..no matter other's current flavor.

Some only see what's missing because they choose NOT to see what's been added.

 

[Pilgrim]

Something that I tried to get at in my earlier post is also addressed above: some of us are actually rather indifferent to the religious aspects of the holiday. That's not a crime or a moral failing, it's simply fact.

And folks to whom that's not a big deal aren't likely to observe it in displays, behavior or other in other ways.

 

[jamespowers]

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

No one is saying anyone can't celebrate Christmas - all that is being said is that NOT everyone has to.

Now you had to go and drag me into commenting here. :eusa_doh:
The Amendment you quote, and bold in areas that are missing some of the point, says nothing about diversity or freedom from religion it says there is freedom of religion. Period. Its intent was to protect religion from government not government from religion. There is a difference.
You don't have to celebrate anything but you do have to admit the root of the holiday. That is all. Paving it over with trees and holly doesn't make it any less so.
I think we actually agree aside from the meaning of Amendment I.
As a bonus, if you can find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution then I will award you with a 7 5/8 Borsalino.
Anyone ever wonder why they just didn't stop at Congress shall make no law?

 

[Novella]

Something that I tried to get at in my earlier post is also addressed above: some of us are actually rather indifferent to the religious aspects of the holiday. That's not a crime or a moral failing, it's simply fact.

That would be me. I celebrate Christmas as I did growing up - vaguely aware of its meaning, but more focused on the idea of "holiday" cheer and goodwill rather than Christmas religiousness. To me it is more of a cultural custom than a religious event, although I do recognize and respect its origins.

 

["Doc" Devereux]

Gentlemen, we step away from the subject under discussion and dangerously close to politics.

 

[Solid Citizen]

Religion & Politics

Two quick ways to kill a web site one is already banned so should the other IMO

SC fftopic:

 

[koopkooper]

Ladies and Gentleman I introduce to you an example of the secularisation of todays society.

 

[jake_fink]

Perhaps at some level people are responding more to the Saturnalian symbols as reflections of our time and attitudes than to the symbols of peace, ascetisicm and faith. St Nicholas at least has something to do with Christ, being a saint and all, though the version you probably saw on the cards was likely the Coca Cola Santa. Maybe one day we'll celebrate Ronald MacDonaldmas too.

PS: I pity the loss of Knecht Ruprecht at this time of year.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

Now you had to go and drag me into commenting here. :eusa_doh:
The Amendment you quote, and bold in areas that are missing some of the point, says nothing about diversity or freedom from religion it says there is freedom of religion. Period. Its intent was to protect religion from government not government from religion. There is a difference.
You don't have to celebrate anything but you do have to admit the root of the holiday. That is all. Paving it over with trees and holly doesn't make it any less so.
I think we actually agree aside from the meaning of Amendment I.
As a bonus, if you can find the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Constitution then I will award you with a 7 5/8 Borsalino.
Anyone ever wonder why they just didn't stop at Congress shall make no law?

Actually, there is no mention of the "seperation of church and state" in the Constitution, except in most interpretations of the "establishment" clause. The definitive statement of such comes from Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists Association and said - Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. He wrote it, he ought to know!

Now, as to your first paragraph, I think it was BOTH in terms of protection. These men saw first hand what a powerful and corrupt clergy can do to a system of govt. and they sincerely wished not to repeat it.

Oh, do I still get the Borso?

 

[Briscoeteque]

Chanukah is pretty much a mass-produced materialistic holiday anyway. It's a really minor Jewish holiday and the only reason why it's even remotely more popular than something like Purim is because it happens in December, near Christmas. Otherwise, as it celebrates an event not in the Torah, it's not that big of a deal to religous Jews. To more secular Jews, ironically the group the holiday of Chanukah is about distancing one's self from, it's a big deal because they don't feel left out at Christmas.

For the record, I'm a pretty Secular Jew at this point, but Chanukah's just an excuse to buy presents, and I HATE presents. I much prefer Purim, where it's actually Tradition to get as drunk as possible. That I can get behind! Plus, it's supposed to be the only holiday that should be celebrated after Moshsiach!

The store has all right to only atheist/agnostic cards. I'm sure there are scores of stores that only sell religious ones. Power to both.

 

[Roger]

I think it's very simple really...it's called Christ-mas.....not secular-mas.
It's a Christain holiday, not a Jewish or Muslim holiday. They have their own holy holidays and we have ours, simple as that.
Could you imagine in this PC world demanding Jews and Muslims "tone down" their celebrations and make theirs more PC secular, I don't think so.
It's time as Christians we stand up for our own traditions and tell everyone else to go kiss a duck.

Exactly! Kwanzaa is a con and I will never consider it a holiday and it deserves no mention. Out here in California I went to a See's Candy Store and saw some Hannukah candy, was I as a Roman Catholic offended by this display? NO! So why should anyone be offended by a Nativity scene?

 

[Roger]

Something that I tried to get at in my earlier post is also addressed above: some of us are actually rather indifferent to the religious aspects of the holiday. That's not a crime or a moral failing, it's simply fact.

And folks to whom that's not a big deal aren't likely to observe it in displays, behavior or other in other ways.

Good point. I respect your logic.

 

[Lauren]

I suppose it's just strange to me that Christmas is celebrated when a lot of people don't know anything about Christ outside of swearing [huh]