• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Happy Holidays or Merry Christmas?

Happy Holidays or Merry Christmas?

  • Happy Holidays

    Votes: 13 41.9%
  • Merry Christmas

    Votes: 15 48.4%
  • Neither

    Votes: 3 9.7%

  • Total voters
    31

Stace

Boobie Jubilee
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
7,254
Reaction score
364
Location
Clarksville, TN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
AlbqOwl said:
I first heard of the Wendy's policy at one of our local stores a week or so ago and then read of it in other places. Our local Wal-Mart also initiated a similar nation-wide policy before so many customers complained that they rescinded it. Other such phenomena is mentioned in this rather lengthy thread.

No need to apologize, however. I wouldn't have believed it either if it had not been explained to me by those operating under such a presumed politically correct dictate.

I don't think a local store would dictate chainwide policy, I believe that would have to come from headquarters, but that's beside the point.

I haven't really seen anything like that in our area, but I know that doesn't mean it's not happening elsewhere.

People are so concerned with being politically correct these days that they sometimes go overboard with it. I think as a company, stores and such should not advertise for one specific holiday, but when it comes to individual employees, they should be able to use the greeting of their choosing.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
AlbqOwl said:
I first heard of the Wendy's policy at one of our local stores a week or so ago and then read of it in other places. Our local Wal-Mart also initiated a similar nation-wide policy before so many customers complained that they rescinded it. Other such phenomena is mentioned in this rather lengthy thread.

No need to apologize, however. I wouldn't have believed it either if it had not been explained to me by those operating under such a presumed politically correct dictate.

I disagree with telling an employee what they are or are not allowed to say, I had a problem with this in the military, because I worked for the government and thus the president, I was unable to voice my opinion on him if it was a negative one, but positive opinions were accepted, which I think is bullshit for a nation that gives everyone the right to free speach and the "right to petition the government" and something about greivances (not in the mood to look it up word for word). So yes, I disagree that any business can tell thier employees that they are not allowed to wish others a Merry Christmas (praying that they actually know the faith of those they wish it to as to not offend, if one would be so easily offended that is).

Now, as far as Christians complaining about the wording of advertisements and "oh no! they didn't mention the word christmas in thier ad, they said HOLIDAYS".... as far as that goes....I only have one thing to say to christians, grow up and learn to be tolerant of the fact that your not the only ones who celebrate a holiday during this time of the year. Are jews all pissed off because Passover isn't mentioned as much as Easter? If they are Ive never heard them.

As far as the Salvation Army and Target goes, people fail to realize that it has been Target's policy not to allow soliciting for quite some time, they just want to make publicity and, basically, make an attempt to FORCE Target to allow thier charity man by threatening a Boycott of thier stores because they aren't treated special.....again.....
Target already has a partnership with the Salvation Army via a Wish List online gift giving..thing.. or whatever. What else do you want?
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
inventr1 said:
Hello All,

As the National Spokesperson for American Atheists I often get misquoted. The above statement is not true -- I made no such comment and support no such action.

American Atheists is suing to remove 12-foot-tall crosses (no stars, no crescents), from the side of the highways in Utah. These are gratuitous religious displays which surely show a one-sided support for one religion, and are illegal.

Bill O'reilly asked one of our representatives (not me) about the Arlington Cemetary, and our person was so put-off by the absurdity of the remark that he stumbled. Since then that's all we've heard about. It is not true. American Atheists is not about infringing on the rights of believers on their own grave stones.

The separation of church and state supports and protects believers and nonbelievers alike. We all need to stick to the matter at hand, and not assume the imagined.

David Silverman
National Spokesperson
American Atheists
http://www.nogodblog.com

I do apologize if I confused you with your representative, but I assume when he is out doing interviews, he does indeed speak for you, and your org. I was very surprised by the answer that your rep. gave to the question, and apparently I was not the only one. This "stumble" that you refer to, it was more then a mere stumble to those of us that are watching you and yours very carefully. This is an assualt on our society, and we will not sit idely by, and watch you dismantle this country, one cross at a time. While I have you here, maybe you could answer a question? You just said you would not want to remove a cross that was "about infringing on the rights of believers on their own grave stones." You do know, that we indeed don't know the beliefs of some the brave souls buried here. So I ask, will you begin to seek out that information, and take the necessary action to right this terrible wrong?:confused:
 
Last edited:

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Deegan said:
You do know, that we indeed don't know the beliefs of some the brave souls buried here. So I ask, will you begin to seek out that information, and take the necessary action to right this terrible wrong?:confused:

I can't answer for him but......

Why should they do that when they can just assume that this man or woman is a Christian, stab a cross down, and go on about thier business, because even if they were not a Christian, who cares? Its giving the almighty Cross more public view and maybe remind those who have fallen away from the Almighty Jesus, cause if they don't pray to him and believe in him they are going to HELL!!!!

Sorry for the sarcasm, but your question made it seem like it is okay to assume everyone is a christian unless otherwise stated, like a religious equivalent of "innocent until proven guilty"
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
I can't answer for him but......

Why should they do that when they can just assume that this man or woman is a Christian, stab a cross down, and go on about thier business, because even if they were not a Christian, who cares? Its giving the almighty Cross more public view and maybe remind those who have fallen away from the Almighty Jesus, cause if they don't pray to him and believe in him they are going to HELL!!!!

Sorry for the sarcasm, but your question made it seem like it is okay to assume everyone is a christian unless otherwise stated, like a religious equivalent of "innocent until proven guilty"

I was really being more facetious then anything else, and I don't assume to know the religion of those who have fallen. This is why I asked the question, there are most likely people there with crosses on their graves, that we don't know if they are believers. The actual meaning of the cross is international, and is not limited to, or exclusive to Christian believers. It is a marking for our resting dead, and this attack is groundless, ridiculous, and I hope soon, fruitless.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Deegan said:
I was really being more facetious then anything else, and I don't assume to know the religion of those who have fallen. This is why I asked the question, there are most likely people there with crosses on their graves, that we don't know if they are believers. The actual meaning of the cross is international, and is not limited to, or exclusive to Christian believers. It is a marking for our resting dead, and this attack is groundless, ridiculous, and I hope soon, fruitless.

Since when has a cross been the marking of the dead??????

Since Christ died on it?

If you can do some research and come up with anything else, give me a link and let me know......

I always knew of a pile of stones to be the marking of the dead prior to the great philosopher Jesus.
 

Columbusite

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
808
Reaction score
6
Location
Columbus
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Deegan said:
I was really being more facetious then anything else, and I don't assume to know the religion of those who have fallen. This is why I asked the question, there are most likely people there with crosses on their graves, that we don't know if they are believers. The actual meaning of the cross is international, and is not limited to, or exclusive to Christian believers. It is a marking for our resting dead, and this attack is groundless, ridiculous, and I hope soon, fruitless.

I already did this, top of page 4. :yawn:
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
Since when has a cross been the marking of the dead??????

Since Christ died on it?

If you can do some research and come up with anything else, give me a link and let me know......

I always knew of a pile of stones to be the marking of the dead prior to the great philosopher Jesus.

Of course it was the death of Jesus that first made the cross a well know symbol, but it is not limited to Christians, or religion. If you go to Europe, France more precisely, you will see crosses on all the graves of the fallen in WW1 and WW2, despite the religion of anyone buried there. Across this world you will see this mark, and it's well known that it is a mark of the dead. To try and limit this to one religion, and not see it's wide use as a symbol of death, is to unreasonable, and ignorant of the facts. I wonder what these atheists do when they live near a church, and the see the horrors of that hundred foot tall cross a top that house of worship? Do they move, do they just look away, do they plot a new course home? This is just ridiculous, you will never shield yourself from the symbols, nor should you feel the need.:roll:
 

Columbusite

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
808
Reaction score
6
Location
Columbus
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Deegan said:
I do apologize if I confused you with your representative, but I assume when he is out doing interviews, he does indeed speak for you, and your org. I was very surprised by the answer that your rep. gave to the question, and apparently I was not the only one. This "stumble" that you refer to, it was more then a mere stumble to those of us that are watching you and yours very carefully. This is an assualt on our society, and we will not sit idely by, and watch you dismantle this country, one cross at a time. While I have you here, maybe you could answer a question? You just said you would not want to remove a cross that was "about infringing on the rights of believers on their own grave stones." You do know, that we indeed don't know the beliefs of some the brave souls buried here. So I ask, will you begin to seek out that information, and take the necessary action to right this terrible wrong?:confused:

I'm sure that representative didn't know the situation in Arlington was different and unfortunately just assumed the same thing was going on there. Which, if it was, would have been perfectly OK. I'm also sure that Mr. Silverman has better things to do than respond to your baseless assumptions.
Gee, they want to follow our Constitution and follow separation of church and state. The fact is, not American Atheists nor any other pro-separation of church and state org has taken action against Arlington National Cememtery. Period.
 

Inuyasha

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
1,510
Reaction score
58
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Deegan said:
Of course it was the death of Jesus that first made the cross a well know symbol, but it is not limited to Christians, or religion. If you go to Europe, France more precisely, you will see crosses on all the graves of the fallen in WW1 and WW2, despite the religion of anyone buried there. Across this world you will see this mark, and it's well known that it is a mark of the dead. To try and limit this to one religion, and not see it's wide use as a symbol of death, is to unreasonable, and ignorant of the facts. I wonder what these atheists do when they live near a church, and the see the horrors of that hundred foot tall cross a top that house of worship? Do they move, do they just look away, do they plot a new course home? This is just ridiculous, you will never shield yourself from the symbols, nor should you feel the need.:roll:

Did you ever hear Mel Brooks and Carl Riener's "Thousand Year Old Man" where they talk about the first factory that produced the Star of David but later went over to producing Crosses? Check it out. It's the very first album they did.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Deegan said:
Of course it was the death of Jesus that first made the cross a well know symbol, but it is not limited to Christians, or religion. If you go to Europe, France more precisely, you will see crosses on all the graves of the fallen in WW1 and WW2, despite the religion of anyone buried there. Across this world you will see this mark, and it's well known that it is a mark of the dead. To try and limit this to one religion, and not see it's wide use as a symbol of death, is to unreasonable, and ignorant of the facts. I wonder what these atheists do when they live near a church, and the see the horrors of that hundred foot tall cross a top that house of worship? Do they move, do they just look away, do they plot a new course home? This is just ridiculous, you will never shield yourself from the symbols, nor should you feel the need.:roll:

Okay, the people who decided to bury the fallen of WW1 and WW2 under croses were probably, most likely... what??? Thats right folks.. CHRISTIAN.
The cross is not an international symbol of the dead.... its a christian symbol of the dead, and those who say that the cross is an international symbol of the dead are usually.... christian... or come from christian backgrounds.
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Columbusite said:
I'm sure that representative didn't know the situation in Arlington was different and unfortunately just assumed the same thing was going on there. Which, if it was, would have been perfectly OK. I'm also sure that Mr. Silverman has better things to do than respond to your baseless assumptions.
Gee, they want to follow our Constitution and follow separation of church and state. The fact is, not American Atheists nor any other pro-separation of church and state org has taken action against Arlington National Cememtery. Period.

Well he did take the time obviously, just as you did. He has seen the outrage, and utter disgust that his, and his groups actions and words have created. The point is to show the ridiculousness of these crusades against the symbols and practices they have targeted. I also would remind you that there is, once again, no separation of church and state in our constitution, get this through your heads.:roll:
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Deegan said:
Well he did take the time obviously, just as you did. He has seen the outrage, and utter disgust that his, and his groups actions and words have created. The point is to show the ridiculousness of these crusades against the symbols and practices they have targeted. I also would remind you that there is, once again, no separation of church and state in our constitution, get this through your heads.:roll:

:rofl :rofl :rofl
Hannity teach you that one?

Listen, the seperation of church and state is just that, a seperation of church and state, and was worded as such, not specifically in the constitution, but in the writings of the man who came up with the idea to put it in the constitution.

With that being said.....
Just because his group causes outrage and utter disgust among christians, and because christians think that these "crusades" are ridiculous.. that does not make the christians "in the right"

Christians have a major problem in this country, and its thier "better than you" attitude about things. And, of course, thier view towards the other religions is "holy than thou"

This is another classic example of Christian intolerance and self-righteousnes.
 

Stace

Boobie Jubilee
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
7,254
Reaction score
364
Location
Clarksville, TN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Well, yeesh....

I'm not Christian, so I'm gonna say right now that I don't want a cross anywhere on my grave....just a regular ol' headstone will suffice, thanks.

Honestly, does it really matter what religion people are? They're DEAD, I don't think too many of them care what's sitting above their grave. If they had the ability, I think they'd be grateful that there was anything there at all, so that people could come by and pay their respects and such.

But hey, that's just my two cents...
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Caine said:
:rofl :rofl :rofl
Hannity teach you that one?

Listen, the seperation of church and state is just that, a seperation of church and state, and was worded as such, not specifically in the constitution, but in the writings of the man who came up with the idea to put it in the constitution.

With that being said.....
Just because his group causes outrage and utter disgust among christians, and because christians think that these "crusades" are ridiculous.. that does not make the christians "in the right"

Christians have a major problem in this country, and its thier "better than you" attitude about things. And, of course, thier view towards the other religions is "holy than thou"

This is another classic example of Christian intolerance and self-righteousnes.

Why do you people keep comparing me to Hannity, he must be a bright man, I wouldn't know though, as I don't watch him. Still, I must be doing something right, I have all of your panties in a twist, as you had mine. I have no intolerance for anyone who does not believe as I do, only for those who attack my beliefs, and present a threat to the continuation of that belief. I see a trend, and it makes me uneasy, nervous, and I won't apologize for that. I will however agree that some are this way, and as I have said numerous times, those people are a small minority. You seem to want to group everyone in this neat little box, I won't tolerate that, and I won't accept your label.
 

Stace

Boobie Jubilee
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
7,254
Reaction score
364
Location
Clarksville, TN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Deegan said:
Why do you people keep comparing me to Hannity, he must be a bright man, I wouldn't know though, as I don't watch him. Still, I must be doing something right, I have all of your panties in a twist, as you had mine. I have no intolerance for anyone who does not believe as I do, only for those who attack my beliefs, and present a threat to the continuation of that belief. I see a trend, and it makes me uneasy, nervous, and I won't apologize for that. I will however agree that some are this way, and as I have said numerous times, those people are a small minority. You seem to want to group everyone in this neat little box, I won't tolerate that, and I won't accept your label.

See, that's the thing thought....you feel that "these people" are attacking your beliefs, posing a threat to the continuation of your beliefs?

Did you ever stop to think that just maybe, they feel the same way about you?

No religion, or lack thereof, is better than another. This country was founded so that individuals could practice any faith they chose, and to be able to do so without persecution. That is sadly not the case these days, and I think our Founding Fathers would be ashamed.
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Stace said:
See, that's the thing thought....you feel that "these people" are attacking your beliefs, posing a threat to the continuation of your beliefs?

Did you ever stop to think that just maybe, they feel the same way about you?

No religion, or lack thereof, is better than another. This country was founded so that individuals could practice any faith they chose, and to be able to do so without persecution. That is sadly not the case these days, and I think our Founding Fathers would be ashamed.

I have not seen anyone of faith attack those with no belief, I have seen them give them a place to sleep, a hot meal, and a smile, but never attack them for their beliefs, or lack there of. They are the ones on the defensive here, and they asked for this fight, and a fight they will get. I certainly hope we continue to take the high road in this debate, I am confident we will.

I also think the founding fathers would be very pleased, pleased that religion still exists, as they believed strongly in this as well. They would also be very proud that we have not intermingled the two, and that their system has worked brilliantly. As I mentioned in another thread, we are in no danger of a theocracy, and while you folks continue to claim this "war on Christmas" a ridiculous notion, nothing could be more ridiculous then this assumption. We don't need you liberal hero's to save us from our religious masters, the founding fathers, and this great country, have seen to that just fine. Go ride the coat tails of another, you are seriously not needed here, what arrogance.:roll:
 

Columbusite

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
808
Reaction score
6
Location
Columbus
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Deegan said:
Well he did take the time obviously, just as you did. He has seen the outrage, and utter disgust that his, and his groups actions and words have created. The point is to show the ridiculousness of these crusades against the symbols and practices they have targeted. I also would remind you that there is, once again, no separation of church and state in our constitution, get this through your heads.:roll:

This is just...I don't know what to say. :doh OK. Just have to get over the stupidity, alright. It's time to beat a dead horse. Without separation of church and state you have no democratic federal republic. It is as simple as that. Once you give God (which one now?) power over man in our government our Constitution would be null and void. Most colonies had no separation of church and state. What could get you executed? Blasphemy, cursing (a lot), and denying the trinity in Virginia. Not to mention every country in Europe. Look at what Calvinism did to Geneva and Scotland. Look at Spain, which was one of if not the most conservative Christian country. The Founders were smart enough to make the connection between every single "Godly" nation that was in existence and their histories. They felt that religion was personal and that putting that into the government would just repeat the same disaster. Why has the USA been so successful in granting freedom and liberty? By omitting God and Christianity (without doing so overtly) they effectively made the Constitution a godless document. If they wanted to have a theocracy, which you seem to prefer, we would not have America as we know it. Instead, we would have a plethora of references to the Bible and it would have been made clear that the Bible is to be the document on which we build this country, not just a man made constitution.
They deliberately left out any single mention of God, Christ, and the Bible. Not to mention our 1st amendment guarantees freedom of religion whereas the 1st commandment says "Thou shalt have no other gods before me". If we had no separation of church and state you can be sure our 1st amendment would simply be the 1st commandment and we would all be much worse off for it.
 

Columbusite

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
808
Reaction score
6
Location
Columbus
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Deegan said:
I also think the founding fathers would be very pleased, pleased that religion still exists, as they believed strongly in this as well. They would also be very proud that we have not intermingled the two, and that their system has worked brilliantly.

I'm sure they would be pleased that freedom of religion is still working and church and state are not intermingled because...
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Columbusite said:
I'm sure they would be pleased that freedom of religion is still working and church and state are not intermingled because...

Because only a very small majority believe that this would be good for the faith, good for the country, and good for the church. Again, we don't need to have this discussion, as the methods have been tested over and over again ad nauseum. The Pat Robertsons of the world are few, just as the godless on the left are, I will let them have their fight, I speak only for the rational majority of us. The majority who will never let this become a theocracy, as this nearly destroyed the church, and many countries along with it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, that is what my grandfather always said, and I can't think of a better fit for this situation.
 

Columbusite

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
808
Reaction score
6
Location
Columbus
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Deegan said:
Because only a very small majority believe that this would be good for the faith, good for the country, and good for the church. Again, we don't need to have this discussion, as the methods have been tested over and over again ad nauseum. The Pat Robertsons of the world are few, just as the godless on the left are, I will let them have their fight, I speak only for the rational majority of us. The majority who will never let this become a theocracy, as this nearly destroyed the church, and many countries along with it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, that is what my grandfather always said, and I can't think of a better fit for this situation.

Not just that, but even if they got powerful enough the Consitution plainly says "No.". Although, if you're supposed to be a representative of the "rational" majority, my fears would be well founded (j/k, but I'm only half joking). I do agree that our Consitution has been working and there is no need to change it.
 
Last edited:

Columbusite

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
808
Reaction score
6
Location
Columbus
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Columbusite said:
Not just that, but even if they got powerful enough the Consitution plainly says "No.". Although, if you're supposed to be a representative of the "rational" majority, my fears would be well founded (j/k, but I'm only half joking). I do agree that our Consitution has been working and there is no need to change it.

I don't understand why you continue to be rude, and presumptuous with me, I have not taken that tone with you sir. I would be interested to know what you think is irrational about my thoughts and opinions on this subject. We both seem to be comfortable with the way our constitution has protected us all, we should be in agreement, but you choose to be defensive, why is that?:confused:
 

RubberDucky

New member
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
This shouldn't matter. People should say Merry Christmas if they are a believer, and Happy Holidays if they are not. People should also keep in mind who they are talking to.

I'm not insulted by Happy Chanakuh displays, so why should it matter? Christmas can be a secular holiday as well as religious.
 

Stace

Boobie Jubilee
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
7,254
Reaction score
364
Location
Clarksville, TN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Deegan said:
I have not seen anyone of faith attack those with no belief, I have seen them give them a place to sleep, a hot meal, and a smile, but never attack them for their beliefs, or lack there of. They are the ones on the defensive here, and they asked for this fight, and a fight they will get. I certainly hope we continue to take the high road in this debate, I am confident we will.

I also think the founding fathers would be very pleased, pleased that religion still exists, as they believed strongly in this as well. They would also be very proud that we have not intermingled the two, and that their system has worked brilliantly. As I mentioned in another thread, we are in no danger of a theocracy, and while you folks continue to claim this "war on Christmas" a ridiculous notion, nothing could be more ridiculous then this assumption. We don't need you liberal hero's to save us from our religious masters, the founding fathers, and this great country, have seen to that just fine. Go ride the coat tails of another, you are seriously not needed here, what arrogance.:roll:

You have not seen atheists and/or non Christians attacked? Which rock have you been living under? Now, I know that you cannot lump all Christians into one big group, but there are a number of them that feel people without God in their life, and/or people that have not accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior, are going to Hell. Non Christians did not ask for any fight...they simply want to be accepted for who they are and what they believe in.

No one is arguing that religion is necessarily a bad thing. I didn't say anything about the Founding Fathers being upset that religion still exists....I think they would be disappointed to see the words they wrote taken so strongly out of context. They did indeed mean for there to be a separation of church and state...they realized even then that not all Americans had the same beliefs and faiths, and understood that you cannot govern a nation based upon one faith.

I think we are in danger of a theocracy, because so many right wing Christians are so opposed to the separation of church and state. We cannot have a nation considered fair and equal if we are ruled by the beliefs of one faith, and while the numbers may be slipping, the fact still remains that the majority of the country is indeed Christian, and without separation of church and state, we would indeed be ruled by Christian principles.

I have nothing against Christmas, I don't really know anyone who does...as best as I can determine, the Republicans and many Christians simply feel threatened because the rest of us recognize that there are other holidays celebrated this season and we want to include everyone, because we also recognize that no celebration is more important than another.
 
Top Bottom