• 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.

The War on Chanukah!!

Is there a war on Chanukah?

  • YES!

    Votes: 13 68.4%
  • NO!

    Votes: 6 31.6%

  • Total voters
    19
There is no war on Hanukah .If there is its only by accident.
In NYC they put up a menorah the size of a barn in prospect park, a public park and no one says boo.If anyone attempted to put up a nativity scene the size of a bread box the ACLU would be in court in a New York minute.
A Mall manager was asked why he was putting up a menorah in the Mall, but. No nativity scene.He said Hanukah was a folk festival with no religious significance.
The two holidays are not treated equaly .
 
JOHNYJ said:
There is no war on Hanukah .If there is its only by accident.
In NYC they put up a menorah the size of a barn in prospect park, a public park and no one says boo.If anyone attempted to put up a nativity scene the size of a bread box the ACLU would be in court in a New York minute.
A Mall manager was asked why he was putting up a menorah in the Mall, but. No nativity scene.He said Hanukah was a folk festival with no religious significance.
The two holidays are not treated equaly .

Those are pretty isolated incidents....You're apparently missing the point of this post. If anything, it was intended to be humorous, to make fun of the Christians for their belief that there is a war on Christmas, when in reality, Christmas is THE most prominent celebration during this holiday season, and every other celebration be damned.
 
Stace said:
Uh oh....could we be seeing the beginnings of a DP love connection? ;)

My mother would be pleased. Extra points if he's a doctor. :2razz:

JOHNYJ said:
A Mall manager was asked why he was putting up a menorah in the Mall, but. No nativity scene.He said Hanukah was a folk festival with no religious significance.

No one in New York would say that unless he wanted his head cut off.
 
vergiss said:
My mother would be pleased. Extra points if he's a doctor. :2razz:

I think he said he was going to be a cop? :shrug:
 
JOHNYJ said:
There is no war on Hanukah .If there is its only by accident.
In NYC they put up a menorah the size of a barn in prospect park, a public park and no one says boo.If anyone attempted to put up a nativity scene the size of a bread box the ACLU would be in court in a New York minute.
A Mall manager was asked why he was putting up a menorah in the Mall, but. No nativity scene.He said Hanukah was a folk festival with no religious significance.
The two holidays are not treated equaly .

You are wrong.
Stores have been replaying Happy Hannukah with Happy Holidays, a very generic secular term.
Several Schools will not allow Menorahs to be displayed in the classroom, mostly because of the work of the evil bastards of the secular ACLU.

Hannukah is indeed under fire, there is no reason denying it.
 
Caine said:
You are wrong.
Stores have been replaying Happy Hannukah with Happy Holidays, a very generic secular term.
Several Schools will not allow Menorahs to be displayed in the classroom, mostly because of the work of the evil bastards of the secular ACLU.

Hannukah is indeed under fire, there is no reason denying it.

Aww, give the Christians their chance to be "persecuted".
 
Having the so-called religious items on public property hurts nothing, except some silly atheists.
A very weak argument indeed, that is interpreted as "the state endorsing a religion"..
So what if they are !!
It is high time man wrote realistic rules on how to govern his life rather than depending on what was written hundreds of years ago (Constitution) and the Bible , thousands of years ago...
Or is man up to this task ???
And he had better not leave it up to the atheist..
 
earthworm said:
It is high time man wrote realistic rules on how to govern his life rather than depending on what was written hundreds of years ago (Constitution) and the Bible , thousands of years ago...
Or is man up to this task ???
And he had better not leave it up to the atheist..
Yes, as usual we see the fundies hatred of the US Constitution.
 
Stace said:
Those are pretty isolated incidents....You're apparently missing the point of this post. If anything, it was intended to be humorous, to make fun of the Christians for their belief that there is a war on Christmas, when in reality, Christmas is THE most prominent celebration during this holiday season, and every other celebration be damned.

There is a war on God in general pushed by the liberals and far left.They attempt to impose their ideas on the people using the courts.The war on Christmas is another part of this.
 
JOHNYJ said:
There is a war on God in general pushed by the liberals and far left.They attempt to impose their ideas on the people using the courts.The war on Christmas is another part of this.
Negative, there is no war on god in the courts.
There is a war against the people who put god IN the courts, and school, and everywhere else that it doesn't belong.
 
JOHNYJ said:
There is a war on God in general pushed by the liberals and far left.They attempt to impose their ideas on the people using the courts.The war on Christmas is another part of this.

So basically......you're trying to say that anyone that is a liberal or off to the far left doesn't have religion? And that it's the LEFT that is trying to impose their ideas on everyone else?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

That was funny, thanks, I needed a good laugh.
 
Stace said:
So basically......you're trying to say that anyone that is a liberal or off to the far left doesn't have religion? And that it's the LEFT that is trying to impose their ideas on everyone else?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

That was funny, thanks, I needed a good laugh.
It i so cute when they make their ignorant remarks, based on nothing but emotional fervor, isn't it? :lol: Yes I also had to smile over the naive and simple-minded worldview expressed in his post.
 
Caine said:
Negative, there is no war on god in the courts.
There is a war against the people who put god IN the courts, and school, and everywhere else that it doesn't belong.
Ahhhh...now you're talking! Excellent post! Smart to separate God from the people who want to not separate God from the public domain.

Why do you think that so many out there pee on the Constitution and write things suggesting that it's outdated and it was never the intention of our founding fathers to separate religion and state?

Anyway, as a Jew, and in the spirit of this thread and the season I must admit that the war on Chanukah is taking it's toll on the American public! Do you know that dreidl sales are way down and there's talk in that damn liberal press that Chanukah might be reduced to 4 days! Can you imagine? Rumor has it there's not enough oil left to light our Menorah for 8 days so to conserve energy the holday is reduced to 4.

Did you also notice that this year Dec. 25 celebrates 3 holidays in one? Chanukah, Pagan's Winter Solstice and that other one, Xmas.

Kind of makes you think that "Happy Holidays" has a special place this year, you know?

So, in the spirit of the season - HAPPY HOLIDAYS to Everyone! :2grouphug :2party:
 
26 X World Champs said:
Ahhhh...now you're talking! Excellent post! Smart to separate God from the people who want to not separate God from the public domain.

Why do you think that so many out there pee on the Constitution and write things suggesting that it's outdated and it was never the intention of our founding fathers to separate religion and state?

Anyway, as a Jew, and in the spirit of this thread and the season I must admit that the war on Chanukah is taking it's toll on the American public! Do you know that dreidl sales are way down and there's talk in that damn liberal press that Chanukah might be reduced to 4 days! Can you imagine? Rumor has it there's not enough oil left to light our Menorah for 8 days so to conserve energy the holday is reduced to 4.

Did you also notice that this year Dec. 25 celebrates 3 holidays in one? Chanukah, Pagan's Winter Solstice and that other one, Xmas.

Kind of makes you think that "Happy Holidays" has a special place this year, you know?

So, in the spirit of the season - HAPPY HOLIDAYS to Everyone! :2grouphug :2party:

And a very Happy Chanukah to you :mrgreen:
 
Stace said:
And a very Happy Chanukah to you
Thanks!
Bees%20Wax%20Menorah.jpg

and of course:
xmas%20tree%20for%20kd.JPG

and last but not least!
WinterSolstice1.gif


Thus the term HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
Happy_holidays3_big.jpg
 
Last edited:
steen said:
Yes, as usual we see the fundies hatred of the US Constitution.

First off I'm agnostic so don't think that I'm saying this as some sort of evangelical Jesus freak but the social-conservatives have a point, no where in the first amendment is there a call for a wall to be erected between church and state, what it says is that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, I don't see where that says you can't pray in school or have the ten commandments in a court house, certainly congress has passed no law saying that you have to pray to Jesus or follow Protestant dogma but just as in the Abortion case the liberal interpretation of the Supreme Court has found things in the constitution which simply don't exist if anything the law which erected a wall between church and state has served in preventing the free excercise of religion in direct violation of the 1st amendment . . . so who hates the constitution now partna?
 
Did anyone happen to catch John Gibson shouting down his guest from a Separation of Church and State Group. Gibson absolutely lost it when his guest called him on the lie about students not being able to wear green or red in Plano Texas.

Gibson was screaming so much it actually brought some color to his albino countenance.

johngibsonisajerk-737651.jpg


Newspapers, commentators agree: Virginia, there is no War on Christmas

/snip

a Media Matters review has found that O'Reilly underestimated both support for and opposition to -- on the opinion pages of the nation's newspapers -- the idea that there is, in fact, a "war" on Christmas.

For the purpose of analysis, the articles were divided first by "editorial" -- unsigned pieces that express the opinion of a newspaper's editorial board and thus the official position of the paper -- and "opinion pieces," signed commentaries that include op-ed pieces and columns that appear on a newspaper's editorial and opinion pages.

The war on Christmas is real
editorials
3
signed opinion pieces
14
editorials and signed opinion pieces that mention Fox News and/or O'Reilly and/or Gibson
1

The war on Christmas is bogus
editorials
14
signed opinion pieces
48
editorials and signed opinion pieces that mention Fox News and/or O'Reilly and/or Gibson
44
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512240005
 
hipsterdufus said:
Did anyone happen to catch John Gibson shouting down his guest from a Separation of Church and State Group. Gibson absolutely lost it when his guest called him on the lie about students not being able to wear green or red in Plano Texas.

Gibson was screaming so much it actually brought some color to his albino countenance.
I saw it and it was quite interesting. He had smoke coming out of his ears and, like his godfather O'Reilly ended up "turning off the mike = cut to commercial" to stop the bleeding.

I think as time marches forward and the continuing unravelling of the NEOCON "agenda" unfurls we will see more and more of the "cut to commercial" strategy.

And now, a word from our sponsor...
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
First off I'm agnostic so don't think that I'm saying this as some sort of evangelical Jesus freak but the social-conservatives have a point
You ARE a social conservative, so your comment means nothing. Especially when it comes to getting your two cents in against a liberal.
, no where in the first amendment is there a call for a wall to be erected between church and state, what it says is that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, I don't see where that says you can't pray in school
Nobody says you can't pray in school, they say faculty cannot lead the students in prayer. DUR DUR DURRRR!!!
or have the ten commandments in a court house, certainly congress has passed no law saying that you have to pray to Jesus or follow Protestant dogma but just as in the Abortion case
Hmm? Tell me what the opinion of the court was in Roe v. Wade.
the liberal interpretation of the Supreme Court
Yes, anytime it doesn't agree with you, its liberal ACTIVIST!! judges, but when its a conservative then its just a stritct interpretation of the constitution... yeah right.[/QUOTE] has found things in the constitution which simply don't exist if anything the law which erected a wall between church and state has served in preventing the free excercise of religion in direct violation of the 1st amendment . . . so who hates the constitution now partna?[/QUOTE]
You do, because the supreme court has ruled in several cases, this year included, that courthouses must remove thier 10 commandments from the courthouse. Hmm... Activist Judges I guess... Because they don't agree with you.
 
Caine said:
You ARE a social conservative, so your comment means nothing. Especially when it comes to getting your two cents in against a liberal.
Nobody says you can't pray in school, they say faculty cannot lead the students in prayer. DUR DUR DURRRR!!! Hmm? Tell me what the opinion of the court was in Roe v. Wade. Yes, anytime it doesn't agree with you, its liberal ACTIVIST!! judges, but when its a conservative then its just a stritct interpretation of the constitution... yeah right. You do, because the supreme court has ruled in several cases, this year included, that courthouses must remove thier 10 commandments from the courthouse. Hmm... Activist Judges I guess... Because they don't agree with you.

Yes the Supreme Court has ruled as such because they found something in the constitution that doesn't exist where is this supposed wall between church and state? . . . it doesn't exist, it's a myth much like the right to abort an unborn child is a myth perpetrated on the American people by the liberal establishment, you sir have been hoodwinked, bamboozeled by liberal socialists trying to change the very fabric of this nation from one based on rugged individualism and self determination to one of socialism and government control, since they can no longer do it by winning elections due to the fact that the American people have had the wool pulled off of their eyes by a media no longer constrained by the liberal thought control mechanism known as the fairness doctrine, the liberal elitests must now resort to getting what they want not through Democracy but through the courts, but don't worry buddy because we're getting real Americans on the court soon enough.

Oh and I'm not a social conservative I don't even really believe in god but I am a conservative reactionary with strong influences from both the former trotskyite Neo-cons and anarcho-capitalist Libertarians who believe in limited government and zero social intervention, but hay if you want to lable me then fine.
 
Last edited:
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Yes the Supreme Court has ruled as such because they found something in the constitution that doesn't exist where is this supposed wall between church and state? . . . it doesn't exist, it's a myth
The opinion of you, Coulter, Hannity, Gibson, and O'Reiley. I trust the supreme court more than any of you or them.
much like the right to abort an unborn child is a myth perpetrated on the American people by the liberal establishment,
Thats your opinion, it isn't a fact just because you say it is.
you sir have been hoodwinked, bamboozeled by liberal socialists trying to change the very fabric of this nation from one based on rugged individualism and self determination to one of socialism and government control
More ignorant opinion, I will not be swayed by the likes of you. For if I was, I would have to fear the Arab Boogey man too.
since they can no longer do it by winning elections due to the fact that the American people have had the wool pulled off of their eyes by a media no longer constrained by the liberal thought control mechanism known as the fairness doctrine, the liberal elitests must now resort to getting what they want not through Democracy but through the courts, but don't worry buddy because we're getting real Americans on the court soon enough.
Nonsense, take your lies somewhere else.

Oh and I'm not a social conservative
Take your lies somewhere else.
I'm a conservative reactionary with strong influences from both the former trotskyite Neo-cons and anarcho-capitalist Libertarians who believe in limited government and zero social intervention, but hay if you want to lable me then fine.
Take your lies somewhere else. You will not confuse me with them.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
but don't worry buddy because we're getting real Americans on the court soon enough.
Real Americans? You don't mean that the current justices on the Supreme Court are "faux" Americans, do you? Or do you mean that anyone who disagrees with you is not a "real American"? I just wrote in another thread how amazing it is that some people truly and sincerely believe that another American who disagrees with them politically is not a "real" American or worse, a traitor, a dupe, a brainwashed drone then I read your "real Americans" line and again know that some people's measuring stick is quite different from mine.

I completely despise Bushworld but do not think they're not "real" Americans. Assholes? Sure! Idiots? No doubt! I'd go so far as to say politically evil too, but definitely not "unreal" Americans.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Oh and I'm not a social conservative I don't even really believe in god but I am a conservative reactionary with strong influences from both the former trotskyite Neo-cons and anarcho-capitalist Libertarians who believe in limited government and zero social intervention, but hay if you want to lable me then fine.
Then how come you want to prevent others from free choice?
 
26 X World Champs said:
Real Americans? You don't mean that the current justices on the Supreme Court are "faux" Americans, do you? Or do you mean that anyone who disagrees with you is not a "real American"? I just wrote in another thread how amazing it is that some people truly and sincerely believe that another American who disagrees with them politically is not a "real" American or worse, a traitor, a dupe, a brainwashed drone then I read your "real Americans" line and again know that some people's measuring stick is quite different from mine.

I completely despise Bushworld but do not think they're not "real" Americans. Assholes? Sure! Idiots? No doubt! I'd go so far as to say politically evil too, but definitely not "unreal" Americans.

Then how come you want to prevent others from free choice?

Free choice is not invitation to hurt someone else, as for the rest yes they are it's a proven historical fact that this nation and more specifically the Democratic party was hijacked in the 1968 DNC in Chicago by leftist radicals hell bent on destroying this country through radical reformation of every social institution that there is, their preferred tactic for this assault on American culture is the ACLU who through the backing of the liberal court system have usurped power from the people and put it into the hands of a liberal elite called the Supreme Court and that sir is unAmerican in fact it reminds me of the Soviet politburu, and you have been brained washed didn't I already teach you about the Fairness Doctrine and how it was used to shred the 1st amendment?
 
Caine said:
The opinion of you, Coulter, Hannity, Gibson, and O'Reiley. I trust the supreme court more than any of you or them. Thats your opinion, it isn't a fact just because you say it is. More ignorant opinion, I will not be swayed by the likes of you. For if I was, I would have to fear the Arab Boogey man too. Nonsense, take your lies somewhere else.

Take your lies somewhere else. Take your lies somewhere else. You will not confuse me with them.

The Constitution is not some secret document unexcessible by mortal men it's the right and the obligation of every U.S. citizen to know and understand it, that's what the founding fathers wanted, precisely so what has happened to this country wouldn't happen but unfortunately the F.F.'s put to much stock in the ability of the average American to think for themselves and not become like so many cattle believing everything they see on t.v. or read out of their revisionist history books that now teach not how great the early American pioneers and founders were but how evil and genocidal they were, don't fool yourself buddy all the liberal establishment cares about is the preservation of their own power through political bribery in the guise of social programs.

Furthermore; as to the Founding Father's intent when it comes to abortion one needs look no further than the decleration of independence:

Declaration of Independence said:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

Now this is precedence and proof that regardless of whether or not you believe god is the creator or man and woman are the creator that when the act of conception takes place that person should be afforded the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, I really shouldn't have to explain these rights to you considering the fact that they're supposed to be self evident but like I said the Founding Fathers gave you far more credit than I do.
 
Ok, here's a question, because everyone wants to bring up the separation of church and state issue....people that don't like say that the establishment clause of the First Amendment doesn't say anything about a "wall" or whatever, but I have never interpreted that part of the amendment to mean anything other than a separation of church and state.

If Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the First Amendment, did not intend for there to be a wall of separation, then why did he write this to the Danbury Baptist Association?

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the 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. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
 
Back
Top Bottom