Fighting to defend christmas!

[Dusty Chalk]

I believe that large mass that just flew over your head was a large chunk of sarcasm.

Oh.

You mean, he was agreeing with me?

Yeah, I missed that, thanks for the clarification.

[aerius]

Why let a little thing like the Constitution get in the way, you know that document

that doesn't mention the word "god" anywhere.

Since when have Bush and his Republican fuckheads given a fuck about the Constitution?

[tyrion]

Oh.

You mean, he was agreeing with me?

Yeah, I missed that, thanks for the clarification.

I realize that's shocking.

[Dusty Chalk]

[grawk]

But...but...but...(sputters)...what about separation of church and state?

No establishment of a state religion going on there. That's what the constitution prevents...

[Dusty Chalk]

No establishment of a state religion going on there. That's what the constitution prevents...

No, it goes further than that:

...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

-- that's what I meant by freedom from religious persecution.

[grawk]

No, it goes further than that: -- that's what I meant by freedom from religious persecution.

Saying "yay christians" neither persecutes anyone nor establishes a state religion. So what's the problem again?

[Dusty Chalk]

Saying "yay christians" neither persecutes anyone nor establishes a state religion. So what's the problem again?

It crosses the state/church line. If it said "yay satanists" or "yay wood pagans", I would have just as much of a problem, but somehow I doubt the government would consider such nonsense. The bill goes so far as to establish Christianity's "superiority", despite my feelings to the contrary. Government should keep their nose out of business in which their nose does not belong.

You know, what if it said, "yay for publicly-schooled individuals"? Or "yay for people who touch themselves at night"? Or "yay for homosexuals"? Or "yay for people who eat omnivorously but secretly think the vegans are right"? "Yay for luddites"? "Yay for civil war battle recreationists"?

You know, it's like posts from moderators stating imperatives (like "GTFO" or "STFU" or whatnot) are somehow perceived differently than posts from non-moderating members stating imperatives. Having the government involved is the problem -- I have no problem with individuals or even organized institutions such as churches saying "yay christians" (after all, someone has to -- I certainly won't).

It is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[hungrych]

This is retarded and I as an American am embarrassed to have these idiots in our government.

[granodemostasa]

there are many ways to pass this will without violating the constitution, they just have to change/cross out about 20 words or so and i'll actually be acceptable.

[blessingx]

Since so many individuals view any idea as either Christian or anti-Christian (interesting framing), could this be a further legal maneuver toward protection of actions in the name of Christianity? Discrimination against gays, women, Muslims, etc. because "my faith tells me so"? not to mention rewriting history, but they've sacrificed historical accuracy a long time ago in the interest of converting souls. Case in point: assuming Christmas, the Christmas tree, the Yule Log, etc. began as Christian celebrations.

And such nice timing with Bush using only his seventh veto last week to prevent expansion of healthcare for children and the Senate Republicans today blocking a bill to prevent torture. As an atheist I gotta ask, where the hell did they get their version of Jesus?

Hatred - the reason for the season.

[granodemostasa]

the bill is not that far off. If it could be reworded as a liberal-classic defense of religious freedom, it might have some democratic values to it. As it stands, it's just asking to be killed. The worst problem with it is that it is simply wrong: dec 25th has other non-christian holiday meanings, not all christians celebrate Christmas, and western tradition is far more than just "judeo-Christian." The other issue is that it seeks to define exactly what Christmas means, including what it means for Christians... (i'd at least call for a synod before making this declaration!)

I'm pretty sure that the language in this funky resolution has a predecessor that it is being compared to. That is, the bottom half of it reads like a document, not unlike the ones congress has approved of before, that is meant to protect a historically persecuted minority. IN the resolution format, it does not carry any legal power, but the moral support; think of the resolution condemning persecution against Armenians.

The meaning of the document is the biggest problem. If a resolution like this is passed, it would signal an attempt by congress to protect the "persecuted" group and aid it in it's "struggle." Now what does this mean if only "Christians" are included in the bill? While a person with wilsonian sentiments like myself might want to expend it and make it into a bill about human rights... no matter it could end up taking energy away from our already over-complicated foreign policy goals. (Do we know start putting sanctions on European countries for violating the rights of many muslims?)

[ph0rk]

Perhaps more context is needed: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr110-697

(A similar resolution, thanking Brett Favre for throwing his 421st touchdown pass)

I think a lot of the discomfort around the christmas resolution stems from the argument (not made in the resolution, of course) that the United States was and should be a christian nation again - it is certainly a goal of the evangelical right.

There is aways awkwardness when the group in power does something like this - it would be like a resolution recognizing Caucasians are competent workers and generally intelligent. The majority of congress is christian - so why do they need to pass a resolution recognizing this?

[granodemostasa]

I suppose the bill had to pass... it was after a bill recognizing ramadan and diwali. Still, with 435 house members, you'd think there'd be someone competent enough to understand the variances within Christianity!

[blessingx]

Watching C-Span right now. They're discussing a motion to "recognize the importance of the Christmas tree industry to America." 36 million trees a year for Americans. Started in 1816. Donated trees to our armed forces overseas, etc. Okay, it just passed. Wonder how much more time they can waste before the end of the year? Ah wait, they just started a motion on recognizing the importance of a specific Virginian cemetery.