Christmas: a religious holiday?

[_Trevor]

I think the idiocy was attributed to the "Happy Holidays" generic greeting we hear so much of now. I agree with you regarding the positive message. When I was a kid (before dirt was discovered) back in Jersey, none of this was a big deal. Menorah's and Christmas trees shared time and space. I don't know why we're so sensitive these days. Isn't one of the pathways to appreciating diversity in allowing diversity to exist?

Absent some basic facts, I think this is very reasonable. I think the reason why people are more sensitive about hearing the Merry Christmas greeting (I personally have no problem with people greeting me thus) is their status as religious (or non-religious) minorities in this country. If you represent a group of a few millions in a country with a huge Christian majority, you will necessarily feel the pressure to conform in small ways. I think the complaint about the greeting is one of the small ways people push back.

[_EAllusion]

. Christmas is really a largely secular holiday

How the hell do you figure that? Especially considering that the secular progressives are responsible for pressuring companies like Olive Garden and Ciruit City tro refrain from wishing people a Merry Christmas.

For what it is worth, this is flat untrue. These policies were adopted by various companies in an effort to be inclusive. They just wanted a more general phrase like "Happy Holidays," to be used as the seasonal well-wishing. Then members of the religious conservative wing of American politics spun this as removing "Merry Christmas" to appease the complaints of atheists/leftists. Pat Buchanon, in a moment of surreal hilarity, described Macy's switching to using the phrase, "Season's Greetings" as orchestrated "hate crimes against Christianity." That'd be horrible business, if you think about it for just a second. The amount of people who take offense to Merry Christmas is tiny, while the amount of people who consider themselves Christians is immense. Trying to appeal to as many celebrations and people as possible, on the other hand, wouldn't be bad business. Unfortunately there is a branch of Christians in America who believe that not giving them priviledge constitutes persecuting them. This has been going on for 3 or 4 years now under the title "The War on Christmas" by said conservatives and those wishing to exploit them. What really sucks is when this lie, and I think it is fair to call it that, ends up being believed by overly sensitive administrators who think it is their job to do this.

[_dartagnan]

These policies were adopted by various companies in an effort to be inclusive.

This doesn't stand the test of scrutiny. Companies don't suddenly become overwhelmed with a sense of well being and tolerance for no reason. They are directed in these directions via threats and complaints from outside groups usually with the ACLU behind them. For more than a century "Merry Christmas" has been the norm. In order for a company to make it policy that forbids an employee to wish someone a Merry Christmas, there has to be something else at stake here besides a sense of sympathy for the silent minority who supposedly feels excluded.

They just wanted a more general phrase like "Happy Holidays," to be used as the seasonal well-wishing.

Companies don't worry about these kinds of things unless outside groups are expressing a concern about it and the companies feel it can threaten business in some way. Only when it is brought to their attention in a manner that could have an effect on sales figures, do they go through the hassle of designing a new policy. They thought they could make the changes appear innocuous enough, and hopefully the majority of the population wouldn't care, while successfully appeasing those who were really making a stink about it (atheists). Is there really evidence that companies felt business had declined because customers were being wished a Merry Christmas? Of course not. They don't fix things unless it is broken. There was nothing "broken" about the typical holiday greeting, except in the minds of those who had already been trying to remove all sense of Christianity from public view.

Then members of the religious conservative wing of American politics spun this as removing "Merry Christmas" to appease the complaints of atheists/leftists.

Then who else is responsible for it? You would have us believe that companies all over the country - US companies apparently, and clearly they must be the most conscientious of them all (laugh!) - began feeling sympathy for the excluded silent minority.
You're dumbing it down as a simple holiday greeting when it clearly goes much deeper than that. Christmas is a federal holiday whether atheists like it or not. They don't like the word mentioned at all and they don't like the fact that it is based on the religious celebration of Jesus' birthday. This is why companies are calling Christmas trees "Holiday trees," Christmas carols as "Holiday carols," and Christmas lights "Holiday lights." The ACLU has been attacking religion in this manner outside the Christmas context, so it isn't as if any of this is surprising. There is no mystery where this is originating.

Trying to appeal to as many celebrations and people as possible, on the other hand, wouldn't be bad business.

There is nothing to appeal to. Christians have had no problems incoporating "Happy Hanukkah" in with the traditional season. I suppose that if enough Muslims decided they wanted to celebrate Ramadan during the same period, then there would be room for a future "Happy Ramadan" in there. But no, only the atheists want to water it down to the innocuous "happy holidays" only, because in so doing, no religion at all is being represented. This isn't about a sense of inclusivity and tolerance. It is about the secular progressives trying to remove religion in all forms from public view.

This has been going on for 3 or 4 years now under the title "The War on Christmas" by said conservatives and those wishing to exploit them. What really sucks is when this lie, and I think it is fair to call it that, ends up being believed by overly sensitive administrators who think it is their job to do this.

Calling it a lie doesn't make it so. I think I have reason on my side, and I have illustrated it above. I happen to know something about what motivates corporate decisions to change policies like these, and I can assure you it has nothing to do with a sudden case of conscience about what some people might be feeling. That is pretty much what your argument boils down to it seems.

Again, it is one thing to make a policy change from saying "Merry Christmas" to "Happy Holidays," but it is something entirely different to make it mandatory to refrain from saying what has been culturally acceptable for more than a century. When companies are willing to terminate employees who simply wish someone Merry Christmas, especially when a customer had initiated the exchange with "Merry Christmas," then this is clearly something more than just a modest attempt to appease a silent minority. It is clearly an attempt to avoid lawsuit by idiots toting the ACLU over their shoulders.

[_marg]

Kevin,

I grew up in a non religious family with 4 brothers, I married a non religious individual who has 3 brothers. Atheists generally do not belong to organized "atheist" groups. My family celebrated Christmas, with the tree, outside Christmas lights, gift & card giving as did my husband's family. My kids grew up experiencing what I did. I never thought of Christmas as a religious holiday. I still don't. At least not for myself, and family. And it certainly wouldn't bother me that other people do. On the whole atheists operate their lives as if there is no God but they don't give it much thought whether there is or isn't one. I believe that is something you don't appreciate. Religious holidays aren't a threat to atheists, especially Christmas. In generally if atheists have any concerns about religion, it tends to be about religion being "big business" with special taxation privileges not given other business which seems unfair and the irrational aspects of religion and how that affects followers who have been indoctrinated i.e. an atheist is likely to think Jesus being a son of a God, or dying and coming back to life is completely irrational...that sort of thing.

But Christmas, Kevin, atheists celebrate as well without it even entering their minds that it is a religious holiday to many others. On the list of things an atheist might be concerned about with regards to religion, it's way down at the bottom.

[_dartagnan]

I grew up in a non religious family with 4 brothers, I married a non religious individual who has 3 brothers. Atheists generally do not belong to organized "atheist" groups. My family celebrated Christmas, with the tree, outside Christmas lights, gift & card giving as did my husband's family. My kids grew up experiencing what I did. I never thought of Christmas as a religious holiday. I still don't.

This is irrelevant to the fact that it is a holiday because of religious ideas. Without Christ there would be no Christmas. There would probably be no holiday "season" at all except New Years. July 4th is often understood by kids as a time of lights, loud bangs and excitement. They don't generally acknolwegde that it is a national holiday celebrating our independence. In fact, many anti-American adults who get on the celebration bandwagon don't like to acknolwedge this either. So maybe we should start calling the American flag the "holiday flag," given that companies are all so worried about the sensibilities of the minority idiots?

And it certainly wouldn't bother me that other people do.

But it obviously does bother some atheists. Contrary to what you're trying to portray, atheists have a tendency to be more lawsuit trigger-happy than the average theist. Some see persecution every time they pass by a nativity scene, or if a local Church has a cross that can be seen over the hills as they drive home from work, or if they find out their kid's teacher wears a cross around her neck. Idiots like these need to get a grip. If they refuse to assimilate to a culturally religious America, as it has always been, then they need to go elsewhere. The majority of Americans shouldn't have to conform to their utopian efforts. America is what it is, and without the Judeo-Christian basis/culture from which it sprang, American atheists wouldn't be able to enjoy the rights and privileges that are provided them.

On the whole atheists operate their lives as if there is no God but they don't give it much thought whether there is or isn't one

So? This clearly doesn't preclude some from being idiotic with frivilous litigations. There really are efforts by atheists to remove religion from public view and they think they actually have the constitution on their side. It doesn't matter to these people that American culture is based on Christian-Judeo principles, and when a court house shows the ten commandments, that this is just as much a cultural expression as a religious one. You cannot completely divorce religion from American culture, but that doesn't stop them from trying.

I remember a few years back there was a small town called "Chapels" or something to that effect. It was originally given this name because it was known to have more chapels than any city in the state. Approximately 99% of the residents were theists. This city had a town logo on its city emblem which, naturally, contained a couple of chapels on it. Well, apparently some atheist on the other side of the country found out about it, probably while driving through as a tourist, got "offended" and decided to call the ACLU who then marched across the country to impose its own values on a town comprised mostly of theists. As they were interviewing the residents not a single person agreed with the move to remove the chapels from the town logo. But some pissed off atheists across the country felt "offended" and felt it was a right-wing conspiracy to enforce Christianity on all of America (laugh!). It is as if these people actively scrub the heartland to find any sign of religious expression on public property, only to ring up an ACLU lawyer in protest. Of course, most of these small towns have the constitution on their side, but they are not able to fork out the kind of money for a high powered attorney to battle the ACLU in the courts, so they just give in to the demands. And as a result, slowly but surely religion is being removed from public view.

Who can really argue that this is actually happening? Can't you at least admit that the ACLU and other atheist-based lawsuits have tried to remove or drastically minimize public expression of religion? When I was in school, we had prayer - which no one was forced to participate in - we pledged allegiance to the flag - which no one was forced to participate in - and we took pride in what our country was based upon; faith in God and a sense of patriotism. Nowadays there is hardly an American culture left to defend for our kids, as they are raised in a secularized schooling system that outright ridicules patriotism and religion.

Just last month in Maine (maybe it was NH)I believe it was, a school teacher was telling his students that religion corrupts the mind, and at one point said one would have to be stupid to believe in a God. I believe it was a freshman high school class. So yes, atheists can be just as passionate about their atheism as a theist can be about his theism. The only difference I see is that a theist would be reprimanded for trying to convert students at a public school while an atheist is given a free pass when he tries to convert the theists to atheism. There is no appreciation on their part for America's religious base. There is no respect or tolerance for the majority of Americans who choose to practice any given faith.

I believe that is something you don't appreciate.

It isn't the issue.

Religious holidays aren't a threat to atheists, especially Christmas.

I know this but obviously some atheists disagree.

But Christmas, Kevin, atheists celebrate as well without it even entering their minds that it is a religious holiday to many others

I don't think this has ever been in dispute. It isn't the issue. At least not for me.

[_LCD2YOU]

I grew up in a non religious family with 4 brothers, I married a non religious individual who has 3 brothers. Atheists generally do not belong to organized "atheist" groups. My family celebrated Christmas, with the tree, outside Christmas lights, gift & card giving as did my husband's family. My kids grew up experiencing what I did. I never thought of Christmas as a religious holiday. I still don't.

This is irrelevant to the fact that it is a holiday because of religious ideas. Without Christ there would be no Christmas. There would probably be no holiday "season" at all except New Years.

You are correct about Christ for Christmas but you are incorrect about celebrations.

Check out "Saturnalia". Also, to the Druids and other Pagan religions revered the Winter Solstice. The days started to get longer and that was a real cause for celebration.

Me wonders how many pagan lay people were duped by their pagan religious leaders into "giving all so the gods allowed the sun to climb".

July 4th is often understood by kids as a time of lights, loud bangs and excitement. They don't generally acknolwegde that it is a national holiday celebrating our independence. In fact, many anti-American adults who get on the celebration bandwagon don't like to acknolwedge this either.

I call that the 10-80-10 rule.

10% would like whatever you do.

80% will like it or dislike it depending on what it is.

10% will always hate whatever is being done.

(Note: This does not include teenagers as the numbers would be 0-10-90 with 90% hating whatever their parents want to do no matter what)

So maybe we should start calling the American flag the "holiday flag," given that companies are all so worried about the sensibilities of the minority idiots?

Hyperbole at it's best.

Let me ask you:

If the nature of the US changes to some other religion, I don't care, say Islam, would you rather have them say, "Happy Hollidays" or "Allah Akbar"?

And it certainly wouldn't bother me that other people do.

But it obviously does bother some atheists.

One of the things that bothers "atheists" and "agnostics" is the continued belief that the US was founded as a Christian Nation.

Read Some Thomas Jeffereson and his thoughts on religion.

The US is a Secular Nation.

Contrary to what you're trying to portray, atheists have a tendency to be more lawsuit trigger-happy than the average theist.

I disagree. Do you have anything information on this or is this your POV?

Some see persecution every time they pass by a nativity scene, or if a local Church has a cross that can be seen over the hills as they drive home from work,

But that is the church property and they have no right. Having it in a government building is a problem.

or if they find out their kid's teacher wears a cross around her neck. Idiots like these need to get a grip.

And what if she wore a vail across her face?

If they refuse to assimilate to a culturally religious America,

Which religion? Again the US is a Secular Nation. It is pointed out that the US is to have a clear seperation of Church and State.

OBTW, the "Founding Fathers" were deists.

as it has always been, then they need to go elsewhere. The majority of Americans shouldn't have to conform to their utopian efforts. America is what it is, and without the Judeo-Christian basis/culture from which it sprang, American atheists wouldn't be able to enjoy the rights and privileges that are provided them.

Uh, check your history again. Another myth of religious America saying something that is patently not true.

The US is a Secular Nation. Tyranny of the Majority is clearly not what the writers of the Declaration of the US wanted either. Read the "Federealist Papers" and perhaps actually read what the framers of the constitution were most worried about creeping into government: Religion.

(Note] On the whole atheists operate their lives as if there is no God but they don't give it much thought whether there is or isn't one

So? This clearly doesn't preclude some from being idiotic with frivilous litigations. There really are efforts by atheists to remove religion from public view and they think they actually have the constitution on their side.[/QUOTE]When it comes to government buildings, it certainly does. The flip side is if one religious denomination wants to put in a "holy text" into some government building, all should be allowed, pagan, animists, Satanists and more. If there is going to be a Nativity Scene in the Town Hall, another religious group should be allowed, nay encouraged to place their symbols as well.

Needless to say the whole thing can get really messy.

Simple Solution? Keep all religious icons out of City Hall. Or we can get the "Holy Roller snake handlers" to put a bunch of snakes in government buildings as that is a really big part of how they worship.

It doesn't matter to these people that American culture is based on Christian-Judeo principles, and when a court house shows the ten commandments, that this is just as much a cultural expression as a religious one. You cannot completely divorce religion from American culture, but that doesn't stop them from trying.

And I'll keep on trying.

I remember a few years back there was a small town called "Chapels" or something to that effect. It was originally given this name because it was known to have more chapels than any city in the state. Approximately 99% of the residents were theists. This city had a town logo on its city emblem which, naturally, contained a couple of chapels on it. Well, apparently some atheist on the other side of the country found out about it, probably while driving through as a tourist, got "offended" and decided to call the ACLU who then marched across the country to impose its own values on a town comprised mostly of theists. As they were interviewing the residents not a single person agreed with the move to remove the chapels from the town logo. But some pissed off atheists across the country felt "offended" and felt it was a right-wing conspiracy to enforce Christianity on all of America (laugh!). It is as if these people actively scrub the heartland to find any sign of religious expression on public property, only to ring up an ACLU lawyer in protest. Of course, most of these small towns have the constitution on their side, but they are not able to fork out the kind of money for a high powered attorney to battle the ACLU in the courts, so they just give in to the demands. And as a result, slowly but surely religion is being removed from public view.

No. Religion is always in the public view. All one needs to do is go to church. It does not need to be part of the city.

How would you like it if cities across the US started using Mosques and Minarets?

Who can really argue that this is actually happening? Can't you at least admit that the ACLU and other atheist-based lawsuits have tried to remove or drastically minimize public expression of religion?

In public places? Using Public buildings for others' personal beliefs? Nope. And that is is.

Don't say your personal beliefs is something I need rammed down my throat.

When I was in school, we had prayer - which no one was forced to participate in - we pledged allegiance to the flag - which no one was forced to participate in - and we took pride in what our country was based upon; faith in God and a sense of patriotism. Nowadays there is hardly an American culture left to defend for our kids, as they are raised in a secularized schooling system that outright ridicules patriotism and religion.

I don't need your god, goddess or gods to feel pride in my country.

As for "One Nation, Under god", put it back to what is was before the 50s and the rabid anti-Soviet atheism that had it put in.

Just last month in Maine (maybe it was NH)I believe it was, a school teacher was telling his students that religion corrupts the mind, and at one point said one would have to be stupid to believe in a God.

And I have heard just the opposite how one can't be a good person if they don't believe in god (preferably the one the speaker is talking about.

I believe it was a freshman high school class. So yes, atheists can be just as passionate about their atheism as a theist can be about his theism. The only difference I see is that a theist would be reprimanded for trying to convert students at a public school while an atheist is given a free pass when he tries to convert the theists to atheism. There is no appreciation on their part for America's religious base. There is no respect or tolerance for the majority of Americans who choose to practice any given faith.

Extremism = Extremism. A "fundy athiest wacko" is just as nuts as a "fundy religious wacko"

I believe that is something you don't appreciate.

It isn't the issue.

It is. By your statements, you show a total lack of concern about others' non religious or not Christian POV

Religious holidays aren't a threat to atheists, especially Christmas.

I know this but obviously some atheists disagree.

only when it breaks church/state seperation.

But Christmas, Kevin, atheists celebrate as well without it even entering their minds that it is a religious holiday to many others

I don't think this has ever been in dispute. It isn't the issue. At least not for me.

But it doesn't belong in government buildings any more than "God don't exist".

If I can do plumbng without mentioning a god, why do we need it in government?

[_dartagnan]

You are correct about Christ for Christmas but you are incorrect about celebrations.

How am I incorrect about celebrations? Without Christ there would be no Christmas. Without Christmas, you're saying the American populace would have decided to celebrate something anyway during that same period? This is such nonsense. You guys are hilarious because you're trying so desperately hard to justify your participation in a season that is and has always been religiously based. All this gibberish about how the Christmas tree was from paganism, doesn't detract from the point that Christmas is a religion-based celebration that the rest of the atheistic world decided to join in on for cultural reasons. And that is fine. You can do that. But when you try to completely revamp the cultural landscape of traditional America, simply because you don't feel it should be publicly recognized anymore as a religious holiday, or because you don't feel "included," at that point you lose all respect from me.

Check out "Saturnalia". Also, to the Druids and other Pagan religions revered the Winter Solstice. The days started to get longer and that was a real cause for celebration.

The majority of Americans are Christians and they celebrate Christmas because it is a day to celebrate the birth of Christ. Most recognize that this probably isn't his actual birthdate, but that is beside the point. The fact that people take time out to remember him is what's important to the majority of Americans, and you atheists are making that much harder by abusing the "Separation of Church and State" clause for your own purposes.

Hyperbole at it's best.

It is a valid analogy. If all Christmas adjectives should be changed to "holiday" simply because people don't necessarily understand the holiday as Christ related, then by that logic the American flag should be called a holiday flag simply because a minority feels the day has nothing to do with America. There are certainly plenty of immigrants who do not associate themselves as Americans on any serious level, and thanks to American freedoms, they have the right to reject that association. So should we appease them just the same as we do the minority atheists? If not, then why not?

If the nature of the US changes to some other religion, I don't care, say Islam, would you rather have them say, "Happy Hollidays" or "Allah Akbar"?

This has nothing to do with the issue. The issue is American identification as a Christian nation. It has always been predominately Christian, and the Judeo-Christian influence has developed this nation into what it is today. Without Christianity, we'd probably be living in a country of slavery, and all the atheistic Thomas Jeffersons wouldn't have lifted a finger to stop it.

One of the things that bothers "atheists" and "agnostics" is the continued belief that the US was founded as a Christian Nation.

When 90%+ of its citizens were Christian, then yes, it was a Christian nation. Even if that percentage eventually drops below 50%, nothing can change the fact that it was founded by Christian civilization and that most of the freedoms and rights we have today are due to that Christian influence. Who can reject this with eyes wide open?

Read Some Thomas Jeffereson and his thoughts on religion.

I have. He also felt the black man was inferior intellectually. His use of the phrase "separation between Church and State" doesn't mean what atheists try to extract from it.

The US is a Secular Nation.

Only in the sense that it isn't a theocracy. If the Christian founding Fathers wanted a theocracy then they would have pushed for one. But they didn't. But that hardly stopped them from opening public and government political meetings with a prayer. You simply don't understand what these men intended with this phrase. The history of America flies in your face and you don't even care.
You would have us believe that for centuries our founding fathers as well as their successors were just too stupid to realize what some late 20th century, disgruntled atheists had to point out to us: that religion in all its forms made manifest in any public/government related venue, is unconstitutional. What utter hogwash. One would think that the authors of the constitution had a better grasp on its meaning than late 20th century atheists, most of whom probably have no formal education on American history.

I disagree. Do you have anything information on this or is this your POV?

Provide me with any comparable litigations held by theists. I'm simply putting aside the ridiculous cases brought by atheists and trying to make sense of them. Atheists here try telling me that atheists don't like joining organizations and protesting things about religion. What nonsense. Check out these dozens upon dozens of atheist organizatioons devoted to the destruction of public religious expression in America: http://www.atheists.org/affiliation

But that is the church property and they have no right. Having it in a government building is a problem.

According to whom?

Thanks for proving my point to marg, that atheists like you really do exist. You find all of this "problematic." Why? Because you are intolerant of religion and religious persons. One must wonder if you follow Penn and refuse to allow 80% of Americans into your home simply because the have faith in something besides science.

And what if she wore a vail across her face?

Wearing a cross and wearing a veil is not exactly the same because a veil conceals the identity of the person. Fredom of religion should be granted to all, but expression shoudl be limited at teh point laws are broken. For example, if a Christian thinks it is OK to murder abortion doctors, his religious rights should be taken from him. Likewise, Muslims who think they should be able to veil themselves in Drivers License photos, should not be given the privilege to drive. But this is all irrelevant anyway since the nation is not founded upon Islamic principles. Quite the contrary actually.

Which religion? Again the US is a Secular Nation. It is pointed out that the US is to have a clear seperation of Church and State.

Which means what exactly? It means the government cannot establish any particular religion as the state religion. They had fresh in their minds the problems experienced in England as well as the rest of Europe state religions became nuisances and impeded progress.

OBTW, the "Founding Fathers" were deists.

Not all of them were, but in any event, a deist believed in a supreme creator of the universe, and they felt acknowledging him whenever possible, even in political venues, was important, which should piss off an atheist just as much as the Christians do.

The US is a Secular Nation.

Secular "government," but the "nation" which is comprised of mostly theists, is clearly theistic.

Read the "Federealist Papers" and perhaps actually read what the framers of the constitution were most worried about creeping into government: Religion.

Well, then if you think they were on the modern atheistic brainwave, then you should be able to point to us their concerns over "In God We Trust" being printed on our money. How many prayer meetings were disrupted by the framers who felt as you do? You see we can debate over interpretation over what they said in print, and then we can deal with the more telling factor: their actions, or in this case, lack thereof.

In 1774, while serving in the Virginia Assembly, Thomas Jefferson personally introduced a resolution calling for a Day of Fasting and Prayer. In 1779, as Governor of Virginia, Jefferson decreed a day of “Public and solemn thanksgiving and prayer to Almighty God.” On March 4, 1805, President Jefferson offered “A National Prayer for Peace.”

So given these historic facts regarding Jefferson's actions, can you at least admit Thomas Jefferson, author of the separation clause, did not agree that the clause carries all the baggage that atheists like yourself, infer from it?

Simple Solution? Keep all religious icons out of City Hall.

Yea, that has "solved" plenty hasn't it? Things were doing just fine before you guys started pitching your fits. The government has never come remotely close to theocracy, and it never will. Why? Because Christianity as a faith is grounded in the principle that religion and state should be separate. The only reason Christianity became a state religion in Roman times was because the Emperor Constantine, a pagan at heart who sought political advantage, made it so.

You speak of solution without realizing there isn't a problem. Unless you can make a case that Christians are actively trying to take over government, you're really just howling at the moon and hiding behind baseless conspiracy theory. You keep calling this a problem but clearly the founding fathers didn't see it that way or else the numerous religious implementations throughout America's history nevcer would have taken place.

And I'll keep on trying.

Via disinformation and intolerance, no doubt.

No. Religion is always in the public view. All one needs to do is go to church. It does not need to be part of the city.

"Need" has nothing to do with it. It is about respecting and appreciating traditions and culture of the land. Christian culture has always been integral to the stuff that made America what it is today. By removing all forms of religious symbolism in government places, you do a disservice to American culture, history and also to the early fathers who clearly had no problem with them. The same holds true for Buddas of Bamyan, which were 1,500 year old statues destroyed by the Taliban. One doesn't need to be a Buddist to appreciate the cultural ornament this provided to Afghanistan's tourism. If they were in America, I suspect atheists like you would have them blown up, just the same as the Taliban did.

How would you like it if cities across the US started using Mosques and Minarets?

You're having trouble keeping up aren't you? If America was 90%+ Muslim in the 1770's and 80%+ Muslim today, then we would have something to discuss.

Using Public buildings for others' personal beliefs? Nope. And that is is.

Why not? Public places were used when the early politicians opened meetings with prayer, or when the President has a minister or priest open an inauguration with a prayer.

Don't say your personal beliefs is something I need rammed down my throat.

If you get offended by me saying a prayer while standing somewhere in your vicinity, then you are a weak minded idiot. What's the matter? You don't have the intellectual fortitude to resist our jedi mind tricks that somehow convert you to theism? There is only one word for this and that is intolerance.

I don't need your god, goddess or gods to feel pride in my country.

Well you need "a" God to apreciate the historic United States of America, otherwise you're just trying to recreate it in your own image. And who can deny this? Whether you like it or not, the early leaders did not feel teh way you do. The landscape of religious 18th and 19th century America contrasts drastically with the America you and yoru ilk are trying to create for yourselves. You are culturally deprived and you have appreciation for nothing except your own ego and bigotry. The rest of America, no matter how much a majority they are, must step aside and let you waltz through while redesigning America to suit your own personal intolerance.

I have heard just the opposite how one can't be a good person if they don't believe in god (preferably the one the speaker is talking about.

You're so full of it. Atheists get away with intellectual murder in the class room in ways no theist ever could. You deny this?

It is. By your statements, you show a total lack of concern about others' non religious or not Christian POV

What is there to be concerned about? I think anyone who complains about these things really needs to get a life. Beastie and Marg and others try to pawn you guys off as a benign group of people who maintain a "default" position to religion, and therefore aren't zealous or dogmatic in anything and cannot be compared to religious bigots. But teh facts prove otherwise. Atheists can be some of the most bigoted people on the planet because they care absolutely nothing about the religious beliefs their fellow citizens hold sacredt. Since you cannot relate or empathize in any way, shape or form, it is easy for you to ridicule and hold us all in contempt.
I'm not ridiculing atheists. I admire many of them and I find most of them here intellectually stimulating. What I don't appreciate are those who have no appreciation for American culture or tradition. They think they have the right to recreate America in their own image. Eventually they might be able to do that, but you will never understand or appreciate the real America - the America as it existed from its beginning up to that future point. And without that America, your America would never have existed.

only when it breaks church/state seperation.

Which you probably do not understand anyway.

But it doesn't belong in government buildings any more than "God don't exist".

If the founding Fathers were atheists who put "In God we don't trust" on our paper bills, the most you would hear from theists today is an effort to obtain equal rights. Why? Because the move towards granting equal rights in America was not led by atheists, but rather theists.

If I can do plumbng without mentioning a god, why do we need it in government?

It isn't about "need."

This is about acknowledging and respecting our culture from which this nation was formed. It was most certainly a religious culture. Not a religious "government," but a religious culture. Most atheists cannot even appreciate the advances this world has experienced because of Judeo-Christian principles. Can you? I doubt it. If you don't acknolwedge it, it makes it easier not to appreciate its existence.

[_Trevor]

Without Christ there would be no Christmas.

Yes, but there might be a Saturnalia or something else, and I have no problem with that.

[_dartagnan]

Yes, but there might be a Saturnalia or something else, and I have no problem with that.

As a federal holiday?

Why would you think that?

And for the record, the theory that December 25th as Christ's birthday derives from pagan tradition is more speculative than anything else, and is fraught with problems. Hippolytus of Rome who was born 180 A.D., noted that his birthdate was December 25th.

[_Trevor]

As a federal holiday?

Why would you think that?

Because there have been other popular solstice festivals, and such things were not contingent upon the existence of Jesus.

And for the record, the theory that December 25th as Christ's birthday derives from pagan tradition is more speculative than anything else, and is fraught with problems. Hippolytus of Rome who was born 180 A.D., noted that his birthdate was December 25th.

Not my point at all, d.