• 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!

Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

Oh no worries. Instead of the "War on Christmas" it's morphed into a "War on atheists".


So atheists are the only ones who don't believe in Jesus Christ?
 
Last edited:
Again has nothing to do with anything. Nice dodge though.

It has plenty to do with stuff. Not everybody believes as you do to day nor yesterday nor even in ancient Rome. BTW you mentioned Rome first.
 
Again please point out how this fits into what I was saying or the point I was making in any way? It doesn't, it has nothing to do with it at all.

Then what point were you trying to make? You obviously didn't make it very well if others are answering with something not remotely related to it.

From your first posts about this, you have been talking about how the majority of the people believed in the US that Jesus was the "reason for the season". Although true, that doesn't mean that they have exclusive right to the season or the reason for it. And we do not live in the history of the US. We live in the US now. It is insulting to try to say "Jesus is the reason for the season" for those who have other beliefs about the importance of this season. It is a matter of trying to make one reason for the season to be more important than all the others to the point that any other reason is just ignored altogether. That is insulting.
 
Then what point were you trying to make? You obviously didn't make it very well if others are answering with something not remotely related to it.

No it was clear (at least in regards to the earlier posts). I think sometimes people get a little over enthusiastic and read things that just aren't there.
 
It has plenty to do with stuff. Not everybody believes as you do to day nor yesterday nor even in ancient Rome. BTW you mentioned Rome first.

We were talking about the roots of the holiday. Not hard to understand is it?
 
Then what point were you trying to make? You obviously didn't make it very well if others are answering with something not remotely related to it.

From your first posts about this, you have been talking about how the majority of the people believed in the US that Jesus was the "reason for the season". Although true, that doesn't mean that they have exclusive right to the season or the reason for it. And we do not live in the history of the US. We live in the US now. It is insulting to try to say "Jesus is the reason for the season" for those who have other beliefs about the importance of this season. It is a matter of trying to make one reason for the season to be more important than all the others to the point that any other reason is just ignored altogether. That is insulting.

That is exactly what I was saying. So I guess you had no problem understanding after all? It is historically accurate so no reason to be insulted. It would be like me being insulted by a menorah etc during Hanuka. Or if someone held a sign that said God is the reason for Hanuka. Why would I be insulted by that? That would be silly as it is historically accurate. You and the others are trying to compare a factual statement vs calling someones religion a fantasy.

No comparison, none. All the rest of the ramblings about native Americans and other such nonsense are just that as it is irrelevant.
 
That is exactly what I was saying. So I guess you had no problem understanding after all? It is historically accurate so no reason to be insulted. It would be like me being insulted by a menorah etc during Hanuka. Or if someone held a sign that said God is the reason for Hanuka. Why would I be insulted by that? That would be silly as it is historically accurate. You and the others are trying to compare a factual statement vs calling someones religion a fantasy.

No comparison, none. All the rest of the ramblings about native Americans and other such nonsense are just that as it is irrelevant.

And you still don't understand. There are other reasons for the season even if the majority thinks that Jesus is the only reason for it. The majority is simply wrong. Jesus is not the only reason for the season. Jesus wasn't even the initial reason for it. So it is an insult to all those who see other reasons because it excludes their reasons or at least discounts them as "unimportant" eventhough those reasons are important to those who have them, such as myself.

You are still trying to claim that it can't be insulting because a majority believes a certain way, even if the majority is wrong, and they are. Jesus is not the only reason for the season, and that is a fact. And to many, even if still a minority, Jesus is not the reason for the season.
 
That is exactly what I was saying. So I guess you had no problem understanding after all? It is historically accurate so no reason to be insulted. It would be like me being insulted by a menorah etc during Hanuka. Or if someone held a sign that said God is the reason for Hanuka. Why would I be insulted by that? That would be silly as it is historically accurate. You and the others are trying to compare a factual statement vs calling someones religion a fantasy.

No comparison, none. All the rest of the ramblings about native Americans and other such nonsense are just that as it is irrelevant.


Being in the majority is really inconsequential in regards to these dioramas and signs seeing that we all have rights to freedom of expression. And this was on PUBLIC property.
 
And you still don't understand. There are other reasons for the season even if the majority thinks that Jesus is the only reason for it. The majority is simply wrong. Jesus is not the only reason for the season. Jesus wasn't even the initial reason for it. So it is an insult to all those who see other reasons because it excludes their reasons or at least discounts them as "unimportant" eventhough those reasons are important to those who have them, such as myself.

You are still trying to claim that it can't be insulting because a majority believes a certain way, even if the majority is wrong, and they are. Jesus is not the only reason for the season, and that is a fact. And to many, even if still a minority, Jesus is not the reason for the season.

You can't reasonably expect devout believers to examine history with any kind of academic accuracy. Religion is based on a distortion of history to fit a specific narrative. That narrative usually putting believers at the very top of a social hierarchy which can be simplified as 'religious > non-religious'. This assertion can proven simply by looking at the constant references to 'chosen people', 'chosen tribes' or simply 'chosen men' who brought the word of a supernatural force down for the rest of us. If you demonstrate the errors in religion, the religious are forced to admit that they are just like the rest of us. I don't blame them. To be honest, what fun is it to admit that you're just another human being without a supernatural purpose? It's a lot more emotionally satisfying to go throughout your life believing that if you do certain things in life you'll be rewarded when you die.
 
And you still don't understand. There are other reasons for the season even if the majority thinks that Jesus is the only reason for it. The majority is simply wrong. Jesus is not the only reason for the season. Jesus wasn't even the initial reason for it. So it is an insult to all those who see other reasons because it excludes their reasons or at least discounts them as "unimportant" eventhough those reasons are important to those who have them, such as myself.

In Western Civilization including Europe and the US it is. No getting around that. You yourself said "Jesus was the "reason for the season". Although true," so which is it?

You are still trying to claim that it can't be insulting because a majority believes a certain way, even if the majority is wrong, and they are. Jesus is not the only reason for the season, and that is a fact. And to many, even if still a minority, Jesus is not the reason for the season.

No I am not trying to claim that or anything close. It is the reason for the holiday in American culture. That is what I am saying. It is historically correct and accurate.

Now I am getting tired of re-explaining as you simply don't want to understand at this point. Your reasons are still historically and factually irrelevant.
 
Being in the majority is really inconsequential in regards to these dioramas and signs seeing that we all have rights to freedom of expression. And this was on PUBLIC property.

Here we go again. It has nothing at all to do with being a majority of anything. If Buddhists became the majority of this country tomorrow and they kept the holiday as is. It would still be because of Christians who celebrated the birth of Jesus in the beginning, period. It was celebrated here in this country from day 1 when the first colony's won independence up until now. This is a fact. Has nothing at all to do with a majority of anything.
 
In Western Civilization including Europe and the US it is. No getting around that. You yourself said "Jesus was the "reason for the season". Although true," so which is it?

No, I said the majority believes this. I did not say that it was the reason. I said for the majority it is the reason. This does not exclude the other reasons for the season, nor make them less important. And to make claims that suggest that Jesus is the only reason is an insult, whether you are able to see it from the point of view of someone who does not agree with the majority or not.


No I am not trying to claim that or anything close. It is the reason for the holiday in American culture. That is what I am saying. It is historically correct and accurate.

Now I am getting tired of re-explaining as you simply don't want to understand at this point. Your reasons are still historically and factually irrelevant.

No, American culture is a mixed culture. It does not say that just because the majority believes their reason for something is the only reason for something it does not exclude the other reasons for something.

It is not historically correct to say that Jesus has been the only reason for the season. It has been the reason for a majority of people, but that still doesn't prevent others from taking offense when people make this claim or assumptions that others should view the "reason for the season" as Jesus when those others simply have other reasons for celebrating the season or who don't celebrate it at all.

This has been my argument all along. Just because a majority celebrates during a certain time, for a certain reason, that doesn't mean that others cannot celebrate for their own, different reasons, nor does it mean that those in the minority should not take offense or feel insulted when one of the majority tries to claim the "reason" can only be that of the majority.
 
Here we go again. It has nothing at all to do with being a majority of anything. If Buddhists became the majority of this country tomorrow and they kept the holiday as is. It would still be because of Christians who celebrated the birth of Jesus in the beginning, period. It was celebrated here in this country from day 1 when the first colony's won independence up until now. This is a fact. Has nothing at all to do with a majority of anything.

I'm sure plenty of people had different ideas about it back then too other than Jesus is the reason.
 
No, I said the majority believes this. I did not say that it was the reason. I said for the majority it is the reason. This does not exclude the other reasons for the season, nor make them less important. And to make claims that suggest that Jesus is the only reason is an insult, whether you are able to see it from the point of view of someone who does not agree with the majority or not.

Fact: From the Old English Cristes Mæsse meaning the "mass of Christ"
Fact: Christmas declared a legal holiday in U.S. in 1870
Fact: The root of the holiday in the US is Christian.

So you can argue that Christmas is not about Jesus or the reason. You would still be wrong.

No, American culture is a mixed culture. It does not say that just because the majority believes their reason for something is the only reason for something it does not exclude the other reasons for something.

It is not historically correct to say that Jesus has been the only reason for the season. It has been the reason for a majority of people, but that still doesn't prevent others from taking offense when people make this claim or assumptions that others should view the "reason for the season" as Jesus when those others simply have other reasons for celebrating the season or who don't celebrate it at all.

This has been my argument all along. Just because a majority celebrates during a certain time, for a certain reason, that doesn't mean that others cannot celebrate for their own, different reasons, nor does it mean that those in the minority should not take offense or feel insulted when one of the majority tries to claim the "reason" can only be that of the majority.

That AGAIN has nothing to do with the majority of anything. Neither is my argument. It is a simple fact. You can spout about majority all day long and it will not change the fact the holiday is rooted in Christian beliefs and Jesus, period. Nothing to be insulted about, nothing at all. Your argument is absolutely pointless to what I am saying.
 
Fact: From the Old English Cristes Mæsse meaning the "mass of Christ"
Fact: Christmas declared a legal holiday in U.S. in 1870
Fact: The root of the holiday in the US is Christian.

So you can argue that Christmas is not about Jesus or the reason. You would still be wrong.

I am not wrong. You still have Hanukkah, you still have people who celebrate the winter solstice, and whether you agree with it or not, there are still people who celebrate Christmas without any regard to Jesus. They simply celebrate the holiday because it is traditional, but give no regard to Jesus at all. They don't have anything else to call it, so it stays Christmas.

The reason we have a legal holiday is because of the fact that the majority of the citizens would have been taking that day off anyway (although notice how it took almost 100 years after we were a country for it to be even declared a legal holiday). Why not make it a holiday if very few are working that day anyway because of their own beliefs?

And the whole season, would include all the holidays, not just Christmas. Afterall, these displays are being put up for the "season" at least a month before the holiday it is for. And many people follow many different traditions that have nothing to do with Jesus. Heck, the Christmas tree has nothing to do with Jesus, it would in fact be from Pagan tradition and can't even be explained for use in Christmas except as tradition, yet it is called a Christmas tree.



That AGAIN has nothing to do with the majority of anything. Neither is my argument. It is a simple fact. You can spout about majority all day long and it will not change the fact the holiday is rooted in Christian beliefs and Jesus, period. Nothing to be insulted about, nothing at all. Your argument is absolutely pointless to what I am saying.

Yes there is something to be insulted by, whether you can see it or not. They are celebrating it for another reason, not Jesus. To them, especially those who have had their holidays from times long before Christianity, it is Christians who have stolen the holiday, not them. It is wrong to try to dismiss their feelings of insult because you can't see them but then hold up the Christians feelings of insult at being told to think about other people's points of view or to reconsider their beliefs as insulting because it is being said at "Christmastime".
 
I am not wrong. You still have Hanukkah, you still have people who celebrate the winter solstice, and whether you agree with it or not, there are still people who celebrate Christmas without any regard to Jesus. They simply celebrate the holiday because it is traditional, but give no regard to Jesus at all. They don't have anything else to call it, so it stays Christmas.

The reason we have a legal holiday is because of the fact that the majority of the citizens would have been taking that day off anyway (although notice how it took almost 100 years after we were a country for it to be even declared a legal holiday). Why not make it a holiday if very few are working that day anyway because of their own beliefs?

And the whole season, would include all the holidays, not just Christmas. Afterall, these displays are being put up for the "season" at least a month before the holiday it is for. And many people follow many different traditions that have nothing to do with Jesus. Heck, the Christmas tree has nothing to do with Jesus, it would in fact be from Pagan tradition and can't even be explained for use in Christmas except as tradition, yet it is called a Christmas tree.





Yes there is something to be insulted by, whether you can see it or not. They are celebrating it for another reason, not Jesus. To them, especially those who have had their holidays from times long before Christianity, it is Christians who have stolen the holiday, not them. It is wrong to try to dismiss their feelings of insult because you can't see them but then hold up the Christians feelings of insult at being told to think about other people's points of view or to reconsider their beliefs as insulting because it is being said at "Christmastime".

You just aren't going to get it. Without Christians and in the end a Jesus, no Christmas holiday would exists, period. End of story. So it is nothing to get offended about, period. You can make another long winded post repeating yourself over again, and it will make no difference.
 
You just aren't going to get it. Without Christians and in the end a Jesus, no Christmas holiday would exists, period. End of story. So it is nothing to get offended about, period. You can make another long winded post repeating yourself over again, and it will make no difference.

It would exist. It may have been called something else, such as "winter solstice" or "saturnalia" or something else, but it likely would have existed as a celebration within that time period because it existed before Jesus.
 
Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court



Just so I get this right, these churches are suing the government claiming their rights to freedom of speech were violated because the government wouldn't provide them a soapbox and place in the park?

Found this gem lower down...



So the city ended the practice because the religulous were vandalizing the other displays.

This comes off more as people finding something to get mad about. Pretty sure there are a few hundred thousand things for the court to look at that are infinitely more important than another stupid pissing match between the Atheists and the Christians.
 
It would exist. It may have been called something else, such as "winter solstice" or "saturnalia" or something else, but it likely would have existed as a celebration within that time period because it existed before Jesus.

You don't know that it would exist at all. You are trying to use speculation or a guess vs a well known fact. Sorry does not float. Just because something could or mite have the possibility of happening does not change the fact of what it already is today, or where it came from, period.
 
There are plenty who take the fun out of Christmas, atheists, Christians, other faiths.

There are plenty of people who just suck the joy out of life and we can see them in traffic, supermarket line-ups and most everywhere we look. But we learn to ignore them, or we try.

Christmas is fun, it's time for people to become human through a long held traditions of giving and sharing. There are too many grinches at Christmas, just as there are in our daily lives.

A pox on all of them.
 
Native Americans were part of the US. And there were groups in the US that were not Christian, even when the US became a country. No matter how small they were, they still mattered. Just because they believed something different than the majority, does not mean their views on why to celebrate the season (or not) should be dismissed.

rather than being dismissed I think they are just being ignored.

Great, You don't believe in God, Jesus, Christianity, etc. Who really cares? Just don't bother getting involved.

Why not let others enjoy the season without juvenile interference.
 
Back
Top Bottom