• 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!

81% Celebrate Christmas As A Religious Holiday

So if I go to the religious fora and attack Christmas what will happen?

Nothing that has anything to do with the first amendment. So are you going to present any actual evidence that there is some war on christmas?
 
You should of course be able to show the lawsuit to us since it is public information.

Just to note. He said threatened. The ACLU does do this in many cases. Some I agree with them on, some I don't.
 
Here's one case in Louisiana that shows basically the same thing.

Alliance Defense Fund

Case is from 2004, involved a nativity scene in a library, school sponsored religious caroling and school led prayer before events. Case was settled, with the ACLU dropping the case and the school agreeing to more closely abide by the law as best I can tell. Both sides claimed victory and the only info I am finding is their statements. Case is called McBride v. Bossier Parish School Board.

So you managed to find one case from 7 years ago that is not quite what you represented, linked to a very biased site to talk about it, and you think this proves what?
 
Here's one case in Louisiana that shows basically the same thing.

Alliance Defense Fund

Thanks, but I'd like an objective source. Maybe I can track one down from this though. I did find an ACLU report that said there was a settlement, which isn't the same thing as a win or loss.

This source doesn't say anything about whether the ACLU was suing only over Christian activities and not others, as claimed in the earlier post.
 
Last edited:
Just to note. He said threatened. The ACLU does do this in many cases. Some I agree with them on, some I don't.

This case wasn't just "threatened," it was filed and pursued in a court.

Oh, and I just noticed from the source posted here - the suit ended only because the kids whose parents were suing moved out of state.
 
Last edited:
Case is from 2004, involved a nativity scene in a library, school sponsored religious caroling and school led prayer before events. Case was settled, with the ACLU dropping the case and the school agreeing to more closely abide by the law as best I can tell. Both sides claimed victory and the only info I am finding is their statements. Case is called McBride v. Bossier Parish School Board.

:spin:

The case was dropped because the schools lawyers asked for a dismissal and got it because the parents (and therefore the kids) moved and no longer to go to that school. IE the ACLU had no more standing. And the school did not agree to "more closely abide by the laws". They re-affirmed that they would continue to do the same thing that they had been doing. Which is basically to allow the celebration of all religions.

So you managed to find one case from 7 years ago that is not quite what you represented, linked to a very biased site to talk about it, and you think this proves what?

So an ACLU site is acceptable but my site isn't....why? As for the timeline...so what?
 
Let us consider the many myths of Christmas:

First, Christmas is not the anniversary of the birth of Christ. It is merely an arbitrary celebration of his birth. No one knows exactly when Christ was born, but most scholars believe it was in the spring, perhaps as late as May. The Catholic Church hi-jacked a pagan celebration of the winter solstice and declared it the birth of Christ. Frankly, there is a very good case for such pagans to rightfully tell us all to get the Christ out. Second, true Christians (which are a very small subset of those that think of themselves as Christians) should take offense at 1) the idea that the birth of Christ should be celebrated on a single day; 2) that such a day is so overrun with materialism, as this is completely against anything Christ taught (he spoke of worrying about your treasures in heaven and renouncing your treasures on earth), and 3) the birth of Christ being more remarkable than his death and resurrection.

I consider myself a strong Christian. As my faith has grown, my thinking of Christmas as some type of high holy day has been greatly diminished. I celebrate the birth, but far more importantly the death and resurrection of Christ every single day, with no day any more significant than the other. The idea of Christmas, as it has become in 21st Century America, really having much to do with Christ, I am increasingly finding almost offensive.

That all said, we do use Christmas, in our family, to tell the biblical story of the birth of Christ. But, I think of it much more as a family day, but enjoy the tradition. To me, it is an excuse (or powerful rallying point) to teach the word, drawing sharp contrast to Christ's intention for us and how we treat the day.

Well so long as you keep your Christ out of my Christmas, I don't give a ****.
 
Thanks, but I'd like an objective source. Maybe I can track one down from this though. I did find an ACLU report that said there was a settlement, which isn't the same thing as a win or loss.

So my site isn't objective and yet when defending the ACLU it is ok to use an ACLU website....why?

This source doesn't say anything about whether the ACLU was suing only over Christian activities and not others, as claimed in the earlier post.

The site shows that the school....""Bossier Parish school officials have repeatedly shown their resolve to respect the law and the religious beliefs of all of their students and personnel."" Which obviously includes other activities...and yet there is only an "uproar" when it came Christmas time....Most likely explanation for 500 Alex?
 
Kind of hard to do considering the very word has "Christ" in it. ;)

Not hard at all. People celebrate Christmas for various reasons. While it started out religious, and to this day is predominately religious; it's not always religious anymore.
 
:spin:

The case was dropped because the schools lawyers asked for a dismissal and got it because the parents (and therefore the kids) moved and no longer to go to that school. IE the ACLU had no more standing. And the school did not agree to "more closely abide by the laws". They re-affirmed that they would continue to do the same thing that they had been doing. Which is basically to allow the celebration of all religions.

Spin would be accepting only one sides story as absolutely correct. I went to both sides to get the details. I looked for but did not find any actual unbiased source on it. Nice try, but you fail.

So an ACLU site is acceptable but my site isn't....why? As for the timeline...so what?

I did not say your site was unacceptable, I said it was biased. When I wrote what I did on the case, it was based on both sides biased reporting. I did not I do not think give particular credence to either site and made clear in my post that the information I had was incomplete. It was however more complete than your information.

So when are you going to start documenting this war on christmas? So far all you have offered was a link to a biased story from 7 years ago that proved no such war. Wars are usually hard to miss, so maybe you can point it out to me.
 
So when are you going to start documenting this war on christmas? So far all you have offered was a link to a biased story from 7 years ago that proved no such war. Wars are usually hard to miss, so maybe you can point it out to me.

What's not to see? This time of year, we grab our guns and go shoot us some Christmas. Last year I nearly got it too...but I just winged it. This year, I'm totally taking it down!
 
Spin would be accepting only one sides story as absolutely correct. I went to both sides to get the details. I looked for but did not find any actual unbiased source on it. Nice try, but you fail.

No, spin is when you take what was said and twist it to say something entirely different.

I did not say your site was unacceptable, I said it was biased.

Unacceptable/biased...same thing. Or do you accept biased articles as a matter of course?

When I wrote what I did on the case, it was based on both sides biased reporting. I did not I do not think give particular credence to either site and made clear in my post that the information I had was incomplete. It was however more complete than your information.

Yet you accepted it without claiming the site was biased?

So when are you going to start documenting this war on christmas? So far all you have offered was a link to a biased story from 7 years ago that proved no such war. Wars are usually hard to miss, so maybe you can point it out to me.

Not all wars are sounded with bullets. Some wars are conducted quietly.
 
Not hard at all. People celebrate Christmas for various reasons. While it started out religious, and to this day is predominately religious; it's not always religious anymore.

I was joking.
 
I can believe that a majority of Americans SAY they treat Christmas as a religious holiday, but I'd be skeptical that the majority really do.
 
Here's one case in Louisiana that shows basically the same thing.

Alliance Defense Fund

So far in this thread the "proof" for the war on Christmas is an obscure Wisconsin group with bad banners and a threat letter.

Someone making claim after claim that they refuse to back up with any facts.

And....the creme de la creme...an actual law suit that was indeed actually filed. But low and behold if you in fact do a little thing called research you find out the the law suit actually had little to do with Christmas.

Religious Activities at Elementary School Challenged

The lawsuit was more about the schools official's turning a blind eye to blatent intimidation by a Christian group against those choosing not to participate in Christian activities.

This is your big proof on the "War on Christmas?" Again I less than impressed. Your arguments so fare have been less than weak.
 
But low and behold if you in fact do a little thing called research you find out the the law suit actually had little to do with Christmas.

Religious Activities at Elementary School Challenged

The lawsuit was more about the schools official's turning a blind eye to blatent intimidation by a Christian group against those choosing not to participate in Christian activities.

This is your big proof on the "War on Christmas?" Again I less than impressed. Your arguments so fare have been less than weak.

1: Bold part: I see nothing in your article that proves this.
2: Underlined part 1: I'm sure they are to anyone with either closed eyes and mind or to someone with an agenda. Which one are you? Going by your posts I would have to guess that you are someone with an agenda.
3: Underlined part 2: I'm not going to list every single thing that shows people attacking religion/Christmas. I've given you some evidence, do the rest of the work. Expand your mind.

Now lets look at your source shall we? Your article's second link doesn't even go to where they supposedly cited thier material from. The other three links available in the article also have nothing to do with the subject. Next lets take a look at the author of that article, Austin Cline.

Austin Cline has been actively involved in educating people about atheism, agnosticism, and secular humanism on the Internet for over 15 years.

Experience:

Austin Cline was a Regional Director for the Council for Secular Humanism and a former Publicity Coordinator for the Campus Freethought Alliance. Austin has also lectured on religion, religious violence, science, and skepticism.

Austin Cline

And my site is supposedly biased? Hmm....
 
Last edited:
1: Bold part: I see nothing in your article that proves this.
2: Underlined part 1: I'm sure they are to anyone with either closed eyes and mind or to someone with an agenda. Which one are you? Going by your posts I would have to guess that you are someone with an agenda.
3: Underlined part 2: I'm not going to list every single thing that shows people attacking religion/Christmas. I've given you some evidence, do the rest of the work. Expand your mind.

Now lets look at your source shall we? Your article's second link doesn't even go to where they supposedly cited thier material from. The other three links available in the article also have nothing to do with the subject. Next lets take a look at the author of that article, Austin Cline.



Austin Cline

And my site is supposedly biased? Hmm....

Please check the source again. The article I linked to was an actual excerpt from an AP story. The comments posted by Autine Cline were just that....comments. They had nothing to do with the actual story. Here is tha article in its whole posted for you since you seem unwilling or unable to do any research or leg work on your own.

AP Jessica Bujol said:
Wednesday, April 14, 2004

ACLU files suit against school's religious activities

By JESSICA BUJOL/Associated Press Writer

NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- The ACLU filed suit Tuesday against the Bossier Parish School Board and the principal of an elementary school, alleging the school is violating the First Amendment by sponsoring a teacher-led prayer group and other religious activities.

"There are a number of issues associated here, but they all boil down to endorsement and promotion of religion in the public schools by school officials," said Joe Cook, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Louisiana chapter.

The suit was filed in federal court in Shreveport on behalf of the parents of a second grader and fifth grader at Stockwell Place Elementary. The children, whose names were not made public, told their parents they were being teased because they refused to participate in activities like Christmas caroling at nursing homes. The family is "not of the majority religion", Cook said, and declined to elaborate.

Both children were sent to a computer lab while their classmates practiced religiously themed carols, Cook said.

"That makes a child feel left out, like an outsider at their own school," he said.

Cook said that the school also displayed a nativity scene in the library during the holidays, a time when the teasing escalated. The parents, Sandra and David McBride, met with the school's principal and were told the children needed to learn how to deal with being teased, Cook said.

"That's not the role of public school officials. Their role is to keep the schools inclusive and secular and to make children from all different religious backgrounds feel welcome and to teach tolerance. Instead, they're doing just the opposite and teaching intolerance," he said.

The parents approached the ACLU and filed suit as a "last resort" after meeting with school officials several times, Cook said.

"Belief and faith are important. The promotion of prayer and religion, however, belongs in the home and places of worship chosen by the parents, not in the public school," the McBrides said in a statement.

Both the Bossier Parish School Board and the principal's office were closed by the time the suit was filed late Tuesday afternoon. Attempts to reach Superintendent Ken Kruithoff and Stockwell Place Elementary Principal Timothy Thompson for comment were unsuccessful.

The suit also takes issue with a group called "Stallions for Christ" which promotes "Christian fellowship and prayer", Cook said. The group, named after the school's mascot, meets during recess and is led by a teacher.

When the McBrides met with Kruithoff about the group, he defended it, saying "This is the way things are done in the South" and "Welcome to the Bible Belt", according to the suit.

School officials also sponsored a Drug Abuse Resistance Education graduation that included a student-led prayer, religious songs and speeches that ended with the words "God bless you", according to the suit.

The suit seeks to prevent the school from displaying religious materials and put an end to school-sponsored religious activities, but it is not about singling out the promotion of one religion, Cook said.

"It would be wrong, no matter what religious belief were being advanced at the school," he said. "They have to be neutral, they can neither enhance nor deter religion."

As is obvious by this article by the AP (I know a biased news organization...right) the lawsuit had little or nothing to do with the nativity scene and the caroling. It was about children being ostracized and teased at school for not participating in religious activities and the school district purposfully not taking any action to correct the situation and actually compounding the situation.

As far as you and no one else willing to provide proof for your claims that is exactly my original point. This whole debate is a fake issue. It is based on little or no evidence. It brought up time and time again by conservatives as a wedge issue. It used to devide the country between us and them and then the emotional nature of the issue is used to spur social action.

As far as you attacking my motives...tell yourself whatever you need to keep blythely marching on. This is also a favorite tactic that is parpular amongst conservatives circles now. If your argument is weak then attack the motives of the opposition.
 
No, spin is when you take what was said and twist it to say something entirely different.



Unacceptable/biased...same thing. Or do you accept biased articles as a matter of course?



Yet you accepted it without claiming the site was biased?



Not all wars are sounded with bullets. Some wars are conducted quietly.

SO leaving aside your rediculous complaint that I was spinning by using information from both sides instead of accepting just the side you wanted presented, When are you going to show the war on christmas? You have completely and 100 % failed to even show a small skirmish against christmas, let alone a war. Do you have anything other than it must be happening because you claim it is?
 
How is saying Merry Christmas or having a Christmas Tree up on public land stopping anyone from having thier own public celebrations of thier own beliefs? Or how is it hounding them?

Let's go to a public square where they have a Christmas tree and put up a giant menorah right next to it. I guarantee you that Fox "News" will be all over that.

The very fact that teachers must say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" or that there are stores that refuse to say "Merry Christmas" shows that that "tiny fraction" has been able to do quite a bit of damage for being so "tiny".

Aw, waaaahhhhh! Boo-hoo, fundamentalist Christians are gonna have to share their dates on the calendar with those of other beliefs.

Where is your faith, man?
 
Let's go to a public square where they have a Christmas tree and put up a giant menorah right next to it. I guarantee you that Fox "News" will be all over that.

That happens all over the country. When would Fox find the time?
 
Back
Top Bottom