Grex Agora47 Conference

Item 171: New york schools show religious descrimination.

Entered by bru on Thu Nov 13 18:04:50 2003:

So, there is no assault on christianity in this country?

How about the largest school district in the nation banning nativity scenes
from schools for christmas, yet encouraging the display of Jewish, Islamic,
and Kwanzaa on their holidays?

Yes, we are talking about New York.  New York, that wonderful melting pot of
humanity where all things are encouraged, has banned any suggestion that
Christ might be an historical being and any religious display celebrating the
holiday of his birth.  Only non secular items denotign christmas will be
allowed.  Christmas trees and Santa Claus.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29942

Happy Ramadan
Happy Hannakah
Happy Kwanzaa
Merry Chri....  Opps, no, sorry.  Don't go there  Happy Holidays!
74 responses total.

#1 of 74 by klg on Thu Nov 13 18:08:31 2003:

It's meshugganeh.


#2 of 74 by rcurl on Thu Nov 13 18:24:17 2003:

I see no reasons to permit the display of Menorrahs or "Stars and
Crescent" in public schools. This, as well as not displaying Christian
symbolism, would not be "assault" on any religions.

I would consider appropriate a single consolidated display of all
religions and philosophies that wish to participate, if they are all given
equal space and prominance, as part of a social studies course project. 



#3 of 74 by tod on Thu Nov 13 19:34:01 2003:

This response has been erased.



#4 of 74 by happyboy on Thu Nov 13 19:53:18 2003:

r0: is kwaanza a *religious* celebration?


#5 of 74 by twenex on Thu Nov 13 21:38:54 2003:

It's seems double standards are becoming esponentially more popular.


#6 of 74 by other on Fri Nov 14 01:58:46 2003:

This is not a double standard and it is not discrimination.

The policy described in the article is borne out of ignorance (of 
non-Christian symbology and meanings) combined with an attempt to do 
what the law and the courts have stipulated.

The LAST thing it is is an attack on Christianity.

This is merely a case of ignorance masquerading as education, and 
self-righteous opportunism disguised as the pursuit of justice.


#7 of 74 by bru on Fri Nov 14 03:11:26 2003:

Are you saying the symbols are not religious?


#8 of 74 by gelinas on Fri Nov 14 04:28:22 2003:

The policy, as quoted in the article puts Christmas trees and Menorahs on
the same level, as "secular holiday symbols."  This shows a real ignorance
of the significance of both symbols.  (Of course, most Christians don't
want to think about the traditional significance of the tree, either.)


#9 of 74 by other on Fri Nov 14 06:55:41 2003:

A correction to my earlier cvomment:  Strike the phrase "non-
Christian."

A Christmas tree is by definition a religious symbol, because the 
cultural association it suggests is with a religious holiday, and 
the same applies to the nine-stemmed menorah (hannukiah), although 
the seven-stemmed menorah is not at all associated with a holiday 
(it merely represents the seven days of the week).

The ignorance is in the equally flawed assertions that these symbols 
are not religious.  If I were a Christian activist, I would be 
incensed over the policy attempting to secularize Christmas by fiat.  
As a Jew, I am incensed that once again, someone is trying to equate  
a minor Jewish Holiday with a major Christian one that happens to 
occur around the same time.  As a secular humanist, I'm incensed 
that a purported public educational institution is perpetuating 
ignorance and making a token nod to diversity only as a means to 
keep observance of a religious holiday a part of public education.


#10 of 74 by mcnally on Fri Nov 14 07:48:32 2003:

  re #9:

  > A Christmas tree is by definition a religious symbol, because the
  > cultural association it suggests is with a religious holiday, 

  If I'm interpreting you correctly, both Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer
  and Frosty the Snowman are religious symbols according to this reasoning.


#11 of 74 by pvn on Fri Nov 14 07:51:54 2003:

And candy canes...


#12 of 74 by other on Fri Nov 14 07:59:14 2003:

Perhaps 'suggests' is the wrong word.  How about 'represents'?
It is a *CHRISTMAS* tree, not just a tree.  As for Rudolph and 
Frosty and candy canes, their associations with Christmas per se are 
less direct, minimal and not worth considering, respectively.


#13 of 74 by remmers on Fri Nov 14 11:40:38 2003:

Rudolph is closely associated with SAINT Nicholas.  How religious
can you get?


#14 of 74 by twenex on Fri Nov 14 12:20:44 2003:

re: 9: maybe you've been inhaling too much incense? ;-P

re: 6: I'm not suggesting it's an attack on Christianity
(nor, since I'm not a Christian, would I care any more if
it were than if it were an attack on Hinduism). I'm
pointing out that to outlaw the religious symbols of
religion A on the grounds of "separation of church and
state" while allowing those of religions B, C, X, Y and Z
is evidence of double standards.


#15 of 74 by gull on Fri Nov 14 14:34:32 2003:

I think it's interesting that people were criticizing a plan by
Crestwood Public Schools to make Eid a holiday as being an endorsement
of religion, when Good Friday is already a holiday and has been for
years.  People only seem to care about stuff that looks like public
endorsement of religion when it's a non-Christian religion.


#16 of 74 by bru on Fri Nov 14 15:31:09 2003:

Try that again gull, it makes no sense as it appears.

Christmas trees are not christian in origin.
The Egyptians were part of a long line of cultures that treasured and
worshipped evergreens. When the winter solstice arrive, they brought green
date palm leaves into their homes to symbolize life's triumph over death.

The Romans celebrated the winter solstice with a fest called Saturnalia in
honor of Saturnus, the god of agriculture. They decorated their houses with
greens and lights and exchanged gifts. They gave coins for prosperity,
pastries for happiness, and lamps to light one's journey through life.

Centuries ago in Great Britain, woods priests called Druids used evergreens
during mysterious winter solstice rituals. The Druids used holly and mistletoe
as symbols of eternal life, and place evergreen branches over doors to keep
away evil spirits.

Late in the Middle Ages, Germans and Scandinavians placed evergreen trees
inside their homes or just outside their doors to show their hope in the
forthcoming spring. Our modern Christmas tree evolved from these early
traditions.

Legend has it that Martin Luther began the tradition of decorating trees to
celebrate Christmas. One crisp Christmas Eve, about the year 1500, he was
walking through snow-covered woods and was struck by the beauty of a group
of small evergreens. Their branches, dusted with snow, shimmered in the
moonlight. When he got home, he set up a little fir tree indoors so he could
share this story with his children. He decorated it with candles, which he
lighted in honor of Christ's birth.

Saying a christmas tree is religious is like saying a pumpkin pie is
religious.  Or a blueberry muffin.  It is a tradition, not a religious
artifact.

Symbols of faith are:

Menorah is a symbol of Judaism
Crescent Moon and five pointed star of Islam
The Khanda of the Sikh
The OM of the hindu
The Dharma Wheel of the Buddist
The cross of Christianity

If you ban ine of these, you have to ban them all.
If you accept one of these, you have to accept them all.

Can we agree on that?


#17 of 74 by twenex on Fri Nov 14 17:15:19 2003:

Yep.


#18 of 74 by happyboy on Fri Nov 14 18:00:22 2003:

if they're not christian in origin, perhaps we
should stop calling them CHRISTmas trees.


i'm going to call mine "Madge" this year, or
perhaps "Gay Bobby"


#19 of 74 by tod on Fri Nov 14 18:15:13 2003:

This response has been erased.



#20 of 74 by glenda on Fri Nov 14 18:30:09 2003:

We always call our trees by name.  We usually go to a "Cut Your Own" tree farm
and wander around looking at the trees until one of them tells one of us its
name.  We do the same thing when we don't have time to go to the farm and go
to a tree lot.  If none of the trees on the lot tell us its name we go to a
different lot.  Staci is getting quite good a hearing trees, almost as good
as STeve and me.  Damon has always been a little deaf, I quess trees talk in
that middle range of hearing frequencies that he lost due to ear infections
in his youth.


#21 of 74 by tod on Fri Nov 14 18:47:51 2003:

This response has been erased.



#22 of 74 by mynxcat on Fri Nov 14 18:50:52 2003:

glenda, do you replant your christmas trees?


#23 of 74 by remmers on Fri Nov 14 22:18:08 2003:

Only if they request it.


#24 of 74 by tod on Fri Nov 14 22:26:05 2003:

This response has been erased.



#25 of 74 by aruba on Fri Nov 14 22:56:16 2003:

Glenda, can you give us some examples of tree names?


#26 of 74 by glenda on Fri Nov 14 23:51:12 2003:

Once we get the fireplace repaired, we will keep the tree to burn on the next
year's Christmas eve.  That is what we used to do when we lived in a house
with a working fireplace.  Right now we put them out for recycling.

I only know the names of the trees that talk to me.  Some names have been:
Harry, Thomas, Mildred, Clare, Fred, George, Harriet, Esmarelda.


#27 of 74 by bru on Sat Nov 15 04:28:33 2003:

pine trees are a poor choice for fire places.  Tehy don't burn cleanly and
leave creosote? in the chimney which can lead to chimney fires.


#28 of 74 by gelinas on Sat Nov 15 05:02:26 2003:

Once a year shouldn't be a problem, especially if the chimney is cleaned
regularly.


#29 of 74 by aruba on Sat Nov 15 05:26:21 2003:

Carol's family had a tradition of staying up to midnight on New Year's Eve,
and then burning the Christmas tree in the fireplace.


#30 of 74 by glenda on Sat Nov 15 06:53:55 2003:

I like to let them age and dry out for a year.  The Christmas tree is the only
pine we burn, so only once a year.  Never had a problem with it.


#31 of 74 by other on Sat Nov 15 14:51:00 2003:

The only people in the country who think a Christmas tree is not a 
Christian symbol are Christians.  


#32 of 74 by vidar on Sat Nov 15 15:21:18 2003:

Think about the evolution of the tradition of bringing the tree in.  It 
started with pagans, was adopted by early Christians as a conversion 
tactic, and has become associated with Christianty as people have 
forgotten about the prior (and longer) pagan holidays.


#33 of 74 by rcurl on Sat Nov 15 17:48:40 2003:

I'm not a Christian and I have never considered a "Christmas Tree" a
Christian Symbol. I grew up seeing it as a traditional entertaining
end-of-the-year lighted and good-smelling decoration needed for putting
presents under that serves to jolly up a period of long darkness and cold. 
I've never seen any religious symbolism in it at all. The same way with
"Santa Claus", despite the name. These are tied to 25 December, which I
knew had some tie to Christianity, but that was pretty irrelevant. I soon
learned, of course, of the pagan origins and the Christian co-option of
the date.



#34 of 74 by other on Sat Nov 15 20:30:06 2003:

Like all gross generalizations, mine was slightly less than 100% accurate.
The [nearly sum total of] people in the country who think a Christmas tree
is not a Christian symbol are Christians.
How's that?


#35 of 74 by rcurl on Sat Nov 15 20:41:22 2003:

How about percentages? Since there are  more Christians than of any
other persuasion, the percentage of Christians that think a Christmas
tree is not a Christian symbol could well be much less than the percentage
of any other persuasions. 


#36 of 74 by keesan on Sat Nov 15 21:35:20 2003:

When I was growing up only Christians had Christmas trees.  My brother and
I each had one Christian friend.  The rest of us did not give presents in
December, or send cards.  For some reason we were required to sing Christmas
carols in our 2% Christian school by the Christian teachers.


#37 of 74 by rcurl on Sun Nov 16 04:09:35 2003:

I presume that your kinfolk didn't want to join in Saturnalia either. 



#38 of 74 by mynxcat on Mon Nov 17 15:33:28 2003:

I've been wondering, if you're not supposed to have religious symbols 
on display on public property, and they are moving away from 
explicitly celebrating christmas in schools and putting up christian 
symbols, then  wtf is Christmas the only religious festival that is a 
public and federal holiday?


#39 of 74 by twenex on Mon Nov 17 15:37:15 2003:

What about easter?


#40 of 74 by gull on Mon Nov 17 16:11:36 2003:

And Good Friday...


#41 of 74 by bru on Mon Nov 17 16:42:26 2003:

Because christianity is still the majority religion in this country, adn it
is hard to do business with 60% of the work force taking the day off.


#42 of 74 by micklpkl on Mon Nov 17 16:45:33 2003:

Last I noticed, Good Friday isn't a Federal holiday, nor is Easter (of course,
that one is always on Sunday, when banks and most Federal buildings are closed
anyway.). I'm a little confused by what mynxcat is wondering in resp:38
though.


#43 of 74 by twenex on Mon Nov 17 18:03:32 2003:

I was thinking of "the Easter season". Good Friday, Easter Sunday, Easter
Monday, and however many days kids get off school over there for Easter.


#44 of 74 by rcurl on Mon Nov 17 18:37:07 2003:

They do? I don't recall that happening when our daughter was in public
school. 

To add to #41 - 60% of politicians too. They mandated the Christmas
holiday so they could do their traditional things on a majority religious
event. It is really unconstitutional, of course, but so are "in God we
trust" and "under God". However it goes beyond religion. New Year's Day,
for example, to recover from a hangover, or Labor Day, because of the
electoral power of labor.



#45 of 74 by twenex on Mon Nov 17 18:53:57 2003:

Re: #44 Para 1: M<aybe they don't. Over here they do.


#46 of 74 by anderyn on Mon Nov 17 19:09:11 2003:

AFAIK no public school in the two states I've lived in (Ohio and Michigan)
give children specifically Easter holidays. There is a spring break, but it
does not always coincide with Easter. And no business I've ever worked at has
had Good Friday or Easter Monday off. 


#47 of 74 by rcurl on Mon Nov 17 19:15:45 2003:

I recall schools and businesses being lenient with students or employees
asking to leave early for religious ceremonies. 


#48 of 74 by gelinas on Mon Nov 17 19:17:58 2003:

(Ann Arbor's spring break coincides with Easter.  School lets out at the
end of the day on Maundy Thursday and resumes on Monday a week later.)

Last I heard, the Federal holidays were 

        New Year's Day          Martin Luther King Day
        Presidents Day          Memorial Day
        Independence Day        Labor Day
        Columbus Day            Veterans' Day
        Thanksgiving Day        Christmas Day

I thought there eleven, so I seem to be missing one.


#49 of 74 by mynxcat on Mon Nov 17 19:28:28 2003:

I have a list of the bank holidays in front of me. There are 10. You 
have listed them all.

I know there aren't holidays for Easter, but after all the hoo-haa 
about removing religious symbols from the work place, and not allowing 
christmas trees in schools, why does the government even sanction 
Christmas as a federal holiday. 

bru says it would be hard to do business with 60% of the work-force 
taking the day off. But why should they take the day off. I haven't 
seen the Muslims take Eid off, the Hindus take Diwali off. I'm not 
aware of Jewish people taking Hanukkah off, but it's sufficiently 
close to Christmas to be bundled with all the personal time people 
take around the end of year. 

I'm not fully aware of the constitution in this country, but isn't the 
government supposed to be secular? Or am I just being presumptious


#50 of 74 by gull on Mon Nov 17 19:32:32 2003:

Re #41: That's pretty much the argument one school district is using for
giving kids Eid (a Muslim holiday) off.  So much of their student body is
Muslim that they wouldn't meet attendance requirements for calling it an
"official" school day.

My schools always had Good Friday off, though they were careful not to
*call* it that...of course, we got the first day of rifle season off, too. 
I guess some people would consider that a religious holiday as well. ;>


#51 of 74 by twenex on Mon Nov 17 19:40:16 2003:

President's Day? If that coincides with a holiday in the
uk, remind me to find a job where i'll have to be at work
that day until such time as the democrats win the
presidential.


#52 of 74 by mynxcat on Mon Nov 17 20:18:42 2003:

I think President's day was for the birth anniversary of two 
presidents, Lincoln and Washington, and they picked a day between the 
two brith anniversaries? Or have I been misinformed?


#53 of 74 by glenda on Mon Nov 17 21:06:51 2003:

You got it.  Lincoln's birthday is Feb. 12, Washington's is Feb 22.  We used
to get both off (I worked for the City of Westland), then it was changed to
the Monday between them and I lost a holiday, regained when when Martin Luther
King day came into being.


#54 of 74 by twenex on Mon Nov 17 21:41:55 2003:

Maybe it's not more important to commemmorate than to
"doiscommemmorate" then.


#55 of 74 by tod on Mon Nov 17 23:03:29 2003:

This response has been erased.



#56 of 74 by tpryan on Mon Nov 17 23:20:41 2003:

        Was Washington's birthday Feb 22nd new calendar or old calendar
(jump in days in his lifetime)?


#57 of 74 by twenex on Mon Nov 17 23:36:07 2003:

#54 shouldn't have a "not" in it.


#58 of 74 by klg on Tue Nov 18 03:00:59 2003:

2003:

Federal law (5 U.S.C. 6103) establishes the following public holidays 
for Federal employees.  Please note that most Federal employees work on 
a Monday through Friday schedule.  For these employees, when a holiday 
falls on a nonworkday -- Saturday or Sunday -- the holiday usually is 
observed on Monday (if the holiday falls on Sunday) or Friday (if the 
holiday falls on Saturday).

Wednesday, January 1    New Year's Day
Monday, January 20      Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr.
Monday, February 17     Washington's Birthday
Monday, May 26          Memorial Day
Friday, July 4          Independence Day
Monday, September 1     Labor Day
Monday, October 13      Columbus Day
Tuesday, November 11    Veterans Day
Thursday, November 27   Thanksgiving Day
Thursday, December 25   Christmas Day


re 52:  We did not know that Presidents Washington & Lincoln were 
Jewish.

re 49:  No Jew would take Hanukah off for religious reasons.


#59 of 74 by bru on Tue Nov 18 04:10:33 2003:

Not important what people in other countries or who follow different religions
do.  The fact is that many people would take Christmas off, and in so doing,
would make any attempt to maintain a regular business climate impossible. 
Now, there are places that do stay open on Christmas, but that is up to them.
no one forces anyone to close on any holiday.  Most businesses know how not
to thri their money w\away.Good Friday, Most places I have worked offer the
employees two hours off without pay on Good Friday to go to church..


#60 of 74 by mynxcat on Tue Nov 18 04:54:13 2003:

Re 58> Who said anything about Lincoln or Washington being Jewish? Where the
hell did that question come from?

And I'm not very aware of the Jewish faith. I may be wrong in thinking they'd
want to take hanukkah off.

Also, what is the pont of your post? It reiterated what gelinas said, and
brought up a point that was never debated? Did you even read what people had
to say?


#61 of 74 by tsty on Tue Nov 18 05:58:26 2003:

for a while .. there was a publicized trade between christians and jews so
that each would work the others' holidays ... 
 
howeer taht was in the 60s when peace love and understanding prospered
beside protest ... 
  
media these dyas wouldn't *dare* announce such cooperation.


#62 of 74 by gelinas on Tue Nov 18 06:13:11 2003:

mynxcat, the penultimate sentence of #58 was a pun, based upon the
misspelling of the second occurrence of "birth", as "brith", in your
response.  In Hebrew, "brith" means 'cutting' and is a reference to
circumcision.

I'd thought Presidents Day was established at the same time as Martin
Luther King Day, to keep the total number of holidays the same.


#63 of 74 by tpryan on Tue Nov 18 14:03:13 2003:

        Some New England states also have a day-off holiday
for Patirot's day.  April 19th or the Monday before it.  ?


#64 of 74 by klg on Tue Nov 18 17:20:56 2003:

re:  "#62(gelinas):  In Hebrew, "brith" means 'cutting' and is a 
reference to circumcision."

More accurately "ritual circumcision."  (And the Hebrew word "brith" 
means "covenant."  In Hebrew, the United States is called "Artzot 
ha'Brith" - the "lands of the covenant (agreement)".  B'nai Brith = 
Sons of the Covenant.)

And

"I'd thought Presidents Day was established at the same time as Martin
Luther King Day, to keep the total number of holidays the same."

As demonstrated by the listing, there is no "Presidents Day" as far as 
the federal government is concerned.


#65 of 74 by mynxcat on Tue Nov 18 18:53:39 2003:

Aaah. Now I understand. Thanks Joe.

I guess President's Day is just a bank holiday then? I know we get it.


#66 of 74 by jp2 on Tue Nov 18 19:28:15 2003:

This response has been erased.



#67 of 74 by mynxcat on Tue Nov 18 23:14:47 2003:

Washington's and Lincoln's.


#68 of 74 by richard on Sat Nov 22 04:13:35 2003:

Bru got #0's story from Worldnet Daily (www.worldnetdaily.com)  Be advised
that this "news" site is run by a far right wing fringe group, run by
Joseph Farah.  Here is a bit about Farah:

http://hnn.us/comments/13537.html:

"Joseph Farah describes the United States as a moral wasteland and calls
on Americans to embrace God. His proposal for change includes abolishing
the income tax and the IRS, withdrawing from all international treaties
and institutions, repealing all gun laws and ending federal funding for
schools, the arts, conservation, housing and agriculture while
simultaneously expanding the role of the church in national life,
including actively censoring the entertainment industry and having a
direct role in education and family life." 

Get your news from credible news sources.  Do not get your news from "news
sources" that are really fronts for groups with radical agendas.  The guys
behind Worldnet Daily are as fringe radical as the Rev. Sun Yung Moon's
group that puts out the Washington Times.

Also pushing this lawsuit will not get nativity scenes allowed back in
schools, it will have the opposite effect.  If anything it will cause the
other religious symbols to be banned.  And I reject wholeheartedly the
notion that christians are being made "victims" and "second class
citizens" in this country because of trivial things like this.  Not when I
am an athiest and all the money I have to carry around in my wallet says,
"In GOD We Trust".  



#69 of 74 by bru on Sat Nov 22 16:43:16 2003:

Be advised, I did find tha site you mentined, but that was only after I had
gotten information from another location.


#70 of 74 by klg on Sun Nov 23 01:56:39 2003:

re: 68-

Please be advised that you are reading a 4th-hand accout regarding Mr. 
Farah.  (i.e., Mr. richard is quoting somebody who is quoting another 
source of what Mr. Farah's supposed views are.)  If we have learned 
anything up to this point, it is that Mr. richard is quite an unreliable 
source of information himself, let alone at such a distance from the 
original source.
Perhaps Mr. richard might be able to provide some direct information, 
but we suspect not.


#71 of 74 by richard on Sun Nov 23 04:43:54 2003:

no klg, maybe you might be able to provide direct information refuting what
was posted about Farah.  Do a google search on his name, you'll see
numerous of his writings, first hand proof of his radical views.  Some
fringe crackpot puts up a website with an official sounding name, like
worldnet daily, and people automatically assume he is credible.  He isn't.
This guy is another egomaniac political wannabe gadfly like Lyndon
LaRouche.  But of course klg doesn't care whether he's credible or not,
because klg claims that he alone knows what is best for society.  I am
starting to think that klg's continued refererring to himself as "we"
indicates he has some sort of "messiah" complex, like this Farah character
seems to, and he envisions himself as having followers, thus "we" and not
"I".  Joseph Farah and klg are bretheren!


#72 of 74 by klg on Sun Nov 23 17:21:54 2003:

Mr. richard:
Was it you who posted the link regarding Mr. Farah?  And was not the 
link to a 3rd-hand source?
Do you not think that you ought to be the one repsponsible for 
defending your own source material?
(Not that we are surprised by your reaction.  It is that to which we 
have become accustomed.)
Thank you.
klg


#73 of 74 by tsty on Tue Nov 25 05:15:12 2003:

wroldnetdaily is rightwhing????   are you concious?


#74 of 74 by willcome on Thu Nov 27 09:37:31 2003:

whore??????


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: