Washington Athiest Sign next to nativity.

[Lord Booticus]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008456344_webatheist01.html

It seems that christmas is becoming a religious battle ground. For years various religions have seemed to ignore christmas, allowing christians to parade their holiday in their faces, without any stirrings. However in the age where the non-religious are pretty much a religion themselves have taken it upon themselves to, I don't actually know, challenge christianity?

Personally I think that in a building that is supposed to represent the peoples of an American state it should be nuetral and not give any religion priority.

Here's what Bill O'Reilly thinks:



No idea why he starts yapping about christmas tree's cause its a nativity display which I'm prtty sure is religious. Also I think the whole "Jesus as a philosopher" is a load of bullshit in order for christians to have their religion paraded around.

So what do you think? Should either display stand? Did the athiests go too far? Also what does christmas mean to you?

 

[Pushover]

Anti-religious? That's bigot-talk. I believe atheism is the absence of religion, not the counter to it. That's the way I feel about it, anyway.

I just love how religious folks compare us with the KKK and evil. It's just one more brainwashed way of thinking, and they're brainwashing others by saying it.

Do you realize how many religious commercials, holidays, and everything else that this country gets bombarded with? You think a plaque beside a Christmas display holds a full thimble to all that bullshit?

Fox is biased, anyway. Everyone knows that. Look at the way he interrupts the liberal guy. He doesn't even want to listen.

 

[frankfrank]

Look at the way he interrupts the liberal guy. He doesn't even want to listen.

If he didn't interrupt, he wouldn't be Bill O'Reilly, and it wouldn't be Faux News.

 

[Alpha1851]

So what do you think? Should either display stand? Did the athiests go too far? Also what does christmas mean to you?

I don't think either decoration should be allowed. Christmas trees and the commercial aspects of the holiday are sufficient for adding that Christmas cheer to any public grounds.

In my opinion, the atheists "sign" was horrific. Hey, feel free to stick up your symbol right next to my Christian symbol, it's your right to Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion, but couldn't you at least make it pretty. The atheists just brought in a sign that bitched about Christianity. Give me a break--that's a protest, it's not being used to celebrate the holidays. Surely atheism has some sort of symbol. Make a large device w/ the symbol and throw some cheery Christmas lights on there. Maybe scatter a few fake presents around it. Viola.

 

[WYSIWYG]

Bill mentioned Massachusetts as this would not happen. What did happen in Massachusetts was that if a town or city government that wanted a religious display with Christmas trees, lights, and a manger with Mary, Joseph, and the three wise men can no longer setup any Christmas display such as this on Government property because of the separation of church and state.

If churches or other groups, (nonreligious), wish to setup a christian display they can do so as long as it is on private property.

 

[moschj]

It's funny that he talks about the Winter Solstice. That was a Pagan holiday - the sun was coming back to the earth - the early Church chose 12-25 for Christmas so people didn't miss their holiday.

 

[drhladnjak]

I'm agnostic and pretty much completely not religious, but a lot of atheists (like the ones mentioned in the article) seem to have a huge chip on their shoulder.

After the originally cited Seattle Times story was published and the sign (which weighed something like 50lbs and was somewhat unwieldy) was put up, it was stolen and thrown in a ditch, found by a passer by and returned to a country radio station in Seattle. I'd find the article, but I'm too lazy right now.

 

[Alpha1851]

I think the Christians should give Yule back to the pagans. Usurpers, that's what they are.

Yeah, but I don't think the Pagans gave out presents. I want to keep the presents.

 

[Alpha1851]

And perverted the sanctity of Yule with their crass commercialism.

Here, have some holly and mistletoe.

Oh, I think you can worship the LORD and enjoy presents. I put a lot of love into my gift giving, finding the perfect present for each person. Then there's buying gifts for the needy (which is about to be all of us). The season of advent is at hand.

I love the Christmas season! People are kinder to each other. It seems like people pull together more and volunteer to help this time of year. Everything is light up and all pretty. I love hot chocolate and candy canes. And the decorations. And writing Christmas cards. And finding the right gift for every person and wrapping them w/ shinny ribbons. Oh, and don't forget about Christmas cookies!! Makes me happy.

Besides, isn't commercialism the only thing that's safe anymore? The only thing we can agree on? If I talk about love and peace, then I'm shoving my religion down someone's throat. I thought I'd stick w/ the safest bet--presents.

So, thanks for the holly and mistletoe. For you and Narny I'm sending over a dozen Christmas cookies--in the shape of Frosty and Santa and no crosses.

 

[Alpha1851]

As to peace and love being the sole balliwick of YOUR religion. I'm sure frothing hard-core atheists, amongst others, are pro love and peace.

Of course, but you've got to tread carefully and if I was the author of such messages regarding peace and love, well I'd naturally be afraid of someone assuming I was shoving my religion down their throat. Being the author, just might cause some to jump to conclusions. It's a bit rocky. I stick w/ presents, Santa, and commercial Christmas songs. Safe ground.

I hope you and Narny have a lovely trip and visit!! That sounds like fun.

 

[Yooper]

That said, I got a phone call from Eldest yesterday excited about some seat sales she discovered with Westjet and quite happily offered to pay round trip for the Narny and I to go back to the ol' home town for Christmas.

Lordy! Christmas in Moose Jaw! Brrrrrrrrr.

Remember to pack your long underwear!

 

[Alpha1851]

Well, if more people actually just lived their faith instead of trying to talk people into it, allowing their actions to speak for them, or it, as-it-were, it might be an easier sell.

We've got our bad apples. No sense in denying it. There's a nasty apple in every bunch. Unfortunately, people tend to remember the one rotten apple they bit into.

Christmas doesn't have to center around Jesus. It's an enjoyable season. I have Christmas music that incl. "the baby Jesus," and Christmas music that does not. When someone's riding w/ me, I pop my Ipod in my car and if the passenger's brow crinkles up at "Silent Night" I switch on over to Christmas non-religious, and we're rocking away to "Jingle Bells." If the brow is still scrunched, I assume my passenger is a Scrooge and I switch to rap. How someone could not enjoy a festive, "Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow," is beyond me. But, I try to be versatile

 

[LilBit]

Versatile... works for me.

Oh wait, have we tripped over into innuendo again?

Isn't innuendo an Italian term for anal sex?

 

[RobinGoodfellow]

The problem is that the sign is meant as an attack on a religion rather than trying to show a sense of acceptance. If the sign made an attempt at peace, or at least celebrating the season rather than an attempt at disrespecting someone else's beliefs, then I don't think there would have been an issue.

It's sort of weird that, in order to prove it's point, atheists are attempting to attack religion during it's arguably most powerful season, and are doing it by showing themselves at their most base level, even as Christianity is showing its higher ideals. If atheism were to show that they bothered to care about others rather than attack, I don't think that there would have been a problem, and would have shown fellowshp rather than aggression.

After all, isn't atheists' biggest problem with religion its warlike nature? How is this showing that it's any better?

RG

 

[Lord Booticus]

Christmas doesn't have to center around Jesus. It's an enjoyable season. I have Christmas music that incl. "the baby Jesus," and Christmas music that does not. When someone's riding w/ me, I pop my Ipod in my car and if the passenger's brow crinkles up at "Silent Night" I switch on over to Christmas non-religious, and we're rocking away to "Jingle Bells." If the brow is still scrunched, I assume my passenger is a Scrooge and I switch to rap. How someone could not enjoy a festive, "Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow," is beyond me. But, I try to be versatile

If those are the song choices I don't think we'd make good travelling buddies.

Well, I have to admit, and I say this carefully 'cause I know the season is what we make it, that I've not had a really full blown enjoyabe Christmas since I was in my twenties.

Part of that is due to the passing of people I used to spend Christmas with. There're just holes in my life where they were before.

That said, I got a phone call from Eldest yesterday excited about some seat sales she discovered with Westjet and quite happily offered to pay round trip for the Narny and I to go back to the ol' home town for Christmas.

She's very desirous of us to be there and so I said yes. I was also touched by her saying, inquiring as to how I was doing in the wake of the breakup with He Whom I Love that she said there are people there that love me too.

She and I have often not seen eye-to-eye on much of anything and hearing her say that touched me deeply.

This is what christmas is to me nowadays; spending time with the family and just having fun. Its very sad when someone you've spent every christmas with suddenly can't be there one christmas though. But its good to know you'll be with family this year ^_^.

After all, isn't atheists' biggest problem with religion its warlike nature? How is this showing that it's any better?

RG

I don't know, I think there worship of a faceless diety(ies) and blind following of a hypocritical and contradictory story book are bigger problems athiests have with religion.

 

[kallipolis]

The problem is that the sign is meant as an attack on a religion rather than trying to show a sense of acceptance. If the sign made an attempt at peace, or at least celebrating the season rather than an attempt at disrespecting someone else's beliefs, then I don't think there would have been an issue.

It's sort of weird that, in order to prove it's point, atheists are attempting to attack religion during it's arguably most powerful season, and are doing it by showing themselves at their most base level, even as Christianity is showing its higher ideals. If atheism were to show that they bothered to care about others rather than attack, I don't think that there would have been a problem, and would have shown fellowshp rather than aggression.

After all, isn't atheists' biggest problem with religion its warlike nature? How is this showing that it's any better?

RG

Very, well expressed.

 

[gsdx]

The biggest problem with Freedom of Religion is that Christianity is, in all honesty, the only one you're really 'free' to practise.

 

[Swellegant]

The sign is tacky; however, I do think it's necessary: it opens the dialogue on what this is really about.

Why, for example, do non-Christians insist upon celebrating a Christian holiday? Sure, we can call it Solstice or The Holidays or Festivus for that matter, but we're still trying to horn in on the parts we like of a festival that is based part and parcel on something in which we do not believe. Yay, presents and eggnogg and Jingle Bell Rock; Boo, baby Jesus and midnight Mass and Angels We Have Heard on High. Wouldn't it be better to just ignore the whole thing?

Conversely, why do Christians find it necessary to decorate every surface and nook with religious symbols? Why in the world would you put a Nativity scene in the State Capitol? What is its purpose there? Is it merely pretty, or does it have a specific agenda? Isn't it just as tacky and in-your-face as the We Hate Religion sign?

It's impossible to separate the Christian holiday from the "traditional" holiday, because the traditions (even those that were usurped from the pagans) are all based in and grown by religion. Our very culture was created and grown by Christians on Christian principles. And yet, modern-day Christians don't seem to understand the difference between the secular and sacred parts of their holidays... there is no scriptural basis for Christmas celebrations as they are practiced today, and the very fact that so many holiday practices, songs, and celebrations are meant to be secular seems to have escaped them.

The question becomes, for me as an agnostic, should those of us who do not believe in Christianity take part in a cultural Christendom while eschewing the Christianity itself? And my question for Christians is why do you feel it's necessary to practice your religion in public spaces rather than in dedicated or private spaces?

It's rather a sticky proposition, and there are no easy answers.

 

[Narcissism is fun]

Who still listen's to bill?

The man is an idiot.

 

[kallipolis]

Furthermore, I would add that i doubt those responsible for the sign speak for all or even the majority of those who describe themselves as "atheist," anymore than the Phelps's or similar extremists speak on behalf of all christians.

A note worthy observation.