Conservatives Are Trying to Put Religion Back Into the Christmas Season

[bones_IV]

patg:

I think there are a number of issues being oversimplified here into the push to “put religion back into Christmas”…

It is perfectly reasonable that an individual or a private business say “Christmas” all they want - I support freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Paint the 10 commandments on your house, write Merry Christmas across your store, say Merry Christmas to everyone you meet, go for it!

I do not think it is reasonable that public money be used to support the holiday of a specific religion - no matter which religion it is. Since numerous religions have holidays at this time of year and there are non-religious holidays also (New Year’s) it is appropriate for the “state” to spend “everyone’s” money on general holiday items. But to think that Christ should be openly emphasized by the state is a dangerous path I don’t want to go down and one I don’t want my money going down. There was a time when Catholicism and the state were one - it was called the Dark Ages.

Pat

It seems very clear to me what your motives are to decieve and cause a seed of doubt into the Catholic faithful and it is simply out of pride that you post your statements. If you think that Catholicism and state united is dark ages, God help you! A holy Christmas.

Padre Pio “Don’t worry, work and pray.”

 

[Brad]

patg:

This type of statement is exactly what drives me to support the ACLU. No one and no organization prohibits or tries to prohibit YOU from freely exercising any religion you want any time you want - what don’t you understand about this? The ACLU fully supports and helps protect your right to do this!!!

Oh, I get it. Me being opposed to something that is clearly (as I spelled out) in violation of the 1st Ammendment and that prohibits my children from saying God or praying in a public school is JUST CRAZY, especially considering I’m a follower of Jesus Christ. How bizarre of me!

The ACLU is a sham and a fake. They are anti-Christian to their core as demonstrated by being opposed to Nativity scenes but not Jewish or Muslim sysmbols. They are anti-Democracy in opposing the US military. You suppor the ACLU? This is what you support:

What Is Behind The ‘Hate Christians’ Campaign?
By Thomas D. Segel
December 22, 2004

Christ and faith have been under attack for the past 2000 years. The attempts at destruction started with His birth and have escalated across the globe for centuries. In the United States the anti-Christian movement has now reached the point where those who keep religion as the focal point of their lives can no longer dismiss the actions of a hate-filled leftist movement.

At the center of the attack on the Judeo-Christian heritage of America is the ACLU, which has been appropriately renamed by the Traditional Values Coalition, the “Anti-Christian Liberties Union”. This organization, professing to be dedicated to protecting the freedom of all Americans, is relentlessly on the attack against anything and everything the nation considers as fundamental values.

Most Americans are not even aware of the ACLU’s radical left birth and its dedication to following a communist-socialist agenda for the past 85 years. The ACLU was created at a unique gathering held in 1919 by an activist socialist named Roger Baldwin. Others of socialist-communist leaning assisted him with (name removed by moderator)ut at this assembly. Some participating were Elizabeth Gurley, later to become the head of the Communist Party, USA. Also at the event were the Soviet intelligence agent Agnes Smedley and Socialist Party leader Norman Thomas.

From the beginning, Roger Baldwin instructed those involved in the ACLU movement to make sure it always looked like a very patriotic organization. He instructed them to…“steer away from making it look like a socialist enterprise. We want to look like patriots in every thing we do. We want to get a lot of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to make the country and show that we are really folks that stand by the spirit of our institutions.”

The organization then went on the attack and started its legacy of defending abortionists, pornographers, child molesters and attempting to dismantle the nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage.

continued…

 

[Brad]

By 1931 the Special House Committee to Investigate Communist Activities stated, “The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the communist movement in the United States, and fully 90% of its efforts are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It claims to stand for free speech, free press, and free assembly, but it is quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is an attempt to protect the communists …” The committee also reported …“since its beginnings, the ACLU has waged war against Christianity…”

The greatest impact of this hate organization has been since the ill-fated court case of 1947 when the term “separation of church and state” emerged as a legal mantra of the left. Even today, countless Americans, including our elected officials, believe that statement is based upon the constitution, when in fact; there is no such constitutional mandate.

Currently the ACLU is waging a frontal attack on the public display of Christian symbols. In Los Angeles County it panicked officials into recommending the removal of a small cross on the county seal. The ACLU won the removal of a cross from a World War I memorial to fallen servicemen. It has caused the removal of the 10 Commandments from public property across the United States. Twenty-four lawsuits have been filed against the display of the 10 Commandments and more are being filed every month. ACLU suits have been brought against the Boy Scouts because the group has a religious foundation. The newest target is to remove any symbol of Christianity from official city, county, state or national seals. Most observers of ACLU litigation believe that in the very near future suits will be brought against cities such as Corpus Christi, Texas and Los Angeles, California to change their names to something void of religious meaning.

Any examination of the ACLU would be incomplete without reference to its agenda to degrade moral values. This is done through defensive of Gay and Lesbian objectives. It has defended pornography as a freedom of speech issue and even opposes filtering systems on the computers of public libraries. The ACLU is defending the North American Man-Boy Love Association for its role in promoting the sexual abuse of children. It supports and defends homosexual adoption, legalization of homosexual marriage and pro homosexual recruitment programs in public schools. All of these activities are designed to accelerate the moral degradation of the country.

There are ways to slow down, if not seriously impede ACLU activities, if the American public will develop enough backbone to take action. Though it claims to take no government funding, there is reason to believe the ACLU still receives funds from federal, state and local governments. Citizen organizations should examine their public expenditures and demand cessation wherever such payments are discovered.

The funding of ACLU activities usually comes about at times when it is threatening litigation over some perceived wrong. There are now opposing groups recommending suits be filed against any government body authorizing taxpayer support of this so-called civil liberties organization.

Congress could also bring about marked change in the way litigation is filed against municipalities and government agencies. It would need to change the civil-rights statue, which permits the ACLU to collect attorney fees from the very governments it takes to court.

The usual routine is for the ACLU to claim a municipality violates the Establishment Clause with some form of Christian display. If the local government loses the case, taxpayers are hit with the costs and public dollars go directly into the pockets of the ACLU. By Congress changing the law so the Establishment clause does not apply, the ACLU would lose millions of taxpayer dollars.

The civil rights statute also allows anyone to file suit if they perceive they have been “wronged”. This brings about numerous suits of little or no merit. Requiring those who file litigation to show they have been personally harmed would reduce such suits markedly.

 

[Brad]

Another way to slow down this anti-Christian activity would be to publicly identify those organizations and foundations, which provide funding. Records and reports of such financial activities must be made available to the public. Most foundations, organizations, unions and individuals, regardless of their political leanings, do not want their names linked to anything that could prove to be a public embarrassment.

Organizations such as the Horizons Fund of California, the Tides Foundation, the Gill Foundation of Colorado, the Arcus Foundation of Michigan and nationally known Ford and Rockefeller Foundations have all very quietly made generous contributions to the ACLU.

However, in recent weeks the American Civil Liberties Union was forced to reject $1.5 million from both the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations because it refused to ensure that “none of the money would go to underwriting terrorism or other unacceptable activities a threat to civil liberties.”

The ACLU also had to withdraw from a major federal charity drive and give up an estimated $500,000, because it refused to agree to “not knowingly hire anyone on terrorism watch lists.”

There are indications of a citizen backlash forming. We have an organization, which is the champion of everything repugnant, and we have a government fearful of litigation. The public does not like this and seems at a point where it wants to take action. Many think it is about time the American people started making some demands of their own…like forcing our government to take action in support of America instead of the ACLU!

 

[Brad]

You want to suppor this institution? I don’t. As a believer in freedom. As an Amercian. And most especially, as a Christian.

 

[patg]

Brad:

Oh, I get it. Me being opposed to something that is clearly (as I spelled out) in violation of the 1st Ammendment and that prohibits my children from saying God or praying in a public school is JUST CRAZY, especially considering I’m a follower of Jesus Christ. How bizarre of me!

Yes, your misunderstanding is bizarre. Your children can say “God” and pray 24 hours a day in school or anywhere else. Why do you confuse that with the tax supported school’s teachers and administrators leading prayers and numerous religious activities? If you want a high level of catholicism in your schools, do you want it presented by teacher of unknown religious persuasion or someone totally orthodox? If the latter, why would you want to be in a public school?

 

[Brad]

patg:

Yes, your misunderstanding is bizarre. Your children can say “God” and pray 24 hours a day in school or anywhere else. Why do you confuse that with the tax supported school’s teachers and administrators leading prayers and numerous religious activities? If you want a high level of catholicism in your schools, do you want it presented by teacher of unknown religious persuasion or someone totally orthodox? If the latter, why would you want to be in a public school?

I’m not misunderstanding anything here. Since when has a Natvity scene display forced anyone to participate in a religious activity. How have the display of the 10 commandments forced anyone to abide by the Christian faith?

The issue is not and never has been the actual teaching of the faith by a teacher in a public school. The issue is the elimination of any trace of Christianity in the public. Big difference. Eliminating Christmas carols (even instrumental ones) from being played has nothing to do with freeing Muslims or Jews from playing quality musical pieces that are part of the fabric of American tradition - it has to do with saying that God is not allowed in a public activity. Similarly, not allowing the teaching of Intelligent Design is to an effor to eliminate anything associated with God from a public school.

Now, considering that the ACLU has sinister motives as proven by the article I posted above, they are not going to be happy to stop here. They will go after abstinence programs, continue to promote teaching homosexuality as being a choice on par with monogamous hetereosexual marriage (starting in Kindergarten), and work to eliminate chaplains from the military (this has been attempted in the past).

As a Catholic, I’d like to know how you can support an organization that takes our tax dollars to sue us (the goverment), forcing us to pay more money to defend ourselves - and all they accomplish is getting anything Christian out of the school. How can you support them knowing they are fast to defend pedophiles and pornographers? How can you defend them as they are unwilling to commit to NOT supporting terrorists?

If you could show me ONE CASE where a Muslim or Jew or Atheist was forced to be baptised or forced to worship or forced to take communion or forced to go to confession or forced to go to Mass, then you might have an argument. Give me one single case where this has happened, then I’ll understand you better. And even then, although I’d understand you better, I’d wonder whether you really truly understand that Jesus is God.

 

[patg]

Brad:

Since when has a Natvity scene display forced anyone to participate in a religious activity.

It forces them to pay for it! That’s pretty serious participation.

How have the display of the 10 commandments forced anyone to abide by the Christian faith?

Once again, it forces them to pay for it.

The issue is not and never has been the actual teaching of the faith by a teacher in a public school. The issue is the elimination of any trace of Christianity in the public.

No, the issue is using everyone’s tax dollars to promote a specific religion. You are still confusing the public expression of an individual’s Christianity with using public funds to support and promote a religion. The first is wonderful; the latter is illegal.

As a Catholic, I’d like to know how you can support an organization that takes our tax dollars to sue us (the goverment), forcing us to pay more money to defend ourselves - and all they accomplish is getting anything Christian out of the school.

Once again, I see this as backwards reasoning - I don’t want Christianity out of the school, one’s Christianity should always be expressed everywhere. I want the school out of Christianity (and all other religions).

How can I support such an organization? I don’t see any other group taking on those who are trying to use public money to promote a specific religion. Sure, they have their faults, some very serious as you mentioned. But I support a lot of imperfect organizations, all of which have faults (hmmm… including the church whose leaders have sheltered pedophiles and pornographers also).

 

[otm]

patg:

It forces them to pay for it! That’s pretty serious participation.
Once again, it forces them to pay for it.

Not necessarily. The creche might be donated, at which point they are not paying for it; further, the tax effect, if any, is di minimus; and it further presumes that tax dollars are in actuality parcelled out in miniscule amounts to each program.

patg:

No, the issue is using everyone’s tax dollars to promote a specific religion. You are still confusing the public expression of an individual’s Christianity with using public funds to support and promote a religion. The first is wonderful; the latter is illegal.

No, it is you who are playing games with words. No one is promoting religion; it is simply being acknowledged. There is a radical difference, which the ACLU refuses to admit. Further, No religion is being “supported”, as the funds do not go to any religious institution. They go to the purchase of a creche scene from a business.

patg:

Once again, I see this as backwards reasoning - I don’t want Christianity out of the school, one’s Christianity should always be expressed everywhere. I want the school out of Christianity (and all other religions).

Nice try. After 9/11, Schools in California were having the children act out Muslim prayers and fasting. Even after it made the news, the ACLU made no move whatsoever to stop it. It wasn’t Christianity.

patg:

How can I support such an organization? I don’t see any other group taking on those who are trying to use public money to promote a specific religion. Sure, they have their faults, some very serious as you mentioned. But I support a lot of imperfect organizations, all of which have faults (hmmm… including the church whose leaders have sheltered pedophiles and pornographers also).

Again, you confuse supporting with acknowledging. They aren’t the same.

 

[Lonevoice]

patg:

I think there are a number of issues being oversimplified here into the push to “put religion back into Christmas”…

It is perfectly reasonable that an individual or a private business say “Christmas” all they want - I support freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Paint the 10 commandments on your house, write Merry Christmas across your store, say Merry Christmas to everyone you meet, go for it!

I do not think it is reasonable that public money be used to support the holiday of a specific religion - no matter which religion it is. Since numerous religions have holidays at this time of year and there are non-religious holidays also (New Year’s) it is appropriate for the “state” to spend “everyone’s” money on general holiday items. But to think that Christ should be openly emphasized by the state is a dangerous path I don’t want to go down and one I don’t want my money going down. There was a time when Catholicism and the state were one - it was called the Dark Ages.

Pat

Well, as for your last statement, you can thank the Church. Check out this: centuryone.com/1849-3.html

As for the statement about other religions celebrating at the same time of year, out of the 4 Major religions, only Christianity and Judaism celebrate at the same time (as each, in general) as this every year. Ramdan shifts, for instance. In 2005, I think it arrives in Sept. or Oct…

As for Kwanzaa, be sure to add the extra “a” when you Google it for the the American version, as opposed to in Africa where it was kind of a thanksgiving, and celebration of the family. (I suppose no one had invented Mother and Father’s day cards, or lame ties, or bad perfume.)

Calm down, it’s just a joke.

(Due to the differences in the Southern and Northern hemispheres, Kwanza {see the SINGLE “a”?} occurs in Autumn/ Winter up here as opposed to only autumn down there.)

Insofar as the American version is concerned this was a made up, feel good, “we have a holiday too!!!” type of thing back in the 60’s, specifically designed to coincide with Christmas. (Google “Kwanzaa Founder record” if you want.)

I’m black(well, half anyhow) and Conservative, I’m allowed to say all this. (it’s in our rules, swear to God. You don’t have to like it, but you DO have to accept it, or look it up for yourselves. Anyway, aren’t you guys the party of diversity?)

Anyhow, enough of my rant; I’ve been online long enough to know that hardly anyone’s mind is changed by a chat board.

I just wanted to get some facts out there, instead of more cr*p from the left.

God Bless all on these boards.

 

[Brad]

patg:

It forces them to pay for it! That’s pretty serious participation.
Once again, it forces them to pay for it.

Sometimes. Sometimes it is donated. But even if it did, the government makes me pay for construction projects that are not needed, for teaching homosexuality as normal and bad sex education and sometimes bad science etc. to kids in school, for contraception for someone’s Medicaid insurance, for government vehicles that are unnecessary etc. Why is the litmus test only on anything Christian in a public place?

patg:

No, the issue is using everyone’s tax dollars to promote a specific religion. You are still confusing the public expression of an individual’s Christianity with using public funds to support and promote a religion. The first is wonderful; the latter is illegal.

The latter should not be illegal and there is no constitutional basis or historical/legal precedent for it prior to 1950.

patg:

Once again, I see this as backwards reasoning - I don’t want Christianity out of the school, one’s Christianity should always be expressed everywhere. I want the school out of Christianity (and all other religions).

I don’t think you understand the ACLU’s goals. When they fight against a student organized bible study after-school program, how is that NOT restricting one’s Christianity in the school? When they fight against kids wearing red and green in the schoo, how is that NOT restricting their Christianity? How are public funds affected by either of these examples?

patg:

How can I support such an organization? I don’t see any other group taking on those who are trying to use public money to promote a specific religion. Sure, they have their faults, some very serious as you mentioned. But I support a lot of imperfect organizations, all of which have faults (hmmm… including the church whose leaders have sheltered pedophiles and pornographers also).

I want the pedophiles and active homosexuals out of the priesthood because their philosphy is inconsistent with that of the Church. I want the ACLU shut down because thier philosophy is inconsistent with that of the Church. No contradiction here.

 

[katherine2]

Why is it that Christians are asked to be tolerant of other religions, but other religions are not tolerant of Christianity?

Ummmm, would the answer be “because we are Christians?”