tis the season that Fox News pundits get to pretend to be very angry about the totally factual and scary War on Christmas. i know this b/c i do on occasion watch some Fox News, and my mother and her husband most certainly watch a lot of Fox News and they are totally pissed off about how Christmas is under attack.
now i, like most Atheists, find this ridiculous. not that there aren't some silly stunts being pulled by secular folk in protest to certain things that mix Christmas and public land or schools. these things do happen every year, but they are really small potatoes in the big picture. but the outrage that people like Bill O'Reilly are feigning are off the charts. last night, his first two segments were dedicated to this so called war. he had on the RI Governor whose great crime was to continue his predecessor's tradition of calling their Christmas tree a "Holiday" tree. the horror!!
personally i see nothing wrong with calling it a Christmas tree. that's what it is. however, if a state or community or town want to be more inclusive to non-Christians then i don't see a problem with that either. regardless, the furor over a semantic issue is so overblown. there is no war on Christmas. Americans celebrate an entire Christmas season. it lasts a month, with lights, santa, parades, decorations, shopping, tv specials, etc. to be in such an uproar is sheer Christian persecution syndrome. they want to be persecuted.
the so called war on Christmas is really nothing more than correcting Christian overreach. they've gotten away with so many abuses when it comes to religion in public life. now that secular groups like the FFRF, American Atheists, and the ACLU have seen their power increase due to an uptick in non-theists and secular progressives, many of their overreaches are being targeted. and in most cases the seculars win. these losses are their proof that there is a war on Christmas. not so - it's a leveling of the playing field.
the governor of RI summed it up nicely in his segment with O'Reilly. he said "you folks at Fox are just so angry". tis the season! ho ho ho, Merry Christmas!
for anyone who wants to watch the clip.
my favorite part is after the governor says that O'Reilly and Fox are just too angry, O'Reilly yelled back "I'M NOT ANGRY!!" , to which the governor replied "look, you're yelling". too funny!
'Tis the season to mock Faux Noise,
Fa la la la la, la la la la...
The times that theists will arrived at our feet!
i'm aware that it was originally a pagan symbol, but it's been adopted long enough by the Christians that it's ok to give it to them.
I don't know about the tree, but Yul is awesome.
If there is a war on anything it's winter solstice. Why on earth is it okay to give the tree tradition to Christians? Evergreen trees aren't mentioned in Biblical scripture any more than deciduous trees. Should we give them Arbor Day too? The Pope just came clean that Jesus wasn't really born in a manger with animals all over the place either. Is there anything about Christianity that is genuine?
Not Arbor Day! Never! Not until they pry the pruning shears from my cold dead hands!
Christianity is a syncretic religion. Christians just won't admit it. If they did, that would imply (1) their god is not the "original", (2) their god and his commandments are made up and (3) all that christian effort is meaningless.
I think the most egregious theft in Christianity is that of the Golden Rule. This is the one piece of logic that any healthy, stable human can wrap their head around. It's a piece of wisdom that a child can digest and learn from, and it has been in existence for far longer than any branch of Abrahamic religion - but I can't tell you how many times I have said to a theist that as an atheist I try to always run my decisions through the Golden Rule test before I take action, only to be told that I am practicing the words of Jesus. No, I'm practicing the words of Confucius and so many others that repeted them.
I think the theft of 'morals' by xtians is the most egregious. Good morals are good morals. They do not BELONG to any religion.
Define "morals". Many Christians have a truly warped definition of morals. Kicking a child out of the house because they admit they are gay is a far cry from moral, and a grotesque violation of the GR. Perhaps a better way to state that is not theft, but the self-serving (or religion-serving) redefining of morals.
You're right Future. Morals maybe isn't a good word either. I'm WAY more moral than most xtians I know, and it's not because I have an ulterior-motive. I should say "a nice person" or a "good person", I don't know.
The problem I have with the Golden Rule is that everyone DOESN'T want to be treated the same way. Maybe someone treats me the way THEY want to be treated, and I don't like it.
I define morals I guess as trying to do no harm to others, the Earth, etc. Being nice to people and animals. Trying to help those that need it. There are too many things to list. I would include not butting in to other people's business, i.e. if they marry gay or straight, if a woman chooses to have an abortion, etc. NOT MY BUSINESS. But xtians butt in all the time to stuff that isn't their business. They do think they are being moral. You are right. I think that they are being horrible.
You are right as well, booklover. The Golden Rule can sometimes be twisted towards the will of the narcissist, who thinks that, say, the music they are listening to is so great that playing it so loud that everyone around them can hear it is doing them a favor, or that since they believe Jesus is the savior of mankind, then everyone else should appreciate it when they say "I'll pray for you." However, for the healthy mind and one that doesn't think in terms of religion above common sense rationality, the GR is a useful tool. Even a child can understand why stealing is wrong if they imagine how they would feel about their toys being stolen.