- Home
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Health
- Religion
- Society
- Tech
- Money
- People
- Science
- Galleries
Is there a "War on Christmas?"
It’s that time of year again: houses are brightly lit, trees are sparkling with tinsel and parents are battling for the last remaining Elmo. In recent years, though, we’ve been hearing more about a “war” on Christmas, as public displays become increasingly scarce and “Merry Christmas” becomes “Happy Holidays.” Are Scrooges stealing your holiday, or are times changing for the better?
Featured Image:
























Comments
One of the preferred
sdsdsdsdsdsdfsdfdfgxcfbvxcvb
Christmas Greetings Text
Christmas controversy refers to controversy or disagreement surrounding the celebration or recognition of the Christmas party in government, media, advertising and various secular environments.
http://www.christmasgreetings123.com/christmas-greetings-text.php
Different paths up the same mountain:
Politically, this issue is an old technique of the "divide and conquer" game by those in power. As long as the masses fight one another over religion by paying attention to such secondary issues exploited by the corporation-owned press like this "War on Christmas", they won't see the consolidation of money and power into the hands of a few until it is too late, and the "freedoms" so bandied about in this debate are permanently gone.
Personally, I don’t mind it when Christians say to me during this season "Merry Christmas" as long as they don't punch me :-) when I nicely respond to them by first thanking them for their blessings and then by saying "And have a Happy Yule too". I love this time of year with the colorful lights all over the place decorating homes and trees. I don't mind a Manger scene being displayed on public property as long as I can wear my pentagram necklace and my shaman medicine bag out in public without being physically attacked.
I am not so insecure in my own spiritual path to be mean or stingy about sharing this time of year with Christians and with people of other religions. I am not so insecure about the strength of my own beliefs to feel threatened by the stares of fear or by words of hate I receive from persons who are blind to the beauty of spirits as each shines around our human bodies of flesh & bone with rays of colorful lights spreading further out … wings!
Beautiful human beings, I am learning to love you all.
It's sad
I think it's sad that people say x-mas instead of Christmas or Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas JUST because of the fact that it's spelled CHRISTmas. You know after Jesus Christ *the reason we celebrate Christmas in the first place* I'm not saying that's why everyone does it, but I know a number of people who say that's why they choice x-mas
are you posting my comments?
it doesn't seem to got through
Christmas the most wonderful time of the year!
I went to Vegas..they still honor Christmas in the public square...imagine that???
sin city lol! I even went to church on the sunset strip on Christmas Eve!
Even the 7 eleven had a nativity. It was awesome!
Los Angeles.and California have a problem with this and it is very weird.
Went to New Mexico- they have crosses and churches everywhere you go- a holy city I call it!
It was awesome too see that.
Boo to the freedom from religion foundation and the aclu--- shame on them!
Merry Christmas,Happy birthday Jesus Christ! and God bless you too!
I will pray where ever I choose- in my school- at the park anywhere public!
take my bible to school etc...
God rules..to hell with the others!
lol
God rules...to hell with the others
Yeah, that sums up Christianity pretty well, doesn't it.
well, we hope they will be saved
but....if they continue down the path of destruction- anti-christ behavior---calling wrong right and right wrong etc....hell pretty much sums it up.
I can see that most people on this site are not Christian- all you have to do is view the polls..either that or they are so brainwashed by society 's liberal view, they forgot how to be faithful, good Christians.
Look Christians are growing- thousands - millions live here is the USA..God Bless America.
They will not be silenced! Check out Silencing Christians in America site. What an eye opener.
Christians make America a great place to live. Keep people in line.
Look I know some good Muslims and Jewish people that do the same for America.
Then there are the others.
The ones that bring America down.
Good and Bad..I love America. I will fight for our right as Christians to practice the faith and not be silenced!
but not for everyone
Christmas may be a wonderful time of year for Christians, but not for everyone else. For people of other religions / cultures it is just another day out of the year.
who cares????
The other cultures dont have to join in if they dont want to..but they can leave the people alone that do love christmas .. we dont tell them what to do at thier traditions...so why do they have the right to tell us we cant say merry christmas..i dont care if they celebrate another way....so why are they so against me having my right?????
celebrate
“so why are they so against me having my right?????”
Nobody is denying you your right to worship or celebrate. All that is being said is that the government cannot endorse your beliefs (any more then it can endorse the beliefs of others). Government displays of religion are not acceptable in our secular society .
Here's what I personally say to the thing...
Here's what will clear up the issue:
1) Do not make X-mas a national holiday
2) Allow employees and employers to take religious holidays off with pay, so that they may celebrate whatever religious holiday they choose.
Sounds simple enough, and I can guarantee you it'll work.
I do not mind having non christians celebrating X Mas, but..
If I cannot say Merry Christmas without being mortared by hundreds of PC youknowwhats, I will not be happy. Traditions have been key for America. This just shows how much of it is getting lost.
More a dilution of the culture
It's not so much that there is a war on Christmas, it's more that there is war on our (traditional)culture. Since our demographics have changed our views are changing. The problem, to use an analogy, is if you are a jack of all trades you are a master of none. The dilution of the traditions of our society invites other traditions to fill its place. But I fear we will end up with a very watered-down culture. A little bit of this and a little bit of that invites a superficial culture. A deep culture, say such as China's, would not be possible if all culture values from all parts of the world were to be preserved. The great cultures have a personality to them. Mixing them together does not make the new culture strong, it makes it weak.
Just Exactly Who is The Family Research Council?
I just made a long call to the Family Research Council in Washington DC, I was interested in possibly supporting them, I agree on many of the positions they claim to represent. I am setting here very disappointed, to use mild comparisons they appear to be modern day Pharisees and Sadducees. For you non Christians they may be people who have hidden motives and are not who they claim to be. It is impossible to determine who or where there funding comes from. For all we know they could be funded by interests in China who wish to have much more control over the USA. The Fact is we just don’t know who the money comes from or if they have hidden motives. Do any of you know exactly who there money comes from? Please don’t use the Evangelical Council as a resource to find more on this subject, you will get only general meaningless data from them. How about it Family Research Council, give us a list of your top twenty contributors and there amounts.
Super Expert
Non-Interference
In general, I don't believe anyone is asking you to give up your own traditions or to dilute them with substitute traditions. No, what is being asked of you is to enjoy your traditions freely PROVIDED you allow others to do the same and restrain yourself from attempting to dominate others whose personal traditions conflict with your own.
You are wrong on the subject of diversity. Although it is true, in an individual it is difficult to be a master of anything if one hopes to be a "jack of all trades". Notice I used the word "difficult" instead of "impossible". Indeed, in human history there have been individuals who have demonstrated that a jack-of-all-trades can be a master of many of them - Benjamin Franklin, Leonardo da Vinci, Thomas Edison, Thomas Jefferson, and so on. There are without a doubt individuals among us even now who demonstrate the same. You also may be discounting the fact that "jack of all trades" or, as others would call it "generalist" is a master skill in and of itself. Most are able to master a skill or two, however, there are still many among us who are able to learn many skills and integrate them masterfully to create something greater than the sum of its parts.
But this is regards to an individual. Within a group of individuals, if those individuals cooperate in their actions, the entire group benefits from the narrow-focused mastery of each of its members. Of course, the greater the size of the group, the greater the degree and scope of mastery within it. This is the brilliance of community. All can benefit from mastery in areas for which they have little knowledge, talent or skill in return for sharing their own mastery. In the individual, one can be a master generalist. In a community, one need not be a master generalist, however, one benefits from general mastery while a member of a group of cooperating individual masters.
All in all, diversity of experience, knowledge, understanding and expression in an individual, i.e., greatest possible breadth AND depth, gives that individual a great chance of surviving no matter what problems are adversities are presented to them. Indeed, it is human adaptability and improvisation that makes our species unique. The individual MUST be able to adapt with skill to many kinds of situations or they will perish. The utility of community, assuming all of its members are free and willing to cooperate with others who are also free to grow, develop and progress toward goals of their own choosing, is that through cooperation, individuals can survive in community who would not survive without it. Each member brings unique keys to unlocking the solutions to specific problems which others do not possess. To use those keys to aid not simply themselves but all with whom they consider kinship is to create an abstract organism with adaptability beyond that of its individual members.
The United States has never in its long history been one single culture but rather always a mix of cultures. You worry over the watering down of american culture because of the mixture of various specific cultures into one. Of course, this is what "american cutlure" has always been. I say to you that what you really worry about is the marginalization of one specific culture - yours - by allowing the cultures of others to have influence in what is supposed to be a guaranteed culture of non-interference, i.e., the idea that no one culture has all of the necessary questions and certainly not all of the answers. You do not know it and perhaps do not want to know it but, by allowing the influences of many cultures in addition to your own, you benefit from their experiences, their knowledge, their wisdom, their talents and skills, their expressions. If you adopt an attitude of isolation, of non-cooperation, an attitude of division rather than connection, you cut yourself off from the benefits of a larger community and thus reduce your survival chances. You as an individual cannot possibly master everything you need to master to survive many circumstances on you own. So too, no culture can survive well which cuts itself off in various ways from the benefits of other cultures. We humans love to create divisions on an Earth and in a nature that has no genuine division. All is connection save, perhaps, within the human intellect or lack thereof. Peaceful and voluntary coexistence and cooperation is the best path for us all.
We can survive together or die divided.
Brief answer
Your reply was quite long. I don't have the time or energy to respond to every sentence. But I will respond to your first sentence. When I say "Merry Christmas" and somone tells me I am not being inclusive and should say "Happy holidays" instead, they are asking me to give up my traditions or to dilute them with substitute traditions.
We agree to a point ...
I have to agree with you, if you greet a stranger with "Merry Christmas" and they chastise you for your greeting, they are in the wrong. If, on the other hand, you greet them with "Merry Christmas" and they return your greeting with "Happy Holidays", two strangers have acted respectfully of their own beliefs and each other. If you chastise them for returning your greeting with "Happy Holidays", you are in the wrong.
We ought to all agree that each individual is a culture of one. We each can have very different beliefs and practices while living side by side IF we each agree to a relationship with one another of non-interference, i.e., believe and practice what you wish AS LONG AS you allow me to do the same. This isn't a watering down of any individual's culture but rather peaceful coexistence. When you attempt to compel others to your beliefs and practices, you violate the non-interference and peaceful coexistence which is the understood agreement in an authentically civilized culture. If I attempt to compel you to my beliefs and practices, I too violate such an agreement.
Again, I must state I agree with you, when offering a greeting of "Merry Christmas", you aren't insulting my own beliefs and you ought not be unfairly compelled to change those beliefs or practices unless they unfairly interfere in the beliefs and practices of another. Those you greet ought to understand the spirit of the greeting which is polite friendship and return with a greeting in kind and of their own choosing. To chastise you for your greeting is ill-mannered.
It is unfair of another to demand you "water down" your personal culture, however, the culture of a group or community, state or nation belongs to all who are its members. They evolve and enjoy that culture as a group and thus no one individual can dictate to others what is proper for that culture and what is improper. You own your personal culture but not culture at large. The general culture you live in is a mixture of individual cultures - always has been and always will be. You cannot demand it go in one direction versus another nor can you demand it remain in one place. Your right to your personal culture does not extend to a right to dictate the culture of many. If "Merry Christmas" is appropriate to you, then use it, however, you have no more right to demand that as the greeting of all than they "Happy Holidays" crowd has right to demand you change your personal greeting.
Again, we can live cooperatively, side by side in peaceful and respectful coexistence as individuals or we can perish divided and alone.
But their is a tension
I agree with most of what you say. I think the difference between us is that I focus on the tension between the personal and public culture. Each comes at a price. The closer the public culture is to my personal culture the more at home I feel. How would the public culture accommodate all personal cultures? I don't believe it can, except by compromises. Go to Amsterdam and Saudia Arabia. Very different cultures that are quite incompatible. My belief is these compromises result in the dilution of the culture. We don't become more like Amsterdam and more like Saudia Arabia, we become neither. My belief is the result is a watered down culture, not a vibrant, stronger one. I believe that because I see what's happening here, and I have been to China and India and see something much different there. What you say sounds good on paper but when translated to the public culture results in blandness. Compromise is inevitable. But we should be mindful of the tension that is there.
On Paper?
Well, as I said, you're uncomfortable with the mixing of cultures because this dilutes them. But, of course, a mixing of cultures is what we've always had. As it happens, every culture one can name is nevertheless a mix of culture, even if those in it have forgotten that truth. If you are looking for some cultural purity, you will not find it in the 21st century and only in the most isolated places would have found anything resembling a "pure" culture in the past.
I understand the emotions you feel about changes in culture but I have to disagree with the thinking behind them. I think you mourn the loss of a culture that you perhaps perceive but was not the most genuine truth. I dare say that "culture" isn't actually a thing or an identifiable state of anything but rather is a process. In other words, don't think of culture as a noun so much as a verb. One can take a snapshot of a culture in a single moment but, because culture is continually changing and evolving to something else, that snapshot is a "culture" that never existed before the snapshot and will not exist again after you take it. You are uncomfortable with the fact that the culture you wish to remain permanent and unchanging is, in fact, changing right before your eyes and not in the directions you wish. I have to admit, there are point in human cultural history I wish had remained that I might enjoy them - I would love to have experienced the Renassiance or the great Enlightenment, perhaps the industrial revolution firsthand or even the American Revolution - unfortunately, as romantic as it would be, it is harmful to yourself to hold onto the untruth that cultures don't change or ought not change. Culture, as I said, is a verb. Change is inherent to it.
I understand completely why you would view the change of the culture you love as "diluting", but I have to say you injure yourself by your reluctance to accept the fact the culture is always change and no one person can prevent it and, indeed, it's unlikely an entire nation of people can prevent such changes. It is an essential truth of all life that change MUST happen or life perishes. What you might not have considered is the fact that, from the perspective of love for one point in cultural development, any change is surely unwelcome, however, this new point in culture is surely as rich as previous points in time. That one doesn't appreciate the new culture does not make that new culture any less rich, it just makes less appreciated by those who did not desire change.
I can tell you, in my own view, and considering the incredibly expanded access to information and connection of individual to individual, group to group, culture to culture that's afforded by the internet, the human world I see today is far richer than any I've experienced in my 48+ years - and I say this having traveled around much of the world personally and seen much firsthand.
What you see today is, of course, the end of previous cultures. What you might not realize is you're also witnessing the birth of those cultures millions will also come to love, cherish and fight to keep.
On and on it goes. It's a privilege to see even a small part of the long human story.
But it's not as rich
Your statement "What you might not have considered is the fact that, from the perspective of love for one point in cultural development, any change is surely unwelcome, however, this new point in culture is surely as rich as previous points in time." is where we disagree. I don't believe there is any assurance that the new point in culture is as rich as previous points. That's one of my points. Cultures can get richer, they can get poorer. Right now I believe we are "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" so to speak, and our culture is the poorer for it. Change can be for the better, it can be for the worse. In my life time it appears to have changed, generally, for the worse.
Why purify culture?
Isn't America a land of immigrants and diversity? What is the benefit of purified culture? Because the cost is personal liberty and fairness.
Because there would be no deep culture without it
I don't feel comfortable with the word "purified" but the great cultures of the world would not have been great without some continuation of cultural trends. It does not cost me my personal liberty nor is it unfair to me to go to China and watch and become a part of their culture. China is what China is because of their culture. God forbid if we turn all cultures into shopping malls; they are everywhere and they're all the same.
You're missing the point
I'm not talking about going to other countries: I'm talking about living in this one. Why should America, a country of immigrants, support a certain culture? And why is a deep culture worth doing away with individual liberties? And I don't care if you're not comfortable with the word purified, supporting your culture and your culture only with the government and focusing on one deep culture is purification.
Worse, we're talking about religion here, not just culture. Our government should not be endorsing a certain religion legally in the first place.
No you're not
Why should individual liberty be stymied by a deep culture? How is my/your liberty affected because we have traditions? Do you value a deep culture? I fear we are becoming very superficial in our culture and saying that it's worth it for individual liberties is not the equation. Deep culture and individual liberties are both important. But they are not in conflict. Finally, the question is about a war on Christmas. Why do you bring the government into it?
Again, you fail to get it
If you're making it a policy to support only one culture in a country of immigrants, the rest of us who are not part of your religion and your culture have OUR rights to our culture and religion or lack of it shoved to the side.
Not so
No. You are not pushed aside. Why not a common culture with many subcultures?