It's been secular in the Netherlands for centuries. The Feast of Sinterklaas, or St. Nicholas, is an annual event which has been uniquely Dutch and Flemish for centuries. St. Nicholas' Feast Day, December 6th, is observed in most Roman Catholic countries primarily as a feast for small children. But it is only in the Low Countries - especially in the Netherlands - that the eve of his feast day (December 5th) is celebrated nationwide by young and old, christian and non-christian, and without any religious overtones. (It were the Dutch settlers who brought St. Nicholas over to New Amsterdam - USA.) http://www.thehollandring.com/sinterklaas.shtml/
Even the Vatican is caving to the pc bs of the war on CHRISTmas: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59227 Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
"The American people, common sense, and the Constitution are clearly winning the war on Christmas waged by the Left," said Gary McCaleb, ADF senior counsel. "Unfortunately, the misguided belief that we must sanitize Christmas to keep from offending a small segment of the population exists." http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59223 Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Hey, if WorldNutDaily says it, it must be true, eh? Besides, how hard can it be to win a war that exists only in your mind?
Next thing, it will be Mary as the carpenter and Joseph as the stay at home house-husband. The article also mentions Elvis as being in the traditional stable. I'm sure they must have got that wrong.
O.K, sorry, nearly killed that thread. I'll re-open with a plan to make Christmas much more tolerable; once every four years ( like the olympics) Christ, you'd get bored with the Olympics every year. I could actually get excited about that. Imagine no "ding dong merrily on high" for four years, no "rup a pum pum!", no "come all ye faithful!" Who's with me?
Liberals are losing the war on CHRISTmas. Believers fight them and win. Yay. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :bravo:
The only "fighters" in this alleged war on xmas appear to be the deluded: Muslim helps Jews attacked on New York subway who were attacked by deluded xians. Their current delusion is that there is some "war" being waged on their Christmas. What bunk. Merry Christmas, everyone.
Yay! "If the anti-Christmas forces are winning, then the war in Iraq is nothing short of total victory." What War on Christmas?
there is no war on christmas. plus christmas was nothing more than a marketing ploy easter too. the were modeled after pagan relionous holidays to get them to convert.
Christian supremacists The so-called "war on Christmas" is just another ploy by certain Christians to remind us how repugnant they find the notion that they are equal to their neighbors. Equality, as such, is a violation of Christians' equal rights and equal protection under the law. ("Oh, dear Jesus! We have to be equal?") • • • Remarks revised and extended: The issue has been misrepresented, and apparently in order to call someone a piece of shit. Let's start with the resolution's sponsor: Iwasaki's article examines the no vote of local (Seattle) Democrat Jim McDermott. As one staffer explained, "[If] you know the congressman, you'd know why." Of course, that answer simply doesn't satisfy Christian supremacists or "reporters" who editorialize at the outset°. What nobody cares about is what the resolutions in question said, and why people voted against the Christmas resolution. I do understand, however, why American conservatives—so influenced as they are by Christianity—are upset at opposition to a supremacist resolution about Christmas: the one time of year they actually feel compelled to "be nice" (as, opposed, say, to reflecting that Christian influence year-round), and some Democrats actually oppose their effort. The problem with HR 847 is that it is dressed up to resemble resolutions 635 and 747, but also attempts to reinforce Christian supremacism in American society. The Ramadan resolution (635) does the following: • Notes 1.5b Muslims worldwide. • Acknowledges 9/11 and other threats and attacks against "law-abiding, patriotic Americans" of diverse heritages, particularly members of the Islamic Faith. • Notes September 14, 2001 condemnation by House of Representatives of bigotry and violence against Arab-Americans, American Muslims, and Americans of South-Asian descent. • Acknowledges Muslims who reject violence, hatred, and terror; and praises those who encourage democracy, tolerance, and civil/political rights. • Acknowledges Ramadan as a holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal. • Notes the period of Ramadan. • Recognizes Islam as one of the "great religions of the world". • Expresses friendship and support for Muslims. • Acknowledges Ramadan, conveys the House of Representatives' respect to Muslims worldwide. • Rejects hatred, bigotry, and violence against Muslims. • Commends Muslims who have opposed terrorism. The Diwali resolution (747): • Notes the significance of Diwali to persons of Indian descent, and that the festival is celebrated by Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jains around the world. • Notes over 2b Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jains worldwide. • Notes the word "Diwali" is a contraction. • Acknowledges Diwali as a festival of lights, gives very basic explanation of holiday. • Notes symbolic beliefs of Diwali celebrants. • Notes occasion (day) of Diwali. • Notes Hindu interpretation of Diwali. • Notes Sikh interpretation of Diwali. • Notes Jain interpretation of Diwali. • Recognizes Diwali as an important festival in order to demonstrate support for Indian Americans and internationals of Indian heritage. • Acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Diwali. • Recognizes and appreciates religious diversity. • Acknowledges new relations and dialogue between U.S. and India. • Acknowledges onset of Diwali and expresses respect to Indian Americans and internationals of Indian heritage. The Christmas resolution (847) is markedly different: • Notes Christmas as holiday of great significance. • Notes approximate 3:1 Christian majority in the United States. • Notes 2b Christians around the world, that Christianity is the largest religion in the world. • Notes Christian contributions to western civilization. • Recognizes Judeo-Christian roots in American history. • Notes occasion (day) of Christmas in the U.S. • Recognizes Christmas as recognition of God's redemption, mercy, and Grace. • Notes widespread recognition of Christmas as a time to serve others. • Recognizes Christianity as one of the great religions of the world. • Expresses support for Christians in U.S. and around the world. • Acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and Christianity. • Rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians. • Expresses deepest respect to Christians. Where the Ramadan and Diwali resolutions seemed to be respectful acknowledgments of minority communities, the Christmas resolution just seems to be more chest-beating by Christians. None of these resolutions are without their problems; the Ramadan resolution seems deliberate; the Diwali resolution is almost comically simplistic, as if it wasn't worth the kind of effort as the Ramadan bill; the Christmas resolution, as I noted, is about getting Congress to recognize the supremacy of Christian faith. Also, note the bill titles: • HR 635: "Recognizing the commencement of Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal, and expressing respect to Muslims in the United States and throughout the world on this occasion, and for other purposes" • HR 747: "Recognizing the religious and historical significance of the festival of Diwali". • HR 847: "Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith". Commencement of Ramadan, holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal, expressing respect. Significance of Diwali. Importance of Christmas and Christian faith. There's a bit of a difference. Rep. King's Christmas bill seems disingenuous for its supremacist notions. And on the supremacy issue itself, the Christmas resolution should have been rejected. I have no significant problem with the idea of Congress sending holiday greetings to whomever, but this resolution looks to be deliberately crafted for other purposes. There is no need for the House of Representatives to kowtow to Christianity, and it is significant that some think it should. McDermott's opposition highlights an irony. The President of the United States will bring his born-again, evangelical Christianity to the people to the point that he has, in the past, said that God told him to invade Iraq. And yet, as HR 847 points out, "many Christians and non-Christians throughout the United States and the rest of the world, celebrate Christmas as a time to serve others". I would assert that this is, in fact, one of the problems with Christmas. So many people talk about it being the time of year to be good and decent and helpful to others. As I understood it from my Lutheran indoctrination as a child, my preparation for "adulthood" in the church, and my education at a Jesuit high school (as well as years of general discussion with Christians), every day is the day to be good and decent and helpful to others. So, yeah ... Merry freakin' Christmas to all the kids Bush vetoed, eh? At least you know you'll be (abstractly) in the President's prayers on Christmas. After all, it's the one time of year he should be good and decent and helpful to other people. If people decrying the "War on Christmas" should treat such issues so simplistically, what are the rest of us to think? ____________________ Notes: ° "reporters" who editorialize at the outset — Ironically, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is openly acknowledged as the "liberal" daily newspaper in Seattle; Iwasaki opens by blasting McDermott as "Congressman McGrinch", and tells the story according to Christian presuppositions. Now, I personally am not offended by Iwasaki's article, but I thought it worth mentioning—since there is constantly chatter about "liberal media bias"—that Seattle's liberal daily is taking the supremacist view. Even Iwasaki's excerpts of the bills in question suggest there is a difference, but he does not make any specific note of it. (The AP article posted by Seattle's allegedly more-conservative newspaper, the Times, acknowledges McDermott's perspective. So much for our local classifications, eh?) Works Cited: Iwasaki, John. "Ho-ho-no: McDermott votes against Christmas". SeattlePI.com. December 12, 2007. See http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/343335_mcdermott13.html Daly, Matthew. "McDermott votes against Christmas resolution to protest Bush veto". SeattleTimes.com. December 13, 2007. See http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004069327_webmcdermott13m.html House Resolution 635. "Recognizing the commencement of Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal, and expressing respect to Muslims in the United States and throughout the world on this occasion, and for other purposes". See http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr110-635&show-changes=0 House Resolution 747. "Recognizing the religious and historical significance of the festival of Diwali". See http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:2:./temp/~c110yybZEA:: House Resolution 847. "Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith". See http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr110-847&show-changes=0
