Bjorn
Off Topic
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2002
- Messages
- 2,968
You sock puppet ...Evidence?![]()
You sock puppet ...Evidence?![]()
You sock puppet ...
Well, Melendwyr is making a falsifiable prediction, but are you proposing we put the prediction to the test?Evidence?![]()
Well, Melendwyr is making a falsifiable prediction, but are you proposing we put the prediction to the test?
Well said.Now wait a minute. I'da thought the fundies (and heck, other Christians) would be pleased that Boston is correctly separating the historically pagan elements of the holiday from the truly Christian part (which apparently involves deeply discounted laptops at Circuit City).
This is a great argument for a church/state separatist to care about. My question is, why should it bug a Christian who WANTS a city-sponsored tree in the public square?Because that's what it is and that's why it's there?If you want separation of church and state, then the city shouldn't be erecting a tree in the first place. With government money, at least. If private people want to put up such a tree on public property, that's another thing. But renaming it, or putting Santas and a Star of David around a creche set, isn't solving the problem.
In Soviet Union (No this is not a begining of a horrible joke) we had "Holiday Tree" it was used to celebrate the new year. Though obviously derrived from Christmas celebration rituals of the west it was not at all religious.
Not to say the tree has anything to do with Christ. Not much pine in the desert.
Are you from the Soviet Union? I'd love to know more of your background then, it puts you in a different light.
It is precisely the cases that don't get media exposure that don't result in legal action. How would I find out about it if there is no legal action?I would like a current reference to such activity that did not result is severe legal action.
A history of government endorsement of religion.It suggests history.
What relevance does its duration have? If things gain legitimacy with age, doesn't that mean that it should be challenged as soon as possible?If this guy is intimidated by a city logo that was there before he was born he needs help, not media exposure.
I never said that they should fold. I simply pointed out that they have that option, and they should accept responsibility for not taking that option. Complaining about someone "forcing" a city to defend a case is like complaining about a defendant refusing to plead guilty, thereby "forcing" a city to spend money prosecuting a case. This case isn't clear cut, but I've seen this argument so much that I don't have much patience. For instance, there are fundies complaining about how schools "have to" spend all this money defending the pledge, instead of using it for more useful purposes. Well, if they're so strapped for case, why are they throwing it away on trying to keep the pledge?So you think that they should fold? Why? Because of a couple of people who are offended?
You don't understand what's religious about crosses?In what way is a logo "establishment of religion"?
Yes I am, I mentioned that several times too
What info would you like to know? My SS numbers is .....![]()
Uh, I think you mean Holiday Candle Holder, right?BUT, should the city then put up a menorah, and other winter holiday symbols, next to the Christmas Tree, in order to be equitable to its diverse residents?
Uh, I think you mean Holiday Candle Holder, right?
And it's not a Nativity scene; it's a representation of The Homeless in Our Midst!Celebratory candle holder!
It has nothing to do with Holy-days.
Did you live there before and after the Cold War seemed to end? What interests me the most is how those changes affected ordinary people there. Might be fodder for another thread at this point.
Would somebody explain to me why the city of Boston feels the need to burn taxpayer money with a big honkin' decorated tree to begin with?