My dad and step-mom are such a trip...
Moms View Message Board: The Kitchen Table (Debating Board): My dad and step-mom are such a trip...
I get this email asking me to sign an online petition through a conservative group, from my step-mom.
It says that we should be angry that stores don't put "Christmas" on their signs, etc.
I'm sorry, but it really doesn't bother me that I'm a Christian and that the word "Christmas" is not attached to commercialism. There's apparently this huge war over this and I'm thinkin', why?
I would actually love it if "Christmas" were taken off of every sign in the commercial realm.
I just think my parents are missing the point of what to fight for and that their energy is better spent actually helping and spreading the word of God to those around them.
I wonder how they would like it if they saw signs everywhere that said "Happy Hanukkah"! I just don't get them.
By the way, I wrote back in disagreement and said the same thing. My dad called me today and went off for 10 minutes about the subject. We aren't going to change each other's minds but we both like to put in our 2 cents. 
Reminds me of this funny forward I got today
(Warning: Contains cartoon profanity so I wouldn't listen to it in front of the kiddos.)
http://www.illwillpress.com/xmas.html
In my view, it's kind of saddening to see Christmas taken out of everything, Christmas parades either being taken away or names changed and people whining about religeon but I just remind myself that is just a little more preaching i'll have to do for my children so they don't phase God out of their lives too. I'd personally sign the petition but I wouldn't go riot about it. You are right, they are missing the point about spreading the word of Christ. And i'd love to see Happy Hanukkah displayed somewhere. It's about equality with religeons, not totally wiping them out of America.
I think in the minds of a lot of people, egged on by some religious "leaders" and some talk-show hosts, using "holiday" instead of "Christmas" is tied in with the whole school prayer, government/religion thing, and with the lawsuits when government agencies use tax dollars to put up manger displays at this time of year.
Personally, I'm with you - the "Christmas" that is celebrated in shopping malls and town squares is not my "Christmas". The secular world, particularly the commercial world, has pretty much taken over two of the most important days on the Christian calendar - Christmas and Easter. For me, there are two events - Xmas, the gift exchange, advertised, Rudolph and Frosty and Grinch holiday; and Christmas, Christ-mass, when I go to church to celebrate in song and story that "It came to pass in those days".
I also think it is simply silly of the stores, municipalities, etc., to not call it Christmas. A bit too much PC, even for me. They should, if they want to keep all their customers/taxpayers happy, also throw in Hannukah and Kwanza, but that probably takes too much space. Which, come to think of it, is probably why they say Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas.
Finally - it's the store's money, and they are entitled to put whatever they want on their signs. And it's your dad's & step-mom's money, which they are entitled to spend or not spend wherever they wish. I agree, I think their energy would be better spent elsewhere, but it's not my decision.
Interestingly, a lot of orthodox and other really religious Jews really don't like the way Hannukah has been conflated with Christmas. They say that a celebration of a miracle, which included small gifts to help the children remember and celebrate the miracle, has been blown up into a really big deal , sort of a Jewish Christmas, when it really isn't that big a deal in Judaism. Certainly nothing like Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. (Of course, it would be really hard to make a big commercial thing of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement.) The story I have heard is that Jews started making Hannukah a big thing because of the timing, so their children would have a gift-receiving event to celebrate when their Christian schoolmates were talking about Christmas.
Here's an editorial from the NY Times about this topic. I'm going to see if I can create an actual link.
Christmas-Holiday
I did it! Tadah! First successful link.
I have always been saddened as well by the commercialization of Christmas. Used to be you never saw Christmas items in stores until just before Thanksgiving. Now, it's up even before Halloween!!!
Not too long ago, when the Grinch movie came out (with Jim Carrey) I remember seeing all the toys with the likeness of the ugly green dude everywhere in my local Meijer store. I mean, they (toy manufacturers and marketers) get a theme going, and go totally overboard with it, bombarding the market with so much stuff it makes my head spin.
And have you noticed that with the rush to get "The Deal" on the Black Friday people have turned into greedy flesh-eating animals hunting their first prey after a long winter's nap? Totally the opposite of what the season is supposed to be about.
No, I don't necessarily join the chorus in the effort to keep the word Christmas in the retail world.
However, I think that there is a concerted effort to abolish any and all reference to Christianity in particular in the secular world, regardless of the season. Something to do with "separation of church and state" or everyone else's right not to be offended.
My opinion- Why can't we all just get along? Why can't Christianity exist in a nation side by side with all the other religions?
Lisa, it isn't "separation of church and state". The only thing the First Amendment says is : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...". Over the years the Supreme Court has ruled that this means that no government body, federal, state or local, shall use tax dollars to promote a specific religion (i.e., manger scenes = Christianity; manger scenes + Menorah + Kwanza symbol = important December holiday observances). What businesses do, so long as they don't discriminate against their employees or customers with respect to religious observance, is totally the decision of the business and the law and courts don't get involved. But if, for instance, a number of persons identifying themselves as Jews complains in writing to the business that they feel excluded by the businesses' (never know how to apostrophize that) use of the word Christmas, or if the PR person is feeling particularly PC, the business will use "Holiday" instead of "Christmas".
And it doesn't take very many written complaints - I have heard the theory is that for every person who writes a letter, there are at least 100 people out there who feel the same way but don't write a letter. I'm not sure that ratio applies in these days of e-mail, but still, there are likely to be a lot more unhappy people than those who actually write or e-mail.
I agree, why can't Christianity exist in a nation side by side with other religions? But, the people who are demanding that prayer be restored to schools - are they willing to live with Protestant prayers one day, Jewish prayers another day, Moslem prayers and Catholic prayers on other days, plus prayers from whatever other religious communities are represented in a particular school - Native American, Sikh, Buddhist, etc.?
I don't think there is "a concerted effort to abolish any and all reference to Christianity in particular in the secular world". I do think that Fox News, O'Reilly, and some others have taken this up as a battlecry. Oh, there are some really die-hard, fight to the last ditch avowed atheists out there who file lawsuits to remove "In God We Trust" from currency, etc., but that is a very small handful of persons with no influence and, to date, no success in their lawsuits.
If you don't think Christianity exists side by side with all other religions, count the number of religious programs on public radio on Sundays, and see how many are Christian and how many are other religions. Count the number of public service announcements about events on any commercial radio station that are about religious observances and see how many are for Christian observances and how many for other faiths. Congress still has a Christian chaplain, to the best of my knowledge, and opens with prayers every session, as do most legislative bodies (for all the good it does).
This whole thing about Protestant Christians being a picked-on minority is a manufactured non-truth, right up there with WASP males being victims of discrimination. There is the occasional and highly publicized event of discrimination, but by and large, the majority is the majority and enjoys the privileges of being in the the majority.
Lisa - I wonder if sometimes the backlash against Christianity (I see it too) isn't a reaction against actions mentioned in Ginny's first paragraph. The differnet viewpoints are so concerned with pushing their own ideas and issues that we all we get is this tension.
Personally, whether it's Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays is a non issue with me. It's a secular and a religious holiday and both have a right to celebrate it as they will. How I celebrate it and what I call it is up to me. Though I sort of like the trend of Happy Holidays because it creates a distinction between it and the religious holiday.
That is an excellent point, Dawn - "the trend of Happy Holidays because it creates a distinction between it and the religious holiday." Personally, I have always very much resented the commercial kidnapping of my religious holiday, and your comment has gret value. If you don't mind, I am going to borrow it (and I will give credit).
I second that Ginny - great point Dawn.
No problem Ginny. I hadn't actually been able to clarify or express exactly how I felt about Christmas until I wrote that post.
I wonder when people will protest the words "Happy Holidays", which means "Holy days"?
And, I wonder if some liberals who get days off of work for Christmas would still b!tch if they were no longer given those days off due to the mix of religion and work? hhhhmm....
Heidi, you are sort of mixing apples and oranges. Again, the First Amendment only applies to government bodies, not private businesses. Whether businesses give their employees certain days off or not is between them and the employees, and has nothing to do with the First Amendment, separation of church and state, or any of this holiday/Christmas nonsense.
The only exceptions, where private businesses have to consider religious issues, have to do with discrimination. An employer may not discriminate, either in hiring or during employment, because of an individual's religion or religious practices. And, where possible without major interference with the operation of the business, the employer must make reasonable accomodate to an employee on the basis of religious practices. For example, a large employer cannot require a 7th Day Adventist or Jew to work on Saturdays (Sabbath); but if it is a very small business and the employer must have Saturday coverage, the employer can refuse to hire someone who won't/can't work on Saturday for religious reasons. While I can't imagine an employee being offended by being given a day off with pay, I also suspect the employer would not have to "accomodate" by having the employee work that day if the business is officially closed and it would be costly to have that employee only work. Many employers make other kinds of accomodations - mine is closed Thanksgiving and the day after, Christmas, Good Friday, New Years Eve and New Years Day, and allows 2 personal days off with pay for employees who have other religious holidays (Yom Kippur, for example, or Rosh Hashanah). Many businesses make such an accomodation.
This whole foofaraw about holiday/Christmas is really a non-issue, imo,except for O'Reilly, Fox News, and the American Family Association. The AFA has targeted Target (how often do you get the chance to say that?), saying Target has decided to stop using Christmas in their ads and in the store. According to Urban Legends, this may well be true. Urban Legends Target
So, Target is free to advertise as it wishes, and AFA and others are free to boycott as they wish. But really, aren't there more important things to care about - not the least of which is the commercial hijacking of a major religious observance.
I don't think too many people are heeding this boycott. Our local Target was plenty busy yesterday! As Emily observed, everytime we turned around, we had to accomodate a person in our midst.
I honestly can't tell you if I saw the word Christmas at Target, or not. I really wasn't paying attention.
Petition Page
Snopes Page about Target
Ginny wrote-
Over the years the Supreme Court has ruled that this means that no government body, federal, state or local, shall use tax dollars to promote a specific religion (i.e., manger scenes = Christianity; manger scenes + Menorah + Kwanza symbol = important December holiday observances).
I don't care to debate the topic, I just have a question. Why does the White House still do a huge to do with the Christmas tree? And who pays for that? Ok so it was 2 questions.
Well, up until very recently, no one equated "Christmas Tree" with a relgious observance. The Christmas Tree tradition was generally considered part of the secular holiday. Which makes sense, as there is absolutely nothing religious about a Christmas Tree, unless you want to go back into German pre-Christian mythology or Druidism (which personally I don't).
And, I think those who have made the move to "Holiday Tree" are really rather silly. A lit, decorated tree is part of the Christmas tradition, just as a Menorah is part of the Hannukah tradition, or coins wrapped in red paper is part of the Chinese New Year tradition. Some things are just so closely linked in most people's minds (in this country, at least) that it is silly to go through all this PC maneuvering.
Please understand - there are times when I am PC, though I personally dislike that phrase very much. I try to be gender neutral when talking or writing about situations where the gender is unknown or doesn't matter, rather than always saying he, or she. I try to use African American (though I frequently forget, as "Black" was the politically preferred usage when I was a young adult), and I never say "girl" when referring to a female over 18. (I hate being called a "girl" - when someone does, I say "I'm not a girl, I'm a 66 year old woman and have earned every wrinkle."
But in my opinion, a lot of people go too far - sometimes much too far, like Boston with their "Holiday Tree", or that Boston prep school a year or two ago that didn't do Mothers Day or Fathers Day because, it was reported, some children didn't have a mother or didn't have a father. Really, people should use a certain amount of common sense, instead of applying artificial rules without thinking.
Did anyone see Saturday Night Live? The opening skit was the re-lighting of the holiday tree and the chorus singing "hoilday" songs with all reference to Christmas taken out and replaced with nonsensical words. I thought it was a great parody of what happens when the holidays are made too politically correct.
Please understand - there are times when I am PC, though I personally dislike that phrase very much. I try to be gender neutral when talking or writing about situations where the gender is unknown or doesn't matter, rather than always saying he, or she. I try to use African American (though I frequently forget, as "Black" was the politically preferred usage when I was a young adult)
But that's just it...we are plain and simply too *politically correct.* All of the black people I am friends with and work with have no problem being called "black." Surely there are a few who want to be called AA, but just because someone's skin is darker does NOT mean they are from Africa. One of my co-workers is "black" and of Jamaican/Cajun/Hispanic descent. Same with calling people "Mexican." Many "Mexicans" in the U.S. are actually from Central American countries like Honduras, Guatamala, and El Salvador. I learned that when I taught ESL--very few were from Mexico and were insulted when called Mexicans. That universally preferred the term Latino or Hispanic. I know that because I point blank asked them what offended them and what they preferred. I work with people with all sorts of disabilities and when I am outside of my work environment and refer to deaf people as "deaf" you should see the uncomfortable looks. But...deaf people prefer to be called deaf, NOT hearing impaired. Hearing impaired people are people who have hearing that is impaired, but benefit from hearing aids. Deaf people have no hearing, do not benefit from hearing aids, usually use ASL to communicate, and often have a lot of deaf pride.
Anyway, a huge digression, but I find the whole "pc" thing very, very silly. I totally agree with using gender neutral language and that sort of thing, but one learns that in any introductory writing class. That's just simply good literary practice. The whole Christmas/holiday/winter joy--Happy ChristKwanzHannukah thing is more than ridiculous to me. "You say potato, I say potahto." I'll still shop at Target, if someone wishes me Happy Holidays I'll wish the same to them, and I will keep celebrating the birth of Christ with my Christmas tree and Christmas ornaments, and Christmas story out of Luke 2 the same way I do every year.
You make a good point, Pam, and I should have said that when I'm talking to a particular person or group, I use the nomenclature they prefer. It's only in other situations, such as writing here, that I try really hard to use what I understand to be the term preferred by most of the members of the group. And if I'm speaking of people from Mexico/Central/South America and I don't know their country of origin, I usually say Spanish-speaking. I was told by a Guatemalan friend to not say Hispanic, at least not to people who are refugees from his country - the Spaniards (Hispania) were the conquerers, and it is the people with Hispanic roots who are, by and large, the oppressors in his country. But so much of it is common sense - if you know what a person or group prefers, use that; if you don't, use the most polite form you know. Some of it, for me, is that I am a very political person and very involved with the liberal left, which tends to shape my language usage.
The whole "impaired" thing does bother me a bit - sometimes more than a bit. We've gone from crippled to handicapped to impaired, and I personally think "handicapped" is a better word. To me, "impaired" tends to feel like "flawed", and the people who are handicapped are certainly not flawed - they just have a problem in some area of their lives. (I used to describe my former boss as "directionally impaired" when I was asking for directions to the location he had to go to.) I know my dear mother much preferred the word handicapped.
As for learning gender neutral language in writing class - there is a generation gap there. When I was being taught, it was made very clear that the masculine pronoun took in the whole human race and to think otherwise was simply incorrect and silly. And with the English language not having any gender neutral tenses, it can get awkward.
Ginny, there are more government jobs out there than any other. So, it IS mixing the two ideas of religious holiday and breaks from work. Not to mention that there are a lot of publicly owned companies out there who contract their work through the government, hence being paid by public dollars.
This is a huge debate. They were talking about it on the radio.
Walmart was only going to put up happy holiday signs or something.
Big backlash. Now they are putting up Happy everything different holiday signs.
Golly gee, had a busy weekend and all my work's not done yet, so I haven't had time to sit and read this thread since I last posted.
Anyway, I'll just say for now that I understand the difference between a state and a private business and how a private business has the right to advertise any way they see fit, but that the whole "separation of church and state" thing applies only to gov't.
The impression that I get is that it is mainly the ones who throw fits over the "separation" issue who are also most likely the ones that businesses are afraid will get offended by references to Christmas.
There may be differences in venues, but the whole agenda is the same- to eliminate any and all references to Christianity in particular from the secular environment.
Okay, I'll be back later to finish reading!
Here is the final paragraph in a column by Charles C. Haynes, senior scholar at the First Amendment Center:
"If all sides take a deep breath and relax, we can work this out. But first we need to stop turning "happy holidays" or "Merry Christmas" into fighting words. Declaring a ceasefire in the Christmas wars might be the best way to celebrate the season of "peace on earth, goodwill toward men." "
Haynes
Very cool, Ginny. I'll send that to them.
Did anyone see the latest Target commercial? The dad is cramming the gifts into the van while mom and kids are at home waiting by the Christmas tree and wondering where he is. After dad comes home, they all dance around the tree, then we see the Target bullseye logo with "Merry Christmas" under it. Has Target given in to the pressure or was it a decision made independent of the flak its received? Does anyone know?
Off topic: Has anyone seen the Pampers commercial, "Peace on Earth"? A woman sings Silent Night over a succession of sleeping babies. It's a beautiful commercial.
You can watch that video here
http://us.pampers.com/en_US/poelanding.do;jsessionid=HRMBQW3TNTTAXQFIAJ0X0NI
Oh Lisa, that commercial is PRECIOUS! I can't wait until I have a little infant around again. All the "original" holiday songs making me teary eyed these days.
Awwww, I needed a kleenex!
Just wanted to point out that that is Cyndi Lauper who is singing in the Pampers commercial.
As to the topic at hand, I think everyone should just say what they want to, whether it be Happy Holiday, Merry Christmas, etc.
Yes, the AFA made Target cave. I'm a bit indifferent, to be honest.
I've noticed that at lot of the stores I'm going into, the cashiers aren't saying anything except the ususal, "Have a nice day." I wonder if this whole debate is why.
I did go into Nathan's and the cashier wished me a merry Christmas. I have to admit, I liked hearing that . However, I have no problem with the generic all inclusive business, unless you know what holiday the person celebrates.
Ame
I have not read all the replies, from the get go, I didn't understand the reason for wanting stores to promote Merry Christmas, they sell items for the Holiday season all inclusive! I think the "beef" was started with good intentions, not being able to erect Nativity scenes etc where they may "offend" the non-christians than it just hit a slippery slope and all of a sudden, you should only by a hamburger from a chain with Merry Christmas being shouted from the roof top!
|
Members
