Merry Christmas ACLU
I'm sick of seeing anything remotly connected to Christmas being forced from the American landsacpe. The ACLU is behind most, if not all of it. So I thought we should all get together and send a Christmas card to the folks over at the ACLU.
I once sent a Meat Lover's pizza to the folks at PETA. Never even got a thank you but it's the thought that counts. If you care to send a bit of Christmas cheer to the lost people at the ACLU here s the address:
ACLU of PA
Greater Pittsburgh Chapter
313 Atwood St.
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
View blog reactions
posted by Shaun Pierce @ 12/17/2004
9 comments
links to this post
9 Comments:
Why are people who support the ACLU "lost?" You just don't understand. As far as I understand, the ACLU is for the removal of religious imagery from public/government property. Decorate your own yard with as many baby Jesuses (?) as you want. Why do you feel the need to shove it down my throat?
Oh, and very Christian sending a Meat Lover's pizza to PETA. Merry fucking Christmas to you too.
His, well, earthy vocabulary aside, I have to agree with Scooter on this one (Hey, Scooter!).
If anything, the Constitution promises a "hands off" policy when it comes to The State dealing with religion. It can neither force us to worship nor stop us from worshipping (This has to be the truth - even Fred Honsberger said this on the air recently!). But places like City Hall (or any government building for that matter) are no place for an official religious observance - sorry, the Constitution says so.
But I am not sure where you get the notion that "anything remotely connected to Christmas is being forced from the American Landscape." The Charlie Brown Christmas Special has been on the air each year for decades, hasn't it? And Linus tells Charlie Brown what the true meaning of Christmas is - with liberal quotations from Scripture, doesn't he? If what you say is true, then how has that cartoon survived all these years?
Mike
Honsmanlies.blogspot.com
Oh the pizza bit was funny! You know I considered droping the post by Scooter because of the language but it proves his mindset so I'll leave it up... To answer him, anyone who denys Christ is lost. Public property is owned by the public. We should all have equal access to it. Government represents that public and should provide freedom of religion not freedom from it. Offending someone is not against the law.
As for Mike, I would read the Constitution a bit closer. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (You might want to read those last 6 words over again)I'm sure when they figure out how to sue a cartoon character they will. In the meantime, while you are watching "Charile Brown's Christmas" the ACLU is intimidating the U.S. Defense Department into ending its sponsorship of Boy Scout troops, threatening to sue an abstinence website because it mentions God, attempting to outlaw Christmas displays, hushing kids from singing Christmas carols in public and making "Chirstmas" a dirty word. In response to this insanity, red and green have been banned in some places. Trees are now religious symbols! Come on... you gotta admit this is all getting really out of hand. Mike you should leave Fred behind and tune us in.
Mon-Fri. 3p-6p 101.5 WORD FM Your welcome anytime.
Merry Christams. Yeah I said it. So sue me!
I plugged this post on my blog and the comments have really been flying (and all mine are clean!). Come on over and join the scrum.
Yea you! I agree 100%. Someone posted a comment about shoving our Christianity dow their throat-did they ever look at it the other way-non-christianity is being shoved down our throats by the ACLU? I am so tired of hearing that phrase. The separation of church and state means that there should not be a state mandated reiligion. Not that there can't be mention of religion or displaying of religion by the government.
The PETA thing was funny too. I love animals-but they go too far too.
Have a merry CHRISTmas.!
-macbeaner
Funny!
Yes, I'm sure a great way to start a controversy is to send a pizza over to PETA!....well the controversy was already there, but, what the hell.
I tend to agree on both sides of the isle (if at all possible). The ACLU does have the right to look out for their own interests which would be to eliminate the mention of a creator. Similarly, the evangelicals of the world do have the right to try and eliminate the promotion of secularism in all aspects of life, may it be commerce, sports, education, and probably their biggest one of all....Government! I lean in favor of the evangelicals of the world believing in the authority of scripture and Christ, the salvation for whom all are called to his name. But, I also recognize that organizations, whether they be Christian or not, do have the right and opportunity to persue their own interests.
I tend to agree that the foundations of our constitution are framed with Christianity in mind but there is something to be said for the argument by those who recognize how many Deists had their hands in the creations of our frame work as well. This is not to say that we throw the baby out with the bath water by any means. But, I do think it says that we have to accept some sort of tolerance on both sides of the isle. Mutual exhistence, well maybe, but you can still believe what you want to believe in this country. I far as I'm concerned any more.....if it bothers you so much to hear about what one organization of thought is doing to destroy another organization's hierarchy of thought, then you're not comfortable with your own. This whole idea of everything being offensive to each other. He said this and that's offensive to me or she said that and that's offensive to me. If you're really offended then I'm not so sure that you're really comfortable and understanding of your own position.
Let the ACLU do their thing and we'll do ours.
As for someone using profanity on your blog......it's just that, a blog, who cares. And for you guys to throw that in his face like you're "hollier than though".
Paul says, [my sin is greater], so cut the guy some slack.
I have to admit, I felt a little remorse from using the "f-word" in my earlier comment. Normally I don't speak or write like that, but the sentiment is genuine. We can argue about individual ACLU cases all day, but the point still stands that public/government property is not the place for overtly religious imagery. (nativities, etc.) As much as you want to insist that we're a Christian nation, last time I checked we are a democratic republic, not a theocracy. As far as businesses go, that's their decision. Why do you really care whether or not you see "Merry Christmas" in place of "Happy Holidays" in a mall? What about the "overcommercialization" of Christmas? That's a cause I could almost get behind. A previous commenter mentioned "A Charlie Brown Christmas." This special stands out today for three reasons: First, the overtly religious theme, which I have absolutely no problem with. Second, its consistent assault on overcommercialization. Can you see if a Christmas cartoon today said the same thing? Rightwingers would probably be criticizing it for its "socialist" message. Third, while being overtly Christian in its theme, the show utlimately makes the plea for "peace on earth, goodwill to all men," basically, peace, love, and understanding. This sentiment is sadly missing from the current debate; in its place is rhetoric claiming that there is a "downward spiral to the left" and that opponents are mounting an "attack on Christ." (Actual quotes) I've been posting lately on my blog about the controversy; leave a comment sometime if you want. And I promise I'll never swear at you again.
People who don't want to celebrate CHRISTmas should not celebrate it. They should pick another day of the year to do all they want to do for the "Holiday Season" and leave CHRISTmas alone. I don't see anyone complaining about Hanukkah or Kwanza, trying to change the names.
The meat lovers pizza to PETA was great. I mean, it fulfills the mission started by Jesus, doing unto others and the protection of those who are unable to protect themselves. The New Testament speaks against those who display their faith pulicly, instead, the focus should be on a quiet reflecting faith. I, however, have decorated my tree according to the dictates of the Book of Matthew, and we have hung are stockings in the way that Jesus told as...you know, as he was defending and befriending the poor, the weak, the sinful. I applaud those who have real faith, and try to live a truly Christian lifestyle. Those who are not proud, or boastful, those who show concern and compassion for their fellow human beings, regardless of creed. Jesus stated render unto...meaning that even He did not want to get involved with government.
Merry Christmas
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home