SAD CHRISTMAS NEWS FROM PARLIMENT HILL

[blueblood]

1) Whose tradition is it?

2) Harper doesn't pass legislation, parliament does.

3) Whose expression rights are being trampled?

1) Those who celebrate Christmas

2) Harper is the face of government, for all intents and purposes he does

3) Those who want to put up a nativity scene.

Socons who don't like gay pride parades because it offends them are told to go fly a kite

People in gov't who would want to put up a nativity scene are told to go fly a kite because it could offend someone.

It's a case of Heads I win, tails you lose.

[cybercoma]

It's a religious holiday whether you want it to or not. Lights are part of the birthday party. Anyone who celebrates christmas is celebrating his birthday party, no nativity scene, no lights.

Although Christmas is seen as a religious holiday by those that are Christian and believe that it is the birth of Christ, there are many people that are not Christian whom still celebrate Christmas, not as a religious holiday, but as a holiday of family and charity. There are people that celebrate Christmas without any reference or acknowledgment of the birth of Christ. The commercialization of the holiday has made it this way. Further still, there are many Canadians that do not celebrate Christmas at all. There are other holidays at this time of year, such as, hannukah, kwanzaa and ramadan. There are some Christian religions that don't celebrate Christmas until January and others still that don't believe in displaying the nativity. So, you're only half right. Christmas is a religious holiday, but only to those that are religious. There are many Canadians that are not religious or from different religions that still celebrate the holiday without ascribing the religious dogma to it.

Regardless, that is so far from the point that it doesn't even matter. Parliament is the representation of all Canadians and as such, it should not be affiliated with a single religion to the exclusion of all others. The government is not a person, so its rights are not being impeded. It's a matter of inclusion, justice and equal governance.

[cybercoma]

1) Those who celebrate Christmas

2) Harper is the face of government, for all intents and purposes he does

3) Those who want to put up a nativity scene.

Socons who don't like gay pride parades because it offends them are told to go fly a kite

People in gov't who would want to put up a nativity scene are told to go fly a kite because it could offend someone.

It's a case of Heads I win, tails you lose.

1) Those who celebrate Christmas can put up a nativity. The government should not.

2) I'll repeat it for emphasis, since clearly you don't understand where your mistake is:

Stephen Harper does not PASS legislation, parliament does.

3) Those who want to put up a nativity scene can. The government is not a person, it is a group and as such does not have individual rights. Furthermore, the government needs to be representative of all Canadians and as such should not be seen as having a particular religion to the exclusion of all others. The government for this reason should not be displaying a nativity scene, whereas individual politicans or civil servants can and may do so on their own properties.

[blueblood]

Although Christmas is seen as a religious holiday by those that are Christian and believe that it is the birth of Christ, there are many people that are not Christian whom still celebrate Christmas, not as a religious holiday, but as a holiday of family and charity. There are people that celebrate Christmas without any reference or acknowledgment of the birth of Christ. The commercialization of the holiday has made it this way. Further still, there are many Canadians that do not celebrate Christmas at all. There are other holidays at this time of year, such as, hannukah, kwanzaa and ramadan. There are some Christian religions that don't celebrate Christmas until January and others still that don't believe in displaying the nativity. So, you're only half right. Christmas is a religious holiday, but only to those that are religious. There are many Canadians that are not religious or from different religions that still celebrate the holiday without ascribing the religious dogma to it.

Regardless, that is so far from the point that it doesn't even matter. Parliament is the representation of all Canadians and as such, it should not be affiliated with a single religion to the exclusion of all others. The government is not a person, so its rights are not being impeded. It's a matter of inclusion, justice and equal governance.

I'm not saying to exclude anyone. They can have a nativity scene, the jewish candle, and a statue for baal set up there for all I care.

[blueblood]

1) Those who celebrate Christmas can put up a nativity. The government should not.

2) I'll repeat it for emphasis, since clearly you don't understand where your mistake is:

Stephen Harper does not PASS legislation, parliament does.

3) Those who want to put up a nativity scene can. The government is not a person, it is a group and as such does not have individual rights. Furthermore, the government needs to be representative of all Canadians and as such should not be seen as having a particular religion to the exclusion of all others. The government for this reason should not be displaying a nativity scene, whereas individual politicans or civil servants can and may do so on their own properties.

The gov't can present itself how it wants, if people don't like it then that sucks to be them. The current gov't is right of centre, a lot of people don't like it, and it sucks to be them.

A lot of people don't celebrate christmas period, are they excluded for the gov't putting lights up? Why the double standard? By your logic, parliament should be bare.

[cybercoma]

Evidently, your goal is to misrepresent everything I say to convince yourself that your argument is more sound than you think. I've made my case about everything you have said in your last post. If you can't understand what I've said about the difference between the nativity and christmas lights or why the government should not be seen as holding a religious belief, then I'm sorry. But any further discussion on the topic will be less than productive, since you're now going in circles.

[blueblood]

Evidently, your goal is to misrepresent everything I say to convince yourself that your argument is more sound than you think. I've made my case about everything you have said in your last post. If you can't understand what I've said about the difference between the nativity and christmas lights or why the government should not be seen as holding a religious belief, then I'm sorry. But any further discussion on the topic will be less than productive, since you're now going in circles.

Some people who don't celebrate christmas at all are excluded because the Christmas lights are up. If your going to censor christmas then it's all or nothing. Anything else is a double standard.

[cybercoma]

I've already explained how Christmas has been usurped as a secular holiday by those who don't believe in the Christian mythology of it. Christmas lights are a decoration of the season, which is no longer necessarily a religious one, regardless of its origins. And believe me, you don't want to get into origins, since Christmas was taken from a pagan holiday anyway. Now I'm not saying Christmas is NOT religious because certainly it is for those that believe in the religion they tie to it. But Christmas is not religious for everyone, making Christmas lights a non-religious symbol of the holiday, whereas Jesus cannot be separated from the nativity. The nativity is strictly a depiction of a religious event.

Really, this is pointless. We're not going to see eye to eye. You're going to continue to defend against some misperceived slight against religion.

[Oleg Bach]

I've already explained how Christmas has been usurped as a secular holiday by those who don't believe in the Christian mythology of it. Christmas lights are a decoration of the season, which is no longer necessarily a religious one, regardless of its origins. And believe me, you don't want to get into origins, since Christmas was taken from a pagan holiday anyway. Now I'm not saying Christmas is NOT religious because certainly it is for those that believe in the religion they tie to it. But Christmas is not religious for everyone, making Christmas lights a non-religious symbol of the holiday, whereas Jesus cannot be separated from the nativity. The nativity is strictly a depiction of a religious event.

Really, this is pointless. We're not going to see eye to eye. You're going to continue to defend against some misperceived slight against religion.

The Romans removed the "mythical" Christ because he preached logic - much like Plato - and when you are running an empire based on deception of the mass - logic is dangerous - we celebrate the life of this great rebel who was willing to lay down his life, so the individual could give the state a run for it's money and defy the false power meant to control - It is was also a movement of un-dying hope - For instance - The Judge on Jarvis Street in Toronto removed the symbol of Christmas from the court building - because - those that saw it were filled with joy and hope - and to have joyous hopeful people enter into the court disempowered the stupid judge - so she attempted to humiliate and create a state of hopelessness to make all weak and her strong - that was not justice.

[cybercoma]

What does that have to do with Parliament Hill displaying a nativity scene?

[Sir Bandelot]

The Judge on Jarvis Street in Toronto removed the symbol of Christmas from the court building - because - those that saw it were filled with joy and hope - and to have joyous hopeful people enter into the court disempowered the stupid judge - so she attempted to humiliate and create a state of hopelessness to make all weak and her strong - that was not justice.

I doubt that those were her main motives for removing it. This has happened before elsewhere in courts in North America, often accompanied by protests from religious believers.

Someone earlier posted that the origin of "Christmas" is merely a ritual ceremony, and the date for this holiday is set to coincide with winter solstice on December 21. That is the day which the sun rises at its greatest southern declination. After that the sun begins rising more towards the north each day, and days start getting longer. Many cultures in the world have religious festivals during this time of year.

[Oleg Bach]

I doubt that those were her main motives for removing it. This has happened before elsewhere in courts in North America, often accompanied by protests from religious believers.

Someone earlier posted that the origin of "Christmas" is merely a ritual ceremony, and the date for this holiday is set to coincide with winter solstice on December 21. That is the day which the sun rises at its greatest southern declination. After that the sun begins rising more towards the north each day, and days start getting longer. Many cultures in the world have religious festivals during this time of year.

That's the usual come back - "ritual" - "solstice" and all the demeaning rationalization that is the great put down for a man that was the greatest freedom fighter off all time. I know the courts - and they are terrified of positive happy and hopeful people - People that believe in God will now bow fully to the court..the court wants to be God...

This is what took place in early soviet Russia - one of the prime questions the inquistion would ask of those that they thought to be non-compliant was "Do you believe in God" If you said yes or they suspected you were a believer - you would be falsely charged under some fraudulent civil law and executed - because you stook in the way of total state power....The same occured amongst the Jews during their first Zionist meeting back in about 1890 - Half of the partipants wanted to gain monitary and political power in the world - these were the proto-type of todays secualrists.

NOW the other half wanted to wait for devine salvation that would come with a messiah - so a schism occured . and Jews that were non-believers persecuted and helped to destroy the Jews that were believers and non-compliant pests...this in part led to the holocaust - Christmas is important -It allows believers to stand above the state - and that is good...For the state to have total control and for humans to play God leads to abuse of their fellows - ALWAYS.

[cybercoma]

I doubt that those were her main motives for removing it. This has happened before elsewhere in courts in North America, often accompanied by protests from religious believers.

Someone earlier posted that the origin of "Christmas" is merely a ritual ceremony, and the date for this holiday is set to coincide with winter solstice on December 21. That is the day which the sun rises at its greatest southern declination. After that the sun begins rising more towards the north each day, and days start getting longer. Many cultures in the world have religious festivals during this time of year.

I didn't entirely say it was entirely a ritual ceremony. There is no denying that it is a religious holiday for some, which is identified by things like the nativity scene; however, it is a ritual holiday for others and can be celebrated by decorations that have been usurped by the secular, such as Christmas lights and arguably the Christmas tree. For example (and it's anecdotal, I know), the few friends that I have had that I knew were Jewish, not only lit the Menorah, but also had a Christmas Tree in their home.

All of that aside, the point I have been making is that the government does not belong to a certain religion. If it displays holiday decorations that tie it to a religion, then it is proclaiming to belong to that religion. I don't believe our government should have a religion.

[cybercoma]

Oleg, the court is not a person and the government is not a person. They should not belong to a particular religion because they are there to serve and represent all people, regardless to what religion those people belong. Should the courts and government belong to a certain religion, it would no longer represent all people in society.

Perhaps it's difficult to understand because so many people are Christian in Canada. Look at it this way. What if the government and courts only put up decorations and displays as it pertains to Islam, but did not display anything to do with Christianity, would that be ok with you? Why or why not?

[Oleg Bach]

I didn't entirely say it was entirely a ritual ceremony. There is no denying that it is a religious holiday for some, which is identified by things like the nativity scene; however, it is a ritual holiday for others and can be celebrated by decorations that have been usurped by the secular, such as Christmas lights and arguably the Christmas tree. For example (and it's anecdotal, I know), the few friends that I have had that I knew were Jewish, not only lit the Menorah, but also had a Christmas Tree in their home.

All of that aside, the point I have been making is that the government does not belong to a certain religion. If it displays holiday decorations that tie it to a religion, then it is proclaiming to belong to that religion. I don't believe our government should have a religion.

Jews -Muslims - Christians and secularists all enjoyed the tree in the court house .............I believe the motivation of removing it was political correctness which is a tool for the mean spirited that operate under the guise of social benevolence and equality - Like I said - the judge attempted to destroy the good mood this symbol of hope provides...Let the people have hope....it costs the powers that be nothing - but hope is resented because it is power. So this is a power clash..........also - in the alternative - I saw a very large Menorah on the lawn of Queens Park last year during the holy day season...It inadvertantly spoke out saying the Jews own Queens Park...it was removed within an hour....Christmas is a holiday celebrating a Jew - who also loved gentiles....I would say the Christmas tree covers both - we can share.

[cybercoma]

This thread isn't about the christmas tree, it is about the nativity. It has already been recognized that some symbols of christmas (ie: lights, christmas trees, snowmen, santa, etc...) have been secularized. Your indignation about the removal of a christmas tree from a courthouse is beside the point.

[Oleg Bach]

Jezzzz - Glad I am at least "beside" the point - at least we are on the same page. AND you are correct about by "indignation" - you hit the point with that word! Christmas is about human dignity and any indignity against the person resulting from the removal of a symbol of human dignity really bugs me - I have a right as a human being to have dignity and to carry myself as a dignified person. As for the nativity scene - that shows the persecution of the rightful heir and king of Judea (king of the Jews) - I can see why the secularists don't like it. It brings about a feeling of guilt - One of the primary reason Jews and the State (Rome) are and were resented is that they collectively not only removed a rightful king from his throne but killed him doing it. Christmas is not about myth...It is about a fight for personal inheritance- Christ was killed because he was the rightful ownner of the Royal Lands of Judea - he was the king - Pilate knew that...so did the pesky land stealing lawyers that wanted Christ the King removed - it was a real-estate grab. Nothing more nothing less - to this day the curse of Christ is still on the holy land...You can check mate the king but killing him is a no no.

[madmax]

1) Whose tradition is it?

2) Harper doesn't pass legislation, parliament does.

So much for fun in the thread. Thanks cybercoma...........

1) Its a tradition of millions of Canadians.

2) Not if he closes down parliment.

[cybercoma]

So much for fun in the thread. Thanks cybercoma...........

Never discuss politics or religion at a party.

[Argus]

1) Whose tradition is it?

Christians. So what? If you like, we'll bring a girl up on the hill for a Muslim holiday, cut off her clit, then stone her to death.

That way, everyone's traditions get respected!

[cybercoma]

Christians. So what? If you like, we'll bring a girl up on the hill for a Muslim holiday, cut off her clit, then stone her to death.

That way, everyone's traditions get respected!

What religion is our government?