Overall, I don't think that government, in this context, exists to protect the majority.
On Sep 1, 6:53 pm, Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Come on, Clog. You can do better than that. Your first argument is > an example of the semantic fallacy. By that logic, you should be > arrested for being a lady-killer. ;-) There's also a hint of the > genetic fallacy.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy > > You'll notice I don't deny that Christmas is a religious holiday. I > deny that it is "entirely" so. In fact, I suspect that the secular > aspect of Christmas is larger than the religous these days. > > The Free Exercise Clause is equal to (not subordinate to) the > Establishment Clause. (Santa Clause is bigger than both, of course.) > If the rationale behind government closure is this: "the government > acknowledges Jesus as Lord and encourages all citizens to celebrate > his birth," that would be unconstitutional. > > If, on the other hand, the rationale is more like this: "the > government is constitutionally obligated to respect the people's right > to exercise religion. Most of our religious employees are Christians > who celebrate Christmas. Most of our non-religious employees still > have cherished family traditions on these days. So, we've decided > it's easier to just close shop rather than try to find people like > Clogtowner to hold down the fort for us," then that's perfectly > constitutional. > > The fact that people can visit their friends and families on other > days is irrelevant. Millions of families, religous and secular, have > a tradition of gathering on Christmas. So many, in fact, that the > government continues to cater to their wishes. You'd almost suspect > we live in a democracy! > > Aaron > > On Sep 1, 2:37 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi y'all - Aha! an argument at last, albeit devoid of foundation. > > > >Your assertion that Christmas is > > > "entirely a religious holiday" is patently absurd > > > If it is absurd, why is it officially called "Christmas Day." How can > > christmas day be described any other way than religious? If it is > > secular, why not give it a secular name and choose a day other than > > "Jesus' Birthday?" > > > > Taking time off work to visit family or participate in family traditions > > > Does this have to be performed on a religious holiday? Aren't there > > 364 other possibilties? I contend that by voluntarily participating, > > one not only condones but encourages the pernicious practice. > > > <Your understanding of church-state separation disallows the closing > > of government offices on days that have religious > > significance. My understanding does not necessarily disallow it. > > > How can you possibly affirm that a mandatory closing down of the > > Government, requiring compliance from most other businesses, on a > > Christian holiday, is not promoting a religion? A clear breach of the > > first Amendment! Please clarify how your understanding does not > > disallow it. > > > < So, your Christmas rituals > > > I submit that I do not have Christmas rituals. I try to live out the > > day as I would normally - eating out, shopping, lustful gazes at the > > opposite sex. The wall that the Government erects in the name of > > Christianity tries to prevent me. If you can suggest a simpler > > normality on that special day, I'll be happy to hear it. Don't tell me > > to turn on the TV or radio. Perhaps I should hide in the closet - but > > that wouldn't be normal. > > > Nevertheless - I'll be happy to share the brandy with you in a > > suitable location. > > > On Sep 1, 1:35 pm, Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Well, Clogtowner, I think you've carefully chosen a definition of > > > "observe" that fits your bias. Your assertion that Christmas is > > > "entirely a religious holiday" is patently absurd. Taking time off > > > work to visit family or participate in family traditions does not make > > > anyone a "hypocritical" atheist. The mere disbelief in gods requires > > > nothing of us, so there's nothing to be hypocritical about! One can > > > be dishonest, perhaps, by pretending to believe, but not hypocritical. > > > > We can be hypocritical about other things, though - political and > > > economic beliefs, for example. That's what you're really talking > > > about. Your understanding of church-state separation disallows the > > > closing of government offices on days that have religious > > > significance. My understanding does not necessarily disallow it. > > > Your economic and social beliefs prefer businesses that stay open on > > > religious holidays. Not so much with me. > > > > So, your Christmas rituals are consistent with your political, social > > > and economic beliefs. Mine are, too. We just have (slightly) > > > different beliefs about those things. Logically speaking, atheism has > > > nothing to do with it. Even religious people could share our > > > political positions. > > > > If you want to talk politics, though, we have to bring out the brandy. > > > > Aaron- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
