Hmm.  I don't think the government "exists to protect the majority" in
this case, either.  I do think the government responds to the will of
the majority in this case - and I'm fine with that.  I also think the
government has free-exercise obligations that are equal to its non-
establishment obligations, and the tension between these leaves plenty
of room for closing on Christmas if it's justified correctly.

Aaron

On Sep 1, 8:57 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to