Christmas: Religious Censorship - For all or for none?

[Holly Drew]

What do you think? Should Christmas be censored or should it be spoken freely? Should schools be celebrating it? Can we celebrate Christmas and not be religious or Christmas a religious thing only?

Should the image of the naivety (Birth of Jesus) or other religious icons be removed from the publics eye? 

 

If you have an interest in this discussion check out the discussion of the commercialization of Christmas;

 

 http://nerdfighters.ning.com/forum/topics/commercialization-of-chri...

 

If you are interested in this discussion, you can check out this Ben Stein article posted on the Christmas Billboard Blog site. 

http://looking4christmas.blogspot.com/2011/11/ben-stein.html

While your there check out how you can get involved.

http://looking4christmas.blogspot.com/ 

 

[Holly Drew]

I'm pretty much on the fence with this. I can understand that it can annoying and should be left out of advertisements. However I have heard of cases (don't quote me on this look it up for yourselves) where people were offended by religious icons on their neighbours lawns, or at schools or even outside of churches . . . I think its their choice and their right, if they choose to do so. I think people should just respect each others life choices. As long as your not forcing your beliefs onto me I don't care. Go about your business. You can say to me "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Hanukkah" or "Seasons Greetings" and I'll probably reply "Same to you." 
I prefer to celebrate Christmas so that is what I will be doing this year. I'm not offended if you talk about what your going to be celebrating or display religious icons, during this time or any other time of the year. I think there should be more discussions about what other cultures are doing over the holidays because we will most likely find that there are more similarities between us then there are differences. 

[Aleksandra Gieralt]

Totally agree with you on this.  I celebrate Christmas (am Christian), although I am looking into celebrating Hanukkah (or is that spelled Chanukkah) as well.  Kwanza is a non-religious holiday, and you can be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Pagan, Atheist or whatever to celebrate it.  Eid doesn't always fall around Christmas time, but, because there were lots of Muslims in my dorm, I celebrated it last year around Christmas (it was my first Eid :D).

I think that, rather than focus on one holiday or general "holidays," we should focus on learning about all the holidays that go on this time from all religious and secular traditions.  As you said, we'll probably find more similarities than differences, although I rather like to learn about the way other cultures celebrate and incorporate that into my own celebrations.

 

Personally I usually say "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays" or both, never "Season Greetings" (because I find that it makes no grammatical sense, and doesn't "Happy Holidays" mean the same thing anyways?), and, like you, I will reply with "Same to  you" when someone wishes me a merry/happy whatever.  And if I know someone is celebrating Hanukkah or Eid, I will say "Happy Hanukkah" and/or "Happy Eid."

[God ~blogs admin ~]

Something I wrote a wee while ago.

 

"I'm a libertarian, do what you want as long as it doesn't affect others, basically. But as it were, if the holidays are nationalized by the state, and not simply ones own celebration of their faith, then its not 'christmas' its holidays, for even the Hindu will be enjoying time off work on these 'holidays'. By saying, merry Christmas, you're implying that they are christian, and too right they're taking offence. Why should one culture, allow another to ram its beliefs down another's throat?"

 

But yeah. Each to their own. If they want to wear a clothes, chains or whatever in praise of their god, go for it. But remember, it's a total holiday, not just Christians celebrate the winter solace. 

[Holly Drew]

Very true, well put.

[Josh Braun]

I like what my school does to make itself libel free.

 

It's called holiday break, not Christmas break. And we have a Christmas tree on the top of our school entrance and it's also called a holiday tree, not a Christmas tree. 

[Eystein,]

Most kids celebrate Chrismas, not Christmas anyway... and they worship Santa, not baby Jesus. So it's definitely not a religious thing only.

[Vertigo_One [Ops Mod]]

The thing is though, no other festival etc is so subverted by what other people know. For example, we know now that it was the Chinese and Vikings who first discovered America, and that Columbus didn't land on the American mainland at all at first. Yet no one questions his "discovery" of America in popular culture. Simmilarly, we know that Jesus wasn't born on the 25th of December and we know that the festival was most likly co-opted from pagans, but in this case the media etc allow that knowledge use against the Christians who want to celebrate the birth of Jesus by undermining their relevence.

[Abreo]

I don't think thats how it works.

 

Christmas is as close to a guaranteed day off as you can get, hell if you have a good job you might have more days than just that. So almost everybody is off work and out of school and everybody knows their supposed to spend time with their family during this season so its a good excuse for people of any religious background to get together. As a result the "meaning of Christmas" has extended far beyond Jesus. So the media isn't undermining the relevance of Jesus and the holidays but merely realizing that for most people, even most Christians in my experience, the importance of Christmas has little to do with Jesus. It has more to do with family and friends (and an increase in the suicide rate among those with no family or friends). Its not some religious hatred that the media has for Christians thats driving this. In America we even had/have(?) the War on Christmas which is more than just a bit on the Colbert Report. I really have no idea how worldwide this was actually but thats only because I hardly care for it. It was driven (made up) by the media over here so at least Fox news is on your side (although I'm sure you don't want that).

 

Not to mention if you make the holidays too religiously specific in America you'll probably get sued which is ridiculous to say the least. 

 

Great, now I'm done sounding like a freaking Christmas special. I'm going to have to reclaim my manliness somehow. Ugh, I'm gonna just down some bourbon and kill a lion with my bare hands or something. 

 

[Vertigo_One [Ops Mod]]

As a result the "meaning of Christmas" has extended far beyond Jesus.

 

Erm...no it hasn't. Yes people get days off, but why? Surely that should be questioned and that should be the focus of the discussion. You're just not following cause and effect through.

[Abreo]

Yes I am. The cause of getting days off in the first place is Jesus, the effect is that people spend time with their families when they normally couldn't and now the effect of that is that people begin to ignore the Jesus aspect of it and focus on the friends and family aspect especially when they get the opportunity to be with people whom they love but don't see often enough. I was raised Catholic, older members of my family thought my schizophrenic great uncle was possessed by the devil and I haven't even heard them mention Jesus during the holidays. My grandparents are just happy to see everybody. Its basic logic, people love people. 

[Vertigo_One [Ops Mod]]

Yes I am. The cause of getting days off in the first place is Jesus, the effect is that people spend time with their families when they normally couldn't and now the effect of that is that people begin to ignore the Jesus aspect of it and focus on the friends and family aspect especially when they get the opportunity to be with people whom they love but don't see often enough.

 

But isn't that just basically justifying ignorance. IE now that people are so wrapped up in the affect, they forget about the cause? How is that right and fair. If someone does something great, and it has great effects, people should not get so wrapped up in the effects that they do not consider the person who caused them. 

 

If X invents something, and it has Y good consequences, shouldn't X recieve praise/thanks etc?

 

Now obviously, the word "invents" doesn't quite work in this context, but the principle is the same. Bottom line, the media should give focus to the cause as well as the effects.

[Abreo]

But isn't that just basically justifying ignorance. IE now that people are so wrapped up in the affect, they forget about the cause? How is that right and fair. If someone does something great, and it has great effects, people should not get so wrapped up in the effects that they do not consider the person who caused them. 

Honestly, I think Jesus wouldn't be upset with this. People don't focus on him but everybody is still together and happy and being with those that they love because of him. I don't see why he would be bothered by that. 

 

If X invents something, and it has Y good consequences, shouldn't X recieve praise/thanks etc?

 

I wouldn't mind if I was the cause of celebration even if nobody knew my name. I would just be happy that I made so many other people happy.

 

Now obviously, the word "invents" doesn't quite work in this context, but the principle is the same. Bottom line, the media should give focus to the cause as well as the effects.

 

The media has no opinion, it's not even a thing its more of an idea. The media shows people what they want to see. The problem started with people not focusing on Jesus, the media is run by people so it followed after.