This is my "Athiests Who Don't Want To Ruin Religous People's Holidays" Thread.

[jazzjunkysue]

I sincerely want to accept the fact that we are all individuals and that there is plenty of room in this world, in america and on DU for all of us to hold our own personal beliefs.

When others see the world through a different lens than mine, and value the ancient stories as references to their personal understanding of their purpose in life, I'm frankly humbled and comforted.

I don't require others to agree with me and validate my vision of the world. I know my relationship to sprituality has changed over the decades, and am content that we all find meaning and purpose in different ways at different stages of our lives.

Let's try to accept Christmas and Hannukah as beautiful reminders of the best in all of us. There is so much that we share, that a few details really don't matter all that much to me, as long as we don't try to push religion through political devices.

I think it's pointless to debate religion on here. If a tread doesn't ring true for you, just let it be. Reply where your knowledge and experience furthers an interesting conversation.

Let's not make broad arguements through logic or reason: Much of our emotional life doesn't make sense when viewed through logical debate, and I'm fine with that.

Let the season bring what it will. I heard a school chorus of children singing today and it really warmed my heart. The exact words are really irrelevant to the beautiful feelings it generated.

I'm going to enjoy christmas, even though I'm not religious. I hope we'll all be accepting of the holiday, regardless of our own specific differences.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

1. Thank you!

[DailyGrind51]

2. Thank you very much!

[EFerrari]

3. I heard a group of kids rehearsing in the apartment building next door last night.

I couldn't hear the words but they sounded so good.

[G_j]

4. what a wonderful post!

who can argue with peace and goodwill?

[ogneopasno]

5. K&R. Beautifully said.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

6. Who are these atheists of which you speak? I don't want to ruin anyone's holiday. nt

[madinmaryland]

10. There was a thread earlier today about a billboard in SF where

a supposed atheist basically bashes and makes fun of people who believe in any religion.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

15. Oh I see. nt

[Hanse]

36. And that ruined people's holidays because?

[trotsky]

91. Yeah, exactly the point.

If someone's faith is so pathetically weak that some numbnut saying something disrespectful "ruins" the holidays for them, well they've got much bigger problems than someone saying something rude. But when you've got a religion like Christianity which has to portray itself as a maligned victim as much as possible, well, you get these ridiculous issues blown up into (pardon the pun) biblical proportions, coupled with plenty of harsh words for atheists and non-believers who aren't genuflecting enough.

[juno jones]

7. This holiday transcends

culture and religion. Humans have been celebrating winter solstice for as long as we've been here. The religious trappings are relatively recent and should be inclusive, not exclusive.


Happy Holidays!

[sandnsea]

8. Let's try to bring happiness

there's so little of it sometimes that it seems to me this is a great time of year to take advantage of so many opportunities to spread joy.

[Cults4Bush]

9. It can not be said any better.

Thank you.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. Good wishes to you!

I am not Christian or Jewish, and yet I like your idea of finding beauty in the holiday season--for beauty is there.

And you are so right about our emotional lives being different from our logical one.

For those who find the season offensive and harbor thoughts of resentment and anger, think on this--those very thoughts can effect your health. They are a form of stress and, over time, stress can do damage to our bodies in many ways. A suggestion--as was stated in another thread, Japan celebrates Christian although it is primarily a Shinto/Buddhist country. Take the Japanese spirit of inclusion as a way of celebrating this time of year. Remember to breathe in the sweet air and laugh with your friends. Letting go of resentments and anger is a difficult practice, but one that can become very rewarding in the long run.

[CTyankee]

12. I don't think the argument is between us and the religious. We have always said that

religion has a special place and constitutional protection. That NEVER went away! What happened?

An encroachment on church/state separation happened. All WE wanted to do is keep the two separate. Instead, all these issues flooded our legistature about funding private school stuff. When we objected, we were told we didn't appreciate religious freedom as expressed in the First Amendment! That,when the first phrase of that amendment puts the ESTABLISHMENT issue ahead of the FREEDOM issue. What were the founders thinking? And why did they think that way in the first place, huh?

Sorry for the rant...just getting a little frustrated here tonight....

[Tigress DEM]

42. It seems to me you have a clear separation, so it isn't a problem.

IN the DU addressing the issues is something we can agree on. You are right. Even AS a Christian I see that ESTABLISHMENT of ANY Religion into the State's power and authority is a big can of worms even if we ONLY had to worry about all flavors of Christian.

But I have been called names here on DU for expressing opinions that it's possible science may someday prove God exists. It's a possibility, just as it's a possibility science could prove He doesn't. Even what we know now about Quantum physics makes a lot of what we thought we knew a little unstable and science is always advancing as it learns more. Who really knows where it will wind up? Isn't that the fun of it, the challenge of having an intellect and being creative in it's use?

Do I think that we should teach the Biblical story of Creation as a science fact? NO. But do I think it would be a good idea to apply scientific principals to thinking about how Creation might be a theoretical possibility? Sure, why not? Does it really kill anyone for someone to investigate a theory and try to find ways to support their theories?

I don't believe the O'Reilly's of the world have a right to beat us up with the "Christmas Conspiracy" or whatever he calls it and I think that playing tit-for-tat here on DU while understandable in response, is not any more mature or helpful than what crusty old Bill is doing. It's just another mean old man saying, "Get out of the yard" because he likes the sound of his own voice. Great pick to emulate in the reverse if someone just wants to get attention.

SO I really doubt it's you that causes any problems here personally. Ranting about the ways our county is messed up and needs to be put to rights is what DU is for and your voice is needed and important as anyone else's.

[CTyankee]

56. Re your intellectual argument about the question of the existence of God:

am I wrong or didn't Pascal come up with a mathmatical formula proving, at least to him, that there was an afterlife. It's usually referred to as "Pascal's wager" but I think he actually worked it out mathmatically...

[immoderate]

63. Not exactly.

Pascal's Wager is not a formula or a proof, it's a bit of intellectual flummery. Simply stated, he contends that if someone acts like a pious person then he wins in the afterlife if there is one, and does no harm if there is not. It presupposes the truth of Christianity (a minority religion world wide) and negates other religions. It's a bit of circularity.

The "atheist's wager" makes more sense. Simply stated, the assertion is that if one lives a reasonably good life, and there happens to be a benevolent god of the after life, then he will take care of you, whatever your beliefs. If god is vindictive and arbitrary though, he'll deny your rewards anyway. The general outlook of an atheist is that the concept of god doesn't make any sense, nevertheless it's desirable to live a life that is altruistic. See Epicurus.

As to the holidays, as I often maintain, I'll participate in any observance where the food is good.

--IMM

[CTyankee]

82. Yes, I am familiar with his argument but I just thought that he had worked it out

mathmatically, as well as in narrative form.

Since I am not religious, I mostly ignore the holidays except for the weird kind of celebration my granddaughters have: Hannukah and Christmas, with Hannukah being the religious celebration and Christmas being the decoration/santa claus one. They are being raised in Reform Judaism but since my daughter can't give up the tree and the whole santa thing, we have that too. My son in law doesn't much care as long as the tree isn't up too long...

[immoderate]

83. I'm not aware of any mathematical proof.

Even if that is so, I would guess it would have to start from some postulates that are, at best, questionable.

I usually spend the holidays with friends that do something similar. They celebrate Hanukkah, then redecorate for Christmas, then again for New Year. They don't have any particular religious beliefs; the idea is to party.

--IMM

[CTyankee]

84. Here is a youtube explanation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPFxJBhUxi0

It's a probability equation, basically, and Pascal ignored any religion other than Roman Catholicism in his equation. Of course, you are correct. His equation is mathmatically confounded if you consider all the myriad other religions in the mix...

[immoderate]

88. Thanks for finding that.

The video correctly (IMO) shows that the probability of Pascal being right is 0.

--IMM

[qwlauren35]

13. How Ironic...

I'd just started to understand the other side... a little bit.

The idea that some believe that "God IS".

And others believe that "God ISN'T".

And that they are both beliefs without proof, and therefore constitute faith.

Me personally, I cannot understand why anyone would want to spit all over someone else's holiday. I don't disrespect Rosh Hashannah, Ramadan, Chinese New Year, Winter Solstice... or Christmas, or Easter. Heck, I don't disrespect KWANZAA! And as such, if a community of the Atheist Faith got together and set aside a certain day as a holiday, and came up with a unique celebration of that day, I'd respect it.

With that said... I love any excuse for getting my family together. For my family, those annual times are 4th of July, Thanksgiving and Xmas. We also do weddings and way too many funerals.

Almost my entire family has rejected the gift giving thing. But I do LOVE a lot of the traditional Xmas food. I like egg nog... with rum. And I absolutely LOVE RUM-SOAKED fruit cake. Without the rum, it's so-so. I like Xmas tree lights. I love watching the Grinch CARTOON movie. I like caroling, because I like singing, and caroling is an annual excuse, as opposed to karaoke, which is too public.

For the life of me, I cannot imagine rejecting this wonderful excuse to eat, sing, look at pretty things and enjoy my family.

Oh, and the entire "Peace on Earth" thing. I hope it catches on someday.

Signed,
Lauren the Agnostic Buddhist.

[LittleClarkie]

17. FESTIVUS

For the rest of us!

Time for the airing of the grievances!

[nodster]

25. Oh stop

with the "atheist faith" nonsense. There's no such thing as atheistic faith when it comes to someone else's extraordinary claim.

If you truly want all around respect, then give the "both sides have faith" nonsense a rest.

[baby_mouse]

94. hear, hear.

I'd be a lot less fed up with the whole narrative if people would stop putting this "faith" thing about.

[RainDog]

29. this is not accurate

"And that they are both beliefs without proof, and therefore constitute faith."

let me preface this by noting that I like christmas. what I do not like are fundamentalists who insist this is a christian nation and, therefore, their religion (and their version of it, to be more precise) should be given preferential treatment by the govt. I grew up as a christian and that is part of my tradition.

however, you are stating a lie in an attempt to create an equivalency between belief in the supernatural and a belief that the supernatural is not the correct explanation for the working of the world - or the correct explanation for whether or not there is a god.

in fact, there is plenty of proof - applied to the natural world in which we live, to support the idea that there is no supernatural being interacting with humans on earth.

John Allen Paulos wrote "Irreligion" as well as "Innumerancy" (about problems with us non mathies and probability). Irreligion uses probability, as it is applied in the natural world in which we live, to the question of a supernatural being.

Bertrand Russell wrote "Why I am Not a Christian" using the same practices that are accepted in our natural world to prove or disprove, as did George Smith in The Case Against God and Michael Martin's "Atheism, A Philosophical Justification." Dawkins, of course, has written about this as well.

The point in this is to ask you to please not make false statements in an attempt to create a false equivalency. they are not the same thing.

At the same time, yes, I am all for enjoying the holidays. They do not really have anything to do with christianity in the long term anyway, since they co-opted pagan symbols and ceremonies at this time of the year... no one knows when Jesus was born. I do assume he was born, tho some don't. it's when jerks like the guy in Utah try to force people to say "merry christmas" instead of whatever might come out of their mouths that you will hear something from most atheists.

However, the point is that you cannot state, honestly, that both atheism and religion require faith, because they do not and, in fact, there is a body of work that addresses the rational reason to doubt.

[Tigress DEM]

44. I understand how you have interpreted the faith v faith, but "lie" may be too strong a word.

Science is where great minds figure it out for the most part. I've worked to understand it AND various religions.

Someone who believes in Buddhism simply views things in a certain way when they are diametrically opposed thoughts. While what was said is certainly not in any way true for you, it is a way to consider the opposing viewpoints.

Before we had instruments sensitive enough you could say there was a lot of proof that neutrinos didn't exist either. Even today, how many people have actually any first hand experience being aware of neutrinos? If science is your baramoter, you would have to say just because a person doesn't believe in neutrinos, doesn't mean they don't exist.

The sciences are defined by rational tools and can really prove a lot, but not everything. In the realm outside of scientific fact everything else is just unproven theories.

Certainly, the non-existence of God lines up with scientific fact, so I don't think anyone should be "forced" to believe beyond that realm if they are comfortable where they are. But scientific fact changes over time. Example: before the platypus, "Who knew?" I hope you understand, I'm not mocking science. Being a person of faith who believes in the scientific method and that proven facts define the reality we live in makes me a bit of an odd duck myself, so I try to take a lighthearted tone.

I simply have a small hope that one day we will know definitively one way or another that God does or doesn't exist. I don't personally think we have the scientific capacity today at our disposal to actually make the call of God's non-existence a 100% sure thing when we are still making as many new discoveries of species in the rain forest and about how things work etc... We haven't traveled extensively through the galaxies we've mapped, we haven't conquered death or time travel. We DON'T know it all yet. We've barely begun, really.

All I ask from Atheist's personally is not to shut the door on my hope that science may find proof of God and I will do my part to make sure that Democracy keeps religion out of the rule of law. Certainly, if a person is motivated to obey the law by their religious beliefs, great. If a person obeys the law because they are a law abiding citizen, great. Same wonderful result. No problem. But when people start to claim the law can only be obeyed if religion is enforced via the law, I am WITH YOU on the pavement in front of the White House saying, "WRONG ANSWER!"

Peace.

[RainDog]

62. just because "it is a way to view opposing viewpoints"

can be said, this does not make the statement valid. It does not negate the intellectual dishonesty in the statement, or more to the point, the misleading nature of the statement.

Varkam covered this, below.

The examples of science are not valid. Scientists do not claim that they are at the end of knowledge. Religion claims knowledge has been revealed - and the quest for it is over. "Belief" is required for certain scientific issues only when someone lacks the training to do the experiments and make the direct observations oneself. Empirical knowledge, upon which science is based, states that anything claimed as a fact requires a reproducible result. If someone does not have the specific training in a particular field, they rely upon other specialists, whose jobs are also to keep their peers "honest," to vet information. Scientists make mistakes. Religion doesn't.

The analogy between science and religion is especially specious when you look at Galileo, for instance. It only took 600 years for the church to admit they were wrong. Scientists, however, had to accept Galileo's contentions as soon as they could perform the observations and create lenses, etc. themselves.

Galileo's contention could be disputed. The church's could not.

[Marr]

38. Atheism isn't about asserting the non-existence of god.

It's about a lack of belief in god. They are not the same thing. Atheism does not require faith.

If I ask you whether you believe that trolls really live under bridges, does it require faith on your part to reply with a "no"? Of course not-- you've no evidence to suggest that trolls actually exist, much less live under bridges. You probably have a good deal of evidence that suggests the opposite, in fact.

Atheism is exactly the same thing. It does not take faith to lack belief.

[Tigress DEM]

45. Depends on the Atheist, I think.

According to WIKI: It has kind of developed over time. I think the one thing you can say about Atheists is the same thing you can say about DEMS on DU "there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists^ adhere".


^insert "DEMS on DU"


<snip>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

Atheism, as an explicit position, can be either the affirmation of the nonexistence of gods,<1> or the rejection of theism.<2> It is also<3> defined more broadly as an absence of belief in deities, or nontheism.<4><5><6><7>

Many self-described atheists are skeptical of all supernatural beings and cite a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities. Others argue for atheism on philosophical, social or historical grounds. Although many self-described atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism<8> and naturalism,<9> there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere;<10> and some religions, such as Jainism and Buddhism, do not require belief in a personal god.

[Marr]

54. That's true.

There are some who seem to assert, from a position of knowing the negative. I've found them to be in the minority, however.

[bananas]

78. 21% of atheists believe in god, 8% are certain god exists

and for agnostis, 55% believe in god and 17% are certain:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

And while searching for that thread, I came across this interpretation:
"What this means is that Atheism has become a cultural designation, rather than a theological statement."
http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2008/06/juicies...

[immoderate]

89. Humpty Dumpty can help here.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'
--Through the Looking Glass

--IMM

[varkam]

43. Is not believing that there is a teapot in orbit...

...between the Earth and Mars also an article of faith? If so, then you seem to be watering down the term "faith" to the point of moot meaninglessness.

[Tigress DEM]

46. It seems to me that looking at Atheism as a belief structure isn't inherently "bad"

It simply means that what you see as common sense ideas that "prove" the non-existence of God are taken with as much respect as we who do believe in God accord our own "non-proven" theories about his existence.

I understand that to an Atheist being told they have "faith" is taken to be about as disrespectful as calling my God an "imaginary friend", but I don't think it's meant that way in most cases.

AND seriously, have you seen the satalite crap floating up there in orbit, just around Earth? I would say it's more a probability that there is a teapot in orbit, than any article of faith. Add the tool belt we just lost and all those kids trying to get into record books doing stupid stuff... it's only a matter of time. No faith necessary for that one.

[varkam]

61. I was referring to Bertrand Russell's famous teapot argument...

concerning the burden of proof.

It simply means that what you see as common sense ideas that "prove" the non-existence of God are taken with as much respect as we who do believe in God accord our own "non-proven" theories about his existence.

The issue is that atheism, in its basic form, is not a belief at all. Take, for example, a criminal trial. The burden of proof rests with the state and the prosecutor. They have to convince the jury (or a judge) that the defendant is guilty of the crime that he is accused of. If that burden isn't met, the verdict that is returned isn't "innocent", it's "not guilty". There might not seem to be a lot of difference between those two, but it is actually pretty significant.

Basic atheism is just a simple disbelief in that theists have not satisfied the burden of proof. It doesn't require faith to fail to be convinced.

There are other forms of atheism that do make a positive statement, however, but that's another story.

[mr blur]

49. Ah, the usual garbage. Atheism is NOT a "faith"or "belief". Grow up.

[otherlander]

79. Hey, man, back off.

It's a small factual error in a post whose basic message is that the author RESPECTS us.

[defendandprotect]

14. Putting Nativities on public property is "pushing religion thru political devices ...

Just like handing taxpayer dollars over to churches is --

Withdraw that money and support American workers ---

Christmas and Hannukah are not about us ... they're based on Winter Sollstice --

Nature -- of which we are only part.

I think it's pointless to debate religion on here. If a tread doesn't ring true for you, just let it be. Reply where your knowledge and experience furthers an interesting conversation.

I think there is every reason to debate religion at DU ...

And those discussions should move into public arena for wider discussion --

Let's not make broad arguements through logic or reason: Much of our emotional life doesn't make sense when viewed through logical debate, and I'm fine with that.

Well, of course, it's very important to all if us to know what you're "fine with" ...
However I'll be sticking with "logic and reason" and leave fables to others.

"Nature never does betray the heart that loves her" - Enjoy her magic at this season!

[Berry Cool]

21. This is precisely the problem.

You want to call what you believe "reason," whereas what I believe is just a "fable." Do you honestly not perceive how insulting the "You are right and I am wrong and I am going to take every opportunity to tell you that you are wrong" practice is when it comes to people's spiritual beliefs? It's as bad as a Christian telling a Muslim his belief is "wrong" or a Buddhist telling a Hindu her belief is "false."

The truth is, what we both believe, or don't believe, is faith. Or lack thereof. It's not truth vs. falsehood. It's not "I believe what is true, whereas what you believe is false." To behave as if it is is insulting beyond belief.

I will respect you if you respect me. That simple.

[defendandprotect]

27. If you don't respect "logic and reason" ...

then the problem is yours --

Look, if you want to showcase your religious articles on PUBLIC property

-- or post on websites -- then YOUR comments aren't sacred --

and they will rightfully be responded to --

Neither is anyone forced to consider your Nativity sacred --

If you can't handle comments then perhaps those articles should be

displayed on church property--

[Irishonly]

59. I don't believe the Nativity should have been placed at the Capitol

I am Christian and I strongly believe in separation of church and state. The stealing of the sign was wrong.

I grew up in Iowa and before 1968 a Nativity used to be on display at the Iowa State Capitol every December. After the ruling it wasn't. As a child I was mad but as an adult I see the state made a wise choice. I think the governor could have avoided the problems by not having any display. The government is secular and I believe it only added to the conflict by opening up the grounds for religious displays.

We know people of all faiths and atheists. My atheist friends know I love Christmas and still come over at the holidays. They also know they will not be lectured or "witnessed" to and also understand I am just as adamant about keeping religion out of politics. My atheist friends also know we do advent at 8:00 every night. While they are not expected to participate, they know the reading will be done. Sometimes they chose to get into the discussion, sometimes they leave before the reading and other times they just watch the TV machine. They also know I am sound asleep by ten so that may have something to do with it to.

If people could find it in their hearts to stop judging this old world would be a much saner place. I happen to believe in free choice and that I am just a little grain of sand among millions and millions of others. I have never found anything that would tell me my views and faith are the standard in which the world would be judged or that I have been given some special right to tell people how they must believe and live.

BTW, I also wish people would stop buying into the media driven and wing nut's war on Christmas. For too many years Christmas has been over commercialized and bigger meant better. Stop letting corporations rule you.

[RainDog]

31. No. It is not the same. Please read post #29.

You are insulted because you want to claim equality in the way in which ideas for belief or non-belief are formed or supported. they are not the same and atheists do not have "faith" in their belief.

You can respect a person and not respect their belief in god. it's that simple.

[roguevalley]

23. and then again, there might be at least one thread on this board

where the love that is the center of most people's thoughts this time of year can be expressed and celebrated without being pissed on. Just an observation.

[defendandprotect]

28. And then again ...

there hasn't been much LOVE shown for Athiest's rights, has there -- ??

You might even say their right to be heard has been "pissed on"

if you enjoy being vulgar ...

[Rage for Order]

32. Poor oppressed atheists...

[RainDog]

33. well, let's look at that idea.

http://www.closetatheist.net/entry/11/Atheism_Statistic...

In 1999, the one group, in terms of religious belief (or not) that the most Americans would discriminate against in their vote were atheists.

A 2006 study at the U. of Minn. found atheists were the least-trusted group in the U.S. - but this distrust corresponds to education levels. The parts of the country that are the strongest for the democratic party are also those that are most tolerant of atheism.

Interestingly, it seems that acceptance of atheism itself strongly corresponds to nations with higher quality of life and greater economic opportunity for all citizens. Those western democracies that the UN consistently ranks higher on the quality of life indices, educational levels... those western democracies that have universal health care and affordable college - those nations that have a social safety net and strong unions... are also the nations with the most atheists. (You can get the numbers on the levels of belief in god by clicking on more stats in the first link. you can get the numbers for quality of life via the UN. You can get the stats on economic opportunity via the Pew Study on Economic Mobility.

Interesting, huh?

Belief in god corresponds to shittier govt.

[defendandprotect]

67. Yes, true which explains why capitalism promoted religion ...

Belief in god corresponds to shittier govt.

"Finally, Capitalism promoted religion, the opiate designed to keep

the working class docile."

AND, the Africans enslaved in America were permitted religion --

Christianity = "pie in the sky when you die--"

[Hanse]

37. Well, somebody just stole their display.

Pretty much a hate crime.

[Tigress DEM]

48. Should get a discription out to the police. Track it down.

Can't let people walk off with a great display. Someone put time and money or at least a whole lot of velveeta into the project.

Say, maybe it was hungry homeless people?

We should spring for better materials for the Atheist display so it isn't mistaken for a government give away item.



(wink)

[defendandprotect]

70. "Though Shalt Not Steal" ...?

[Tigress DEM]

47. Not necessarily helpful.

IF Atheists and Christians can learn to get along here on DU, we can take it on the road, and who knows maybe Peace on Earth?

[spiritual_gunfighter]

57. double post, sorry

[spiritual_gunfighter]

58. Poor repressed christians... n/t

[defendandprotect]

69. Who's raking in tax payer money from government --?

Respect Separation of Church & State --

it guarantees your highest privilege -

your right to free thought and personal conscience.

Otherwise, it might be Scientologists or Islam controlling

your brain.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

34. It's not like there's a shortage of boards for that shit! n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

95. The love that is center in my thoughts

is unequal under the law, due to religionist dogmas. Just an observation.

[Taverner]

16. Christmas is about the eggnog, presents and vicodin

So mote it be

[wryter2000]

18. An agnostic seconding these sentiments n/t

n/t

[Berry Cool]

19. Thank you. K&R.

I respect others' rights to have no religion. All I ask is that they not constantly harangue me as being stupid, superstitious and intolerant, and blame me for the sins of every religion on the planet.

[tabasco]

20. Great post!

Live and let live!

[roguevalley]

22. lovely post, jazzjunkysue. there can't be enough beauty and love

in this world. Happy holidays to you, my dear.

[Withywindle]

24. Thank you!

My father is a pretty strong atheist - hates religion, snarks on it all the time, etcetera. Yet I have a lot of good Christmas memories from my childhood and why? He always though that the tree, the lights, the presents, etcetera, was a pretty awesome experience for a child and wasn't going to be enough of a shit to deny me of that. (And really, you have to be a petty bastard to begrudge children sparklies and presents.)

In later life, I didn't grow into the fellow atheist he hoped I'd be, but I didn't grow into the fundy Christian he feared I'd be either (and raising me in Appalachia, he had to know that was a risk - kids pick up as much from their peers as from their parents, after all).

I grew up into a Pagan who loves lights and candles and evergreen decorations as part of what humans in the Northern Hemisphere have always done to keep our spirits up when the sun goes away for a while, and respects the flailing attempts to make sense of adherents of a Middle Eastern desert religion when transported to the northern latitudes - equate the birth of their Savior with the rebirth of the Sun after Winter Solstice. Even though, historically speaking, Yeshua ben Joseph was probably born roughly April-ish, by our current calendar, never mind that that calendar has changed several times in the last two millennia...oh, I can't keep track. Obviously Jesus wasn't born on our modern December 25 and obviously there was not snow falling on the roof of the stable, but who gives a shit--it's MYTH.

I respect this time of year as sacred to MANY peoples, for many reasons, and frankly I'm just waiting for the first nice thick icy snowfall to do the traditional naked run out of the sauna, and stay up partying through the whole of the longest night and know that the Sun Child has been reborn.

[rhett o rick]

26. I am not an atheist but not a Christian either. But I never had a problem with the Christmas

celebration. Live and let live. It didn't hurt me a bit to say, "Merry Christmas". That is until the right wing Christian-nazi's declared a war on Christmas. So if there is a war, I am on the side of "happy holidays". Why should Christian-nazi's dictate what we can do at this time of year. Besides, i think Jesus would cry if he saw the throngs at WalMart killing each other for material goods.

[ContinentalOp]

30. Christmas is about SANTA. PERIOD.

To the asshole at work who told me "Remember, Christmas is about Jesus" one year before Christmas vacation: FUCK OFF.

[mondo joe]

35. I'm an atheist and I love Christmas. I also love the separation of church and state, and

free speech too.

I enjoy Christmas. And if people want to pay for billboards with atheist messages that's okay too.

[Hepburn]

53. Ditto

My feelings exactly!

[SidDithers]

92. Ditto...

and it's probably the reason that I respect your opinions so much

Sid

[cemaphonic]

39. I love Christmas, but not as much as I love Bach's Mass in B Minor.

Or Palestrina. Some atheist, huh?

I see it as a primarily secular cultural celebration, that just happens to coincide with a fairly important feast day (but not the most important - that's Easter) on the Christian calendar. Most of our Christmas traditions that aren't borrowings from pre-Christian European religions were invented whole-cloth in the 19th century.

[pipi_k]

60. How about

Pavarotti doing "Sanctus"...


I'm not religious...more of a Native American Spiritualism type...but I think some of the most beautiful music in the world came from The Church

[DeepModem Mom]

40. Thank you. I'd also remind all that there is a DU Religion/Theology Forum...

for those interested in religious discussion and/or debate.

[defendandprotect]

71. When religion is a current event ....

it should be here for ALL to see --

[DeepModem Mom]

73. I didn't see public religious displays addressed in the OP. I was responding...

to the reference in the OP to religious debate. I strongly believe that belongs in the Religion and Theology Forum. In fact, that decision was made by the administrators a few years back after much discussion and controversy here at DU. GD, especially in times surrounding religious holidays (that is, Christian religious holidays, of course) was overwhelmed with posts bashing religion, crowding out other topics. Any post of that sort immediately draws a flood of responses.

Not that it matters, but I am very skeptical with regard to religion, but enjoy the beautiful services at Episcopal churches -- although I attend only the majority of those churches, the ones that embrace and empower gays, and not those splintering off from the Episcopal Church over the issue of both gays, and even women in positions of authority.

[defendandprotect]

74. It was my sense that this ....

thread was a follow-up to the thread regarding the posting of the Atheist

sign in Washington state where the Nativity is displayed on Government property.

IMO, there is no more worthy discussion at DU than Separation of Church & State

upon which our highest privilege is based . . .

that is, the right to freedom of thought and free conscience without which there

is no democracy.

Granted, these issues do RIGHTFULLY attract a lot of interest, but I don't think

that is something to fear.

As we've seen with the most important issues facing our nation -- from racism and

sexism to homophobia -- there is often heated discussion which fortunately has

usually brought new and better understanding of civil/human rights.

I'd just question two other points which you might consider --

Had the original Separation of Church & State issue re Washington been posted

in Religion & Theology would you have seen it -- or any of the comments--??

And, if America had a growing population of Muslims and/or Scientologists --

all of whom wanted to display their religious articles in ways equal to the

Nativities, would you want this done on Government property --??


My joy in the season is based on all the wonders of Nature --

Thoughts of the Old Year and coming New Year.

[DeepModem Mom]

81. I agree that issues of separation of church and state, including public displays, etc...

do belong in LBN or GD. I wasn't aware that this post was in response to another thread.

My suggestion had to do with purely religious discussions and debate, which I think do belong in R&T.

[Tigress DEM]

41. What a heartwarming sentiment! I wish more people ....

I wish more people BOTH religious and non-religious had your mature and healthy attitude.

I'm a Christian, but O'Reilly and his garbage talk makes me glad I don't watch TV much anymore.

I tried to explain to my bff who really LOVES the holidays and gets into it with joy that I don't even mind the sales starting in October or July for that matter, but shopping where store use the religious songs of my faith to push merchandise makes me feel manipulated and ashamed to be a Christian, especially when it starts before Halloween stuff is taken down. Talk about a cross referencing nightmare!

I really hope that as you accept the way this season tends to focus many people on finding their better angels or just finding ways to make better decisions for the coming year, that you encounter them at their best. You are putting out such a good vibe, I hope it comes back to you many fold.

And it may sound silly, but it really does help that someone who has been likely battered over the years with the Christmas story etc... is standing up and saying exactly what you are saying. It sometimes feels like Atheists hate me when I get in these spiritual threads without even knowing anything about me. Me and my "superstitions" or "make believe friends". Sometimes it really gets hurtful and personal. Just knowing another voice like yours exists and is brave enough to post here adds strength to my desire to live more at peace with those I don't entirely understand either.

[SeattleGirl]

50. Thank you, jazz!

Though I do believe in God, I agree with what you are saying.

I think people should be free to believe and/or celebrate (or not celebrate) as they see fit.

[Luminous Animal]

52. Nativity displays..

are about one thing... the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ the Savior. Christmas (Christ mass) trees in our Christian culture reinforce the image of Jesus Christ the Savior and all the good will delivered by the message of Jesus Christ the Savior.

Any other message during the time of celebration of Jesus Christ the Savior pees in the soup of 85% percent of the population who believes in Jesus Christ the Savior.

Please stop reminding me that 15% of the population does not believe in Jesus Christ the Savior.

[defendandprotect]

72. On public property ...

Nativity displays are advertisements for Christianity ....

Shocking, but they may even be trying to influence the public to

think their appearance on Government property means Government

approves of or Government is celebrating their religion.

Might even soften citizens up enough to let churches capture our

tax dollars ...?

Oh, they did that already--!

And for their religious schools --!

[0rganism]

51. Celebration is among the most important things we will do on this planet

regardless of whether we do it religiously or not. I don't think I've heard anyone, whether Christian, Atheist, Buddhist, or Pastafarian, disagree that we're only here in this form for a short time. No one knows how much time we have to enjoy the company of our family, friends, and loved ones in this definite-but-limited existence. Celebration, whether holiday or birthday or just a friendly meeting, gives us a chance to come together and rejoice for a little while; we never really know if this is the last chance we'll have to be with someone, and holidays give us an excuse to make it a special occasion.

It sure would be nice if we'd all figure this out and show one-another the kindness and respect due to our fellow travelers on this peculiar journey. Far too often, I see people go out of their way to make life less pleasant for others, and it's a damned shame.

The kids, they grow up so fast. Beloved pets come and go. People whose presence we take for granted for years can disappear from our lives completely in the blink of an eye. Today's prosperity becomes tomorrow's poverty, but even in poverty we may yet have joy in simple existence. Near the end, I've heard, moments and memories of companionship and sharing become more valuable than fame and riches. How many chances to enjoy one-another's company have we carelessly cast aside?

How important is it to be "right" about something? How much happiness would we trade for the opportunity to make someone else miserable in the name of accuracy? Conversely, how much bullshit would we endure to see a smile warm another's face for a minute or ten?

A handful of days out of an entire year, humans set aside time to do nice things for each other. I, for one, would rather sing a thousand silly Christmas carols than shit on anyone's holiday celebration.

[kiva]

65. Very well said.

A few years ago I was drafted to serve in a graduation ceremony, and the weather was less than perfect--windy and cold. I was grinching about it all to the guy next to me. He disagreed, saying that we are lacking ceremony in our modern world--we need, he said, more pageantry. I remember this whenever I'm tempted to comment about or trivialize someone else's holidays/ceremonies--we do need more pageantry.

[blondeatlast]

76. Beautifully put--especially the last line. Happy holidays, friend!

[Midlodemocrat]

80. What a nice post.

Thank you.

[MasonJar]

55. What a truly beautiful expression of the caring spirit.

[ananda]

64. Happy Winter Solstice!

I hope your holidays are lovely.

[otherlander]

66. I just want to tell you

that this is a beautiful thread.

[skygazer]

68. I'm not sure how the billboard in question has "ruined" anyone's holiday

In that vein, it could be argued that the plethora of religious iconography seen everywhere from government property to the local Wal-Mart ruins any atheist's enjoyment of their surroundings. I would consider that statement to be as ridiculous as the first though.

The question at the heart of this matter is the government's (unconstitutional) support and promotion of the christian religion which is fairly evident, and any objection to that is always met with outrage at the fact that the awful atheists are trying to "ruin" christmas again.

[nichomachus]

75. You know what ruined my holiday

The local "Christians" -- quite a few people in my neighborhood -- who have Christmas decorations, angels, Santas, etc., festooned with American flags and "patriotic" streamers. Allegedly, they are -- according to the notice distributed -- to "honor the troops who are fighting for our freedom" (sic).

I really object to their dragging Christmas into the nationalistic/fascist mindset that's overtaken the whole country.

[0rganism]

87. Here's a way to take it back --

Beat them at their own game.

Put up a whole bunch of decorations in your yard. Christmas lights, angels, Santas, the whole nine yards, but do it completely over the top, way moreso than your nationalistic neighbors. Then, add a world peace theme, and messages wishing a safe and speedy return of the troops from the Iraqupation. Don't leave out the part about Jesus being "the Prince of Peace", either.

Communicate to them in a language they'll understand.

[blondeatlast]

77. Any excuse for family and good friends to get together and eat and look at

someone's painstaking beautiful decor is quite alright by me!

This Xtian appreciates that wonderful sentiment, and

CHEERS!

[ZombieHorde]

85. "Much of our emotional life doesn't make sense when viewed through logical debate"

I would like to hear more about this idea.

[JerseygirlCT]

86. That was lovely, truly. Thank you! nt

[SidDithers]

90. I love Christmas..

and me and my family enjoy it as a secular holiday. But I know not everyone celebrates it that way. You're free to worship and practice in whatever belief system you want to, as long as it doesn't cross over from private beliefs into public governance.

Sid

[jazzjunkysue]

93. Or first snow in Connecticut was saturday night!

Happy holidays, everyone who was part of this thread. I'm grateful for you all.

[Bluenorthwest]

96. Great. Now do one for 'religious people who don't want

to ruin GLBT families, ok?
I read on the thread that this op is about a single billboard in SF. Wow. When one considers the Prop 8 campaign, with dozens of billboards and thousands of signs, all organized by religionists who spent millions to attack my family, that one billboard looks like the speck in your brother's eye, the Prop 8 legions look like the log in your own.
I've read signs for decades, from Christians, that say "God Hates Fags". Seen dozens of them. At our celebrations, at our funerals. Until last week, I had never heard of any other religionists taking a stand against Phelps and Co. Back in the 80's, I called every church in LA looking for one, just one who would stand against Phelps. No takers.
All I'm saying is this: a faith that leads one to legislate against millions of people will always be answered with a Bronx cheer by millions of people. When one makes enemies, one in fact has enemies. Bitching about that is just childish. They wish to take a hate filled stand, let them take that stand in all of its glory. Whosoever digeth a pit, will fall in it.
You seem to be asking me to allow people to hate without restraint in honor of their holidays. Sorry. What I would like to see them do, is clean their own house for the holidays. But as long as they stand with Phelps, and as long as they stand with the legions orgainizing against me, and they are not taking a stand to counter that hate, then frankly to ask me to respect them is a bigoted mindset. They can attack with impunity, and those who defend themselves are 'pissing on them'? Try this on for size: they themselves have pissed on the least among them, which is the same as pissing on the Christ directly. For Christmas, the religionists have pissed on Christ.
But you see them as innocent, with pitchfork and torch, they have no accountability. I see them as owing an apology to millions of people, and as having great work to do in defense of their own faith, if they have a shred of actual respect for it.
Any religious person who can look at one billboard and go ballistic yet does not acknowlege all of the billboards against gays is a hypocrite and has the future of a hypocrite. Selah.