We read:
"Love him or hate him, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is a man who sticks by his convictions. He started by making Wisconsin more business-friendly, then took on the public sector unions. And now, the state lawmaker that has solidified a national name for himself is taking on atheists and non-believers — over the state’s “holiday” tree.
On Monday, Walker decided that he wanted to shake things up a bit. Rather than following recent tradition and referring to the (Christmas) tree that is placed in the Wisconsin’s Capitol Rotunda as a “holiday tree,” he’s changing course.
For the past 25 years, lawmakers have referred to the evergreen that is decorated with ornaments and a star with this benign, uncategorized reference. Now, Walker plans to, once again, call the tree what it is — a Christmas tree.
Rather than making a big deal out of the change, the governor simply put out a press release that referred to the holiday decoration as a Christmas tree. The release doesn’t note that any change in reference occurred.
The infamous Freedom From Religion Foundation, a group of atheists and “freethinkers,” doesn’t plan to let the change go unnoticed. Annie Laurie Gaylor, the group’s president, called the decision both rude and insensitive to non-Christians.
Considering the FFRF’s track record, it’s likely the group will be doing more than simply commenting on the matter. We’ll have to wait and see their next legal moves.
Source
22 comments:
What a load of crap. This is pure Liberal historical revisionism. It was called a Christmas tree because it WAS a Christmas tree celebrating Christmas. Just as many cities might display a Menorah for Hanukkah or a moon and crescent for Ramadan. Calling it a "holiday tree" dilutes and clouds the true meaning of what it truly is.
While I absolutely respect that Atheists have the same rights to beliefs as do non-Atheists, impeding the celebration of a holiday that historically and factually represents those who founded this country is a travesty.
Being an atheist, calling it a Christmas tree is fine in my book. Some people are just too damned silly.
I agree with 2:16 AM !
I think most atheists or non-Christians would not object to the name "Christmas Tree" as it is a very traditional name in the english-speaking countries of the world.
Im so tired of these stupid self centred atheists forcing themselves on us im so tired of this PC nonsense Im tired of tis BCE,CE poppycock tell them to GET A LIFE and TAKE A HIKE
I'll go on record here as saying that I far prefer the term "Christmas tree" to holiday tree. I wish the Christian community would celebrate Christmas for what it is instead of trying to drag others into its observance.
I particularly dislike Hanukkah displays because they are merely a way of perpetuating the myth of a "holiday season" in an attempt to make Christmas into a multicultural event.
The major Jewish holidays were in September this year and, even for them, I would oppose city displays. The place for religious observance is inside communities and families.
And, for you die hards who WILL not understand what I've said in recent postings, there is a clear distinction between prayer and an activity directed at other people. Prayer is quiet and introspective. Making a speech to a crowd can be inappropriate or appropriate, depending on where and when that speech takes place.
And to "Bird of Paradise" I'll say that, in my mathematics books, I show dates with BCE and CE. Why should I have to say "year of OUR Lord" just to give a date?? Not that I feel the need for writing instructions from Bird of Paradise whose spelling and grammar are hardly at fourth grade level.
I find it very insensitive that the Athiest religion wants to force their beliefs on the rest of us! Athiests are following their beliefs on faith just as much as Christians or Jews. There is no PROOF that God doesn't exist.
Anyway, what is wrong with calling the tree after the federal holiday?
I'll decide for myself what I call insensitive, and it's that bunch of loons trying to decide for me that a Christmas tree is insensitive!
And, for you die hards who WILL not understand what I've said in recent postings, there is a clear distinction between prayer and an activity directed at other people.
We understand what you are saying. We also understand that how you characterize in order for you to put some sort of "limit" on it is not your right.
That is what you don't understand. You don't understand that you are a walking contradiction when you say "I am not looking to deny anyone the right to pray" and they launch into what a prayer is, and when that person is allowed to pray.
Prayer is quiet and introspective.
Once again, here you are telling people what defines a prayer. If someone doesn't meet your definition of what "prayer" should be, you feel you have a right to restrict them, all the while claiming that you are not denying them the right to pray.
Making a speech to a crowd can be inappropriate or appropriate, depending on where and when that speech takes place.
Agreed. When a speech to a crowd interrupts or violates someone's rights, that is inappropriate. If it does not, it is appropriate.
Some atheists are just stupid as get. They do not even know from what holiday is derived. If they had any intellectual ability at all, holiday would offend them just as much as Christmas seems to. After all, holiday is the modern day nomenclature of "Holy Day".
Jonathan
You do seem to be rather dogmatic when you say:
"The place for religious observance is inside communities and families."
Public religious observances are common throughout the world
Jonjay, I am completely comfortable with the idea of public religious observance provided, as I have said before, people are entering the room for the purpose of that observance.
My problem is with the aggressive nature of some religions (including Islam and also Christianity) in which people feel that they have the duty of reaching out to other people and changing them. I find that viewpoint to be insulting and offensive. When people who have that kind of viewpoint engage in vocal "prayer" directed at other people who have come to the venue for a completely different purpose, then I object.
The attitude of many of the contributors to this forum is: "This is OUR sports event, or school or ... and you don't have to come here. But, if you do, your price of admission will include implicit participation, at least, in our religious service."
Just as rediclous as calling CHRISTMAS VACATION as WINTER VACATION and EASTER VACATION as SPRING BREAK its so absolutly rediculous
"As for atheists, they are hypocrites and phonies. "
Only the loudmouth ones.
"They do not even know from what holiday is derived."
From Christmas entry on Wikipedia:
Christians supplanted the various pagan winter festivals between 354 and 378 AD . In the East, early Christians celebrated the birth of Christ as part of Epiphany (January 6), although this festival emphasized celebration of the baptism of Jesus.
Many of the modern Christmas ideas and traditions are based upon the pre-Christian pagan winter festivals.
A winter festival was the most popular festival of the year in many cultures. Reasons included the fact that less agricultural work needs to be done during the winter, as well as an expectation of better weather as spring approached. Modern Christmas customs include: gift-giving and merrymaking from Roman Saturnalia; greenery, lights, and charity from the Roman New Year; and Yule logs and various foods from Germanic feasts. Pagan Scandinavia celebrated a winter festival called Yule, held in the late December to early January period.
Funny, although I am pretty much indifferent to what you cal the tree, I find it really funny how everyone is stressing the "Christian Christmas" theme. Seeing as how it was actually the Winter Solstace long before the times of Christ. Both sides really need to lighten up abit and just enjoy a season of peace.
"just enjoy a season of peace."
Oh, how we wish that was true.
It's more like Piece of the Action.
I find that viewpoint to be insulting and offensive.
Well there ya go.
The rest of the world should shut up because you are insulted and offended.
As was said in ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE to the towns wealtiests resident MERRY CHRISTMAS MR POTTER
The FREEDOM FROM RELIGION bunch need to have the tax exempt status revoked
If so, then so should religious organizations have it revoked, who involve themselves in politics.
And yes the Christian Church simply put its own stamp over all the existing important pagan festivals where they came to dominate (Roman empire and later the european colonies), turning them into saints-days and Christ-related days - eg. Christmas, Easter, Halloween, St.Valantine's Day, etc., etc.
"The FREEDOM FROM RELIGION bunch need to have the tax exempt status revoked"
All religions need to have the tax exempt status revoked. Immediately. Religion is the biggest money making scam ever.
Post a Comment