Okc says: Bah, Humbug!

[kmf563]

When you are a public employee, what you do at work is the public's business, not your own business.

I disagree.

Whether or not you have a Christmas decoration in your office in no way shape or form has anything to do with what kind of employee you are and whether you are doing your job or not. Now what they do with my tax money, THAT is my business.

[BDP]

Whether or not you have a Christmas decoration in your office in no way shape or form has anything to do with what kind of employee you are and whether you are doing your job or not. Now what they do with my tax money, THAT is my business.

I swear I'm not trying to pick on you, but that office is paid for with your tax money, so, in effect, they're decorating your tax money with religious artifacts.

But seriously, that is really where the issue comes in and is why government policies are going to be more stringent than private ones. If the government employer allows religious regalia in the office, it could be construed as an endorsement of religion, especially if the policies regarding religious decorations aren't applied in a uniform manner. That's why it's probably prudent as a matter of policy to not allow any of it and is why is does make sense to not use government assets (i.e office space) to conduct religious events.

Now, personally, I don't see any problem with some religious decorations in a private office, but I do think it is prudent as a private employer to not conduct religious activity as a company. However, I do know first hand of some local employers who start the work day with a company prayer and pray before meetings. I don't think that's really ethical, but I can't really argue that they don't have that right. Now, if they made participation in prayer a basis for employment, then they clearly have legal issues and I think ethical ones as well.

Personally, I think that a good employer tries to maintain a welcoming and comfortable work environment for all of his or her employees. As such, I think integrating religion into the work day, whether required or not, has the potential to severely work against that goal.

[kmf563]

If you are presenting it as an endorsement of religion...why stop there? Isn't a government employee always representing our government? So what if I see them in a liquor store, or buying goat porn, or heaven forbid attending something other than the local Baptist church on Sunday afternoon? Should we tell them where they can go and where they can't be seen? Send your servant to get the porn for Gawd's sake!

[BDP]

So what if I see them in a liquor store, or buying goat porn, or heaven forbid attending something other than the local Baptist church on Sunday afternoon?

Well, that's different because those things aren't being done in the service of the government. However, if they brought that into the workplace or did them while "on the clock" (i.e. while spending your tax dollars), then I am sure there'd be a problem. Also, there is some distinction simply because of the directions our government have been given regarding religion. In any event, I am sure, despite Gawd's protests, that goat porn would not be allowed in the office.

Also, when I refer to the endorsement, I was talking about the employer's specific policy and any legal ruling on a policy, not necessarily the specific actions of a specific employee. So not every action of any employee is considered an endorsement by the employer of that action, but a policy which allows such conduct in the work environment, using company assets, and/or while on the company's time could very well be construed as an endorsement. Maybe that's a technical distinction, but I think it's relevant.

[kmf563]

Well, what do you know...we agree on something!

[kmf563]

Here is a poll I just found on Fox25 that relates to our discussion.

FOX25

[BDP]

Well, what do you know...we agree on something!

Did we ever really disagree?

[metro]

When you are a public employee, what you do at work is the public's business, not your own business.

I was watching Victory's church service on tv yesterday while getting ready to go to my church. While he wasn't talking specifically about this event, their pastor, Mark Crow, made some good points. I think he said it best when, if you don't believe in Christmas or don't want to celebrate it for what it is, it should really just be another day for you. Soooooo, if you don't believe in Christmas or don't choose to celebrate it for what it is, (or in this case, if government employees aren't allowed to have a religious display) then today Christmas Eve and tomorrow Christmas should be just another regular work day and government employees should have to report to work today and tomorrow. Our currency and some government buildings say IN GOD WE TRUST, but do we really???? We sure don't act like it.

[bandnerd]

Christmas is a federal holiday, so no, the day is not "just another regular work day" according to the government.

Just because I don't believe that Jesus Christ was born on December 25 doesn't mean I can't enjoy the other aspects of the holiday--the family togetherness, the concept of giving back and being good to your fellow man--I don't go around telling people what they can and cannot have on their desk, as it isn't my job to do so; however, if a place of business has that right, then that's it, they can exercise it if they see fit.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

Christmas is a federal holiday, so no, the day is not "just another regular work day" according to the government.

Just because I don't believe that Jesus Christ was born on December 25 doesn't mean I can't enjoy the other aspects of the holiday--the family togetherness, the concept of giving back and being good to your fellow man--

Yup. I'll take the day off too

[Doug Loudenback]

Having said that I'm glad that Okc softened it's policy concerning an employee's work space, I'd also say, concerning the last few posts relating to some Christians telling others whether and/or how they ought to celebrate the season, that there's nothing at all wrong with non-christians, athiests, anyone, enjoying the holiday season in any way that they deem proper, if they chose to at all. Among other things, perhaps amongst the most important from a non-religious perspective is that the season is a time for closeness and celebration of one's family, and that's not dependent on one being a Christian. Wikipedia notes that,

Christmas festivities often combine the commemoration of Jesus' birth with various cultural customs, many of which have been influenced by earlier winter festivals. Although nominally a Christian holiday, it is also observed as a cultural holiday by many non-Christians.

Especially in Europe. The Christians appropriated the holiday for their own purposes ... nothing at all wrong with that ... but a Christian isn't really entitled to to tell others how they should celebrate the season, in my opinion. A case could be made for the other way around.

[BDP]

OK, so now some Christians want to tell people that if you don't believe what they believe in, then you shouldn't get a day off?? Or that public policy should be dictated by a motto placed on our money starting in 1864??

Maybe Christians should just be thankful that the country has selected a Christian holiday as a national holiday, while the sacred days of many other religions go without such treatment. Christianity gets more special recognition, or, as one could easily argue, exceptions than any other religion in this country, yet it's not enough.

Whether one interprets the establishment clause as a separationist or accomodationist, Christianity if often the beneficiary from the governmental policies that run counter to any concept of separation of church and state. It would be just as hard to show that any other religion is accommodated as much or more than Christianity as it would be to show that a total separation exists.

While it would be hard to establish a de jure national religion due to the explicit instructions not to in the constitution, it is clear that the attempts to make Christianity the de facto national religion by some leaders has had the effect where today it is not enough that a Christian holiday is recognized as a federal holiday, some want the federal holiday to be limited only to Christians. This fails just about every test for just about every logical interpretation of establishment jurisprudence.

[metro]

That's because our country was founded on Christianity. If the government is suppose to be neutral and all politically correct, quit calling it Christmas, quit celebrating it, and don't take a holiday for it. The very word Christmas (Christ- Mas, more of Christ), clearly refers to Christ, the one we celebrate his birth. All the "non-Christian" traditions that go with it probably wouldn't have become a holiday called Christmas. BDP, Halloween is an occultict holiday if you want to get down to the origin's of holiday, so pagans and wiccans have an official holiday as well. I seriously doubt our founding fathers intended this country to be so "politically correct" and divided as we are today.

[Karried]

All the "non-Christian" traditions that go with it probably wouldn't have become a holiday called Christmas.

You have to admit, it has all become so commercialized.. sometimes it feels like so much more of an obligation rather than a true desire to give.

When did Christmas become about obtaining the latest greatest must have toy as a way to celebrate the birth of Christ?

I'm guilty as charged .. at the end of the season, I don't even remember the original intent of the holiday anymore.

I think we all have been brainwashed ... buy, buy, buy... spend, spend, spend... I wonder if the three Kings had this in mind when they brought their gifts?

[Midtowner]

That's because our country was founded on Christianity.

Wrong.

[bandnerd]

Our country was founded on religious freedom, not on the principles of any particular religion...am I wrong in thinking this? We aren't a "religious state" here.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

That's because our country was founded on Christianity. If the government is suppose to be neutral and all politically correct, quit calling it Christmas, quit celebrating it, and don't take a holiday for it. The very word Christmas (Christ- Mas, more of Christ), clearly refers to Christ, the one we celebrate his birth. All the "non-Christian" traditions that go with it probably wouldn't have become a holiday called Christmas. BDP, Halloween is an occultict holiday if you want to get down to the origin's of holiday, so pagans and wiccans have an official holiday as well. I seriously doubt our founding fathers intended this country to be so "politically correct" and divided as we are today.

There's so much wrong with this post...I barely know where to start.

[Martin]

the very word christmas (christ- mas, more of christ), clearly refers to christ...

no. not exactly. christmas is a compound word essentially meaning christ's mass. the latin word from which mass is derived does not mean 'more.'

bdp, halloween is an occultict holiday if you want to get down to the origin's of holiday

halloween is no more pagan than christmas. christmas is a christian holiday superimposed over existing pagan holidays. in exactly the same way, halloween is a christian holiday superimposed over an existing pagan holiday. 'halloween' is basically a shortening of 'all hallows even' and is basically the day before 'all saint's day', a christian holiday. for that precise reason, i sincerely doubt any true pagan would refer to the holiday by the name 'halloween.'

wrong.

not exactly an airtight case you've presented here. while i'll concede that a few of our founding fathers weren't particularly religious, how many of them were buddhist? how many were muslim? hindu? wiccan? bottom line is that christianity played a pretty big role in shaping western culture. i do, however, agree that in principle the country was founded on religious freedom and definitely not founded as a religious state but just to bleat out 'wrong' definitely belies the complexity of our country's founding.

-M

[Midtowner]

not exactly an airtight case you've presented here. while i'll concede that a few of our founding fathers weren't particularly religious, how many of them were buddhist? how many were muslim? hindu? wiccan? bottom line is that christianity played a pretty big role in shaping western culture. i do, however, agree that in principle the country was founded on religious freedom and definitely not founded as a religious state but just to bleat out 'wrong' definitely belies the complexity of our country's founding.

-M

It's a very simple thing to say really. Quite a few of the most prominent founding fathers were deists who completely rejected the Christian hypothesis. For them to have accepted that we were a nation "founded upon" Christianity would have been hotly contested since that was not their religion.

Further, many writings of the founders, some unofficial, such as Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists, and some official, such as the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by George Washington and approved by the Senate explicitly state that in no sense is the United States founded as a "Christian nation."

I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"The doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."
-- John Adams


"The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."
-- Treaty of Tripoli


"I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the Bible)."

"Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to 'God' to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not dare so dishonor my Creator's name by (attaching) it to this filthy book (the Bible)."

"It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of the Bible."

Accustom a people to believe that priests and clergy can forgive sins...and you will have sins in abundance."

And; "The Christian church has set up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended imitation of a person (Jesus) who lived a life of poverty."
-- Thomas Paine


"What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy."
-- James Madison

(that should give you a taste)

The founding fathers' philosophy and world view was most certainly influenced by Christianity. Many of them were Christian (many were not). If I were to look for philosophical influences on the founding fathers, however, I'd probably look to the writings of Descartes and other enlightenment philosophers before I'd look to the Bible.

That said, I'm no atheist. I'm a Catholic. The thing is, when I hear that someone thinks the nation is founded on Christianity, I remember the fact that wars have been fought over determining exactly what "Christianity" meant. The founding fathers agreed -- even the Christian ones -- that religion and government should occupy distinct spheres within public life -- that one ought not interfere with the other.

So Merry Christmas, but don't think for one second that I think I have the right to use the machinery of government to shove my religion down anyone's throats -- and neither does anyone else.

[Martin]

now that i can agree with.

though it is contested whether or not john adams was a deist. while many of his beliefs were consistent with deism, he wasn't necearily a deist, per se. i mean, he's buried in a unitarian church for crying out loud.

also, i think that 'quite a few' deists is a bit of an exageration. i definitely agree that there were some, but you make it seem as if that was the prevailing school of thought among our founders. that really isn't the case.

but those are just nitpicking points... i do agree with what you've stated here. -M

[kmf563]

Wow! I missed the last exit. This thread has taken so many different turns it''s hard to know where to get back on route.

I hope you all had a MERRY CHRISTMAS. I enjoyed my 4 day weekend which I have to make up by working all day this Saturday. Church was wonderful as usual and my family and friends are the best ever.

Should we now focus our attention on New Year's Eve and discuss what we should or shouldn't do for that??!!

Yes. Halloween is a satanic holiday. Remember? I think the rumor around work was that I was participating in a satanic ritual downtown that was marching straight to hell led by the devil himself Wayne Coyne.


Here is a link to help you educate yourselves on Halloween and Christmas.

The History of Christmas

The History of Halloween  The History Channel

[Midtowner]

now that i can agree with.

though it is contested whether or not john adams was a deist. while many of his beliefs were consistent with deism, he wasn't necearily a deist, per se. i mean, he's buried in a unitarian church for crying out loud.

Unitarians aren't Christian by definition -- or at least, they don't have to be. Unitarianism is a very catch-all religion. At its essence, unitarianism is sort of the converse of agnosticism. They all agree that there is a God, but agree to disagree as to what God is.

also, i think that 'quite a few' deists is a bit of an exageration. i definitely agree that there were some, but you make it seem as if that was the prevailing school of thought among our founders. that really isn't the case.

The mother of deism was the existential enlightenment school of thought. That sort of thinking -- that all men are created equal, that freedom and democracy are good aims for government, that religion should be apart from the state were all concepts coming from that school of thought. While many of the founding fathers were Christians, most, if not all had their attitudes shaped by that enlightenment mentality.

Yes, there were some individuals among (notably, many of the federalists) who were opposed to some, if not all of the radical reforms in the American government, but in the end, I think the Hamiltonians gave up a lot of ground to the anti-federalists (Jefferson, etc.) We do have a Bill of Rights after all... something those federalists felt was unnecessary.

[Martin]

unitarians aren't christian by definition

totally true and i would never dream of suggesting otherwise. deists and unitarians are not necessarily the same beast, however. adams himself rejected many of the major tenets of mainstream christianity, but i think (and i may be wrong) that he was primarily christian in background and religious practice.

the mother of deism was the existential enlightenment school of thought.

exactly. deism is a product of enlightenment era thinking, not vice versa. the fact that the enlightenment influenced the form and function of our government does not suggest that 'quite a few' of our founding fathers espoused the deist philosophy.

-M

[dismayed]

I wish the militant types on both sides would just grow up. The same people filing a lawsuit now are the first to complain when a Buddhist, Muslim, or Jew starts expressing themselves in the same way. Talk about having no empathy and not being able to put yourself in someone else's shoes. Here's an idea, let's all just live and let live and stop this nonsense.

[FritterGirl]

My father forwarded me an interesting commentary from the December 21st Wall Street Journal. Perhaps it will satisfy the extremists on both sides of the issue, especially those fundamentalists who now say "It's our holiday, you shouldn't reap its advantages if you don't believe in it the same way we do? (wait, isn't that the same as their standard "my way or it's wrong approach to everything else?"

I couldn't find the exact article online (I have a scanned paper version), but a blogger posted it to his site, which you can find here. Scroll down past the opening paragraph to the story "History of Xmas."

All I have to say is "Happy Saturnalia!" (albeit a day late)