On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 05:00:57 GMT, flaviaR@verizon.net wrote:
>
>On 18-Dec-2006, Hatunen wrote:
>
>> On 18 Dec 2006 16:18:19 -0800, "Sancho Panza"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >James A. Donald wrote:
>> >
>> >> But letting people go home over Christmas and shutting
>> >> everything down over christmas is federal subsidy,
>> >> endorsement and preference
>> >
>> >A frank admission of the government's subsidizing of one religion--to
>> >the exclusion of all others. We'll let ACLU know, so they can call him
>> >as a witness in their next suit.
>>
>> Do we need to remind you that the ACLU or some plaintiff like
>> them has already lost this case since the courts have already
>> declared Christmas a secular holiday?
>
>Well, golly gee whiz, that would mean that they could then
>include a menorah in the display, right?
As long as it is not a religious symbol; is it?
They shouldn't use Christian religious symbols either.
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |