"Tchiowa" wrote in message
news:1167195815.361941.39990@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> PTravel wrote:
>> "Tchiowa" wrote in message
>> news:1167181160.623018.282030@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > PTravel wrote:
>> >> "Tchiowa" wrote in message
>> >> news:1167111017.883738.24510@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> >> > And I agree with the others. While this newspaper may in
>> >> > fact be a propaganda organ for the government that doesn't alter the
>> >> > fact that Christmas is celebrated in many parts of China.
>> >>
>> >> Not as it is here, nor for any purpose other than commercialism and
>> >> adaptation of "western" fads.
>> >
>> > Who said "as it is here"?
>>
>> I said. Remember what this thread is about? The U.S., i.e. here.
>
> But you waid that to refute James' posting. But it was *not* what he
> said nor was it what the article implied. He said that they celebrate
> Christmas. You said they didn't. When a whole lot of proof came out
> that they do, indeed, celebrate it. You add the qualifier "as it is
> here". Changes the meaning of what you said and complete negates your
> attempt at refutation.
>
> And it's a tad dishonest.
What is dishonest is your complete misrepresentation of what I've written.
>
>> > You deny cultural bigotry yet this is another
>> > example. Just because they don't celebrate Christmas *exactly* as they
>> > do in the US doesn't mean they don't celebrate Christmas.
>>
>> It means it's irrelevant. How hard is it for you to stay on topic?
>
> Hard hard is it for you not to add new qualifiers and change what
> you've been saying?
I haven't changed anything. You're still lying. Go back through the
thread.
>
>> My point: the celebration of Christmas is not universal and confined,
>> primarily, to those who have a tradition, heritage and culture of
>> Christianity. Donald the antisemite's response -- "they celebrate
>> Christmas
>> all over China." First, that's not true, and second, whatever
>> observance
>> is made in the name of western cultural chic is strictly and solely
>> commerical -- UNLIKE HERE.
>>
>> Are you tracking?
>
> Yes, but you seem to be lost. Your point was *NOT* "primarily" as you
> state above. You said they didn't do it, PERIOD. Now you are backing
> off and adding qualifiers.
Another lie.
>
> Second, the claim that it is strictly and solely commercial may be true
Oh, it may be true, hunh? I thought you said you knew more about China than
I did and I was wrong.
Another lie?
> but it is also true for many in the US, *PLUS* that's not what you said
> originally. You are again changing what you said because you've been
> proven wrong. So you are trying to pretend that you said something
> different.
Not only have I not been proven wrong, but you've failed, totally, to
respond to the points that I have made.
>
>> > They are
>> > allowed to do it differently and allowed to have different motives.
>>
>> Indeed they are. And, perhaps, some day the motives of observance of
>> Christmas in the U.S. will have changed sufficiently so that the holiday
>> is
>> truly secular, like Halloween, at which point it wouldn't matter in the
>> least to people like me, i.e. those whose traditions, culture and
>> heritage
>> do not include Christianity, if the government participates in its
>> celebration.
>
> For a very large percentage of Americans, Christmas is already secular.
But not for the majority of Americans whos BACKGROUND, CULTURE, TRADITION
AND HERITAGE IS NOT CHRISTIAN -- for them, Christmas is a Christian
tradition that has no cultural relevance to themselves.
> And for all there is at least a secular aspect to it. And the Christmas
> Tree represents the secular aspect. And that's what this thread is all
> about, remember?
You seem to have trouble with that point. All you've got is your insistance
that is the case. It's not for those whose traditions, heritage, culture
and background is not Christian.
>
>> >> > One can't help but wonder given your animosity toward Christmas if
>> >> > you
>> >> > saw exactly what you wanted to see.
>> >>
>> >> I have no animosity towards Christmas. I only have animosity towards
>> >> violations of the First Amendment.
>> >
>> > Which, if you are the lawyer you claim to be, the courts have already
>> > said has nothing to do with Christmas Trees at the airport.
>>
>> You are mistaken about the meaning of the First Amendment -- our Supreme
>> Courts can be wrong (and have been wrong), just like the Evangelist in
>> Chief
>> in White House is routinely wrong.
>
> I see. So you say "I'm a lawyer and I know the law so the rest of you
> should take my word as final and precise" and then when the law clearly
> contradicts you, as pointed out by the courts all of a sudden it's "The
> Court can be wrong". Did somebody say something about keeping on track?
I don't care whether you take my word for it or not. I'm a lawyer and I've
studied the law, yes. Your understanding of the law is non-existant -- you
haven't a clue. You claim that Lynch says that Christmas trees are
secular. That's beyond ignorant -- that means either you haven't read the
decision at all or, more likely, you didn't understand anything that you
read.
>
>> > They don't
>> > violate the First Amendment. So since that can't be the source of your
>> > animosity, what is?
>>
>> That is the source of my animosity and, in fact, they do violate the
>> First
>> Amendment. The Supreme Court has NOT ruled that "Christmas trees are
>> secular." I assume you're referring to Lynch v. Donnelly -- that's not
>> what
>> that case means at all.
>
> Lemon said that if an object is secular it can be displayed without
> violating the First Amendment.
Absoutely and completely wrong. You haven't read Lemon. You don't even
know what it is about. Hint: it's got nothing to do with "secular objects."
> Lynch said that the trees are secular.
Not even remotely close to what Lynch said.
>
>> >> > After all you have been saying that
>> >> > only Christians celebrate Christmas in America which is not only
>> >> > demonstrably false but silly in the extreme.
>> >>
>> >> And that is a complete lie. I've never said anything of the sort.
>> >
>> > ??? Of course you have. We've been arguing about that specific
>> > statement.
>>
>> No I haven't -- you're not mistaken, you're simply lying. You've made up
>> strawmen. Go back through the thread and read what I've written, then
>> apologize or shut up and go away.
>
> Wow. Maybe we should team up together and find the imposter who has
> been using your posting ID to say things like:
>
> "First of all, the point isn't whether "Christians" celebrate it, but
> whether the celebration is confined to those whose culture, tradition
> and heritage is Christian. The answer is, yes, that's who celebrates
> Christmas. Those whose culture, tradition and heritage is something
> else do not celebrate Christmas. In particular those whose culture,
> tradition and heritage is Jewish or Muslim do not celebrate Christmas."
Right, that's what I said. I never said that "Christians" celebrate it.
You've copied what I wrote word for word, yet you're completely incapable of
grasping the difference between "Christian" and "someone whose background,
culture heritage and traditions are Christian."
That's not a difficult concept, yet you're incapable of distinguishing
between the two.
I take it back -- I don't think you're intelligent.
>
> and
>
> "Christmas, on the other hand, is restricted to those whose culture,
> tradition and heritage is Christian, is not either all-sectarian or
> non-sectarian, and is not universal. It is certainly not part of
> American culture, but only Christian American culture. "
There you go, sport -- exactly right. It's part of Christian culture,
tradition, heritage and background, not American culture, tradition,
heritage and background.
And do you know why?
Because we who are do not have a Christian culture, tradition, heritage and
background but, nonetheless are Americans DON'T CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS.
Got it yet? Or, like that antisemite Donald, do you believe that anyone who
doesn't celebrate Christmas is not an American?
>
> and
>
> "No, I'm of the opinion that when one particular tradition is confined
> to those of a particular background, it's not "universal," or
> "American," or whatever else you want to call it. "
Read that last one over and ponder its meaning.
>
> and
>
> "No one finds Christmas offensive. It is not, however, cross-cultural."
>
> and
>
> "You did, when you said Christmas has become part of American culture.
> Did I misunderstand you? Do you agree that the observance of Christmas
> in America is, for all intents and purposes, confined to those whose
> heritage, tradition and culture is Christian?"
>
> How many more do I need to re-post for you? Who is that masked man
> pretending to be you and saying those things?
And I never denied it. What point do you think you are making? Thank you
for saving me the trouble of re-typing what I've been saying from the
beginning of this thread.
>
>> Read below -- THAT is what I've said.
>
> No. That is what you are saying *NOW*.
That's what I've been saying right along.
>
>
>
>> >> > Again, simply silly. You're telling me that in the US only
>> >> > Christians
>> >> > allow their children to sit on Santa's lap at the mall? Atheists
>> >> > (for
>> >> > example) don't?
>> >>
>> >> Jews don't.
>> >
>> > Nonsense. I've seen it.
>>
>> Yeah, I'm sure you've got a Jewish friend or two. Yes, there may be a
>> scattering of Jews around who might. The overwhelming majority don't.
>
> But some do which is *NOT* what you said repeatedly, as quoted above.
Are you seriously going to contend that because some small minority of Jews
observe Christmas, it's a universal holiday?
>
>> > Think about what you've said. About 70% of Americans claim Christianity
>> > as a "background".
>>
>> That's wrong. Every survey I've seen says 90-96% claim Christianity as a
>> background.
>
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/us_rel1.htm
>
> " 76.5% of American adults are Christian (52% Protestant; 24.5%
> Catholic).
> 14.1% do not follow any organized religion; they are Agnostics,
> Atheists, Humanists, Secularists, or have no religious affiliation.
> 1.3% are Jewish.
> 0.5% are Muslim, followers of Islam.
> 0.5% are Buddhist.
> 0.4% are Hindu.
> 0.3% are Unitarian Universalist.
> 0.1% are Neopagan (Druids, Pagans, Wiccans, etc)
> There are many more small religions, each of whom are followed by
> fewer than 0.1% of American adults. "
>
> Lots of similar surveys available.
Fine, so what? As I said, not the surveys that I read, but even more
compelling that Christmas is not universal.
>
>> > About 1/3 of those acknowledge that they are not religious.
>>
>> Irrelevant.
>
> No, because I said that less than half of Americans are "active
> Christians" so this includes that calculation.
What do "active Christians" have to do with anything? "People whose
culture, traditions, heritage and background is Christian" includes "active
Christians" and "inactive Christians" or whatever you want to call them. It
does not, however, include Jews, Muslims, Buddhist, Hindus, etc.
>
>> > So somewhere between slight less than half and 2/3 of Americans are
>> > Christian. The others are not. Let's use the figure that benefits your
>> > argument the most: 2/3.
>> >
>> > You are thus arguing that 1/3 of all Americans don't celebrate
>> > Christmas!!! Are you serious?
>>
>> My god, but you're deliberately obtuse. Okay, I'm going to say this one
>> more time -- I'll even use capital letters:
>>
>> Christmas is celebrated almost exclusively by THOSE WHOSE BACKGROUND,
>> CULTURE AND HERITAGE IS CHRISTIAN, and almost exclusively not by those
>> whose
>> background, cultrure and heritage is something else.
>
> But if 1/3 are *NOT* Christian then you're saying that 1/3 don't
> celebrate Christmas.
One more time: We're not talking about who is CHRISTIAN, but who comes from
a TRADITION, HERITAGE, CULTURE AND BACKGROUND THAT IS CHRISTIAN.
Do you understand the difference?
>
>> No -- you are so closed minded that you've made up a position for me, and
>> completely ignored what I've actually said. You are the bigot if you
>> believe that we who don't come from a Christian culture, tradition and
>> heritage have any interest whatsoever in observing those holidays and
>> other
>> observances which are peculiar to it.
>
> The bigotry is you assuming that because a person is not Christian he
> doesn't observe a holiday that is a national tradition and a national
> holiday.
No, your bigotry is assuming that because you observe Christmas, everyone
else does.
>
>> >> And, since this is exactly what I started my participation in this
>> >> thread
>> >> with, and all that are left are the anti-semites and those who, like
>> >> yourself, can't seem to distinguish between the usual right-wing "war
>> >> on
>> >> Christmas" lies and what I've been saying, I'll just let you pat each
>> >> other
>> >> on the back and congratulate yourselves on how stiff-necked Jews are,
>> >> and
>> >> how anyone who doesn't celebrate Christmas is anti-Christian.
>> >
>> > Sorry, I'm not a racist. I don't believe Jews are stiff-necked.
>>
>> You just believe that we should observe Christian holidays because if we
>> don't we're anti-Christian.
>
> Never said that nor anything like it.
This is what you wrote -- it's only two posts up:
"And people who don't celebrate Christmas are anti-Christian. But people
who oppose other people celebrating Christmas by putting up a secular
Christmas decoration in the airport are, in fact, anti-Christian."
Here's the google reference:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.abortion/msg/cdbc97f167c71f1c
So, at least we know -- it's not that you're unintelligent. You simply lie.
>
>> > You, on the other hand, as an individual definitely are.
>>
>> Yeah, right. What holiday am I forcing you to observe?
>
> None. But you are trying to limit Americans in their observation of
> Christmas by trying to prevent them from putting up secular decorations
> at the airport.
Except that they're not secular decorations. You claim they are, but have
no basis for the contention other than what's in your own head. You said
that the Lynch case said that they are. That's a complete lie. Lynch said
nothing of the sort. You said that Lemon says that they are. That's
another lie, since Lemon has absolutely nothing to do with displays of any
kind. Then you're left with your claim that everyone, Jews, Muslims and
Christians celebrate Christmas. You've been told that's a lie by the Jews
who have posted here.
So all you're left with is your lies.
Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.
Now, clear up one other thing.
As I said, Donald's agenda is quite clear -- he's an antisemite, a racist
and a bigot.
What's your agenda?
Why did you lie about Lynch?
Why did you lie about Lemon?
Why do you lie about Jews?
>
>> > But people
>> > who oppose other people celebrating Christmas by putting up a secular
>> > Christmas decoration in the airport are, in fact, anti-Christian.
>>
>> Again, you've totally ignored what I said. I don't oppose anyone
>> celebrating Christmas. Go nuts -- put up trees and tinsel, bankrupt
>> yourself buying presents, play Christmas music to your hearts content.
>> Just
>> don't do it with my tax money.
>
> Which tax money? Airports are funded by user fees.
Another lie.
>
> Besides, the rule is that the majority gets to decide where tax money
> is spent.
No, that's not the rule. Did you take civics in high school? The majority
doesn't get to violate the Constitution, regardless of what the majority
would like to spend its money on.
> There are a lot of things I don't want my tax money spent on.
> But that's not the way it works.
You haven't a clue about the way it works.
>
>> > You keep trying to cover your true statements.
>>
>> No, you keep lying about my true statements and making up positions I've
>> never held.
>
> Are you going to help me find the forger using your identity?
I've already shown up your lies.
>
>> You're not stupid, so I don't believe you were simply mistaken. That
>> means
>> your lies are deliberate.
>>
>> Why do you deliberately lie?
>
> I see. Quoting your words is lying. That it?
No -- quoting my words and saying they mean something else is lying.
Saying that Lynch held that the display of Christmas trees was secular is
lying.
Saying that Lemon held that Christmas trees are secular is lying.
Saying that Jews celebrate Christmas is lying.
That's lying.
>
|