Iowa Town Renames Good Friday to 'Spring Holiday'

[beemerboy]

I wonder what John Robert Hanna's thinking about this:

 

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2482813/posts

 

Yes, I know they reversed their decision but you have wonder what's going on in America's heartland.

 

 

 

[philbytx]

quote

Taking a recommendation by the Davenport Civil Rights Commission to change the holiday's name to something more ecumenical, City Administrator Craig Malin sent a memo to municipal employees announcing Good Friday would officially be known as "Spring Holiday."

unquote

 

So, it was a "recommendation" from the Davenport Civil Rights Commission. And here is the quote from their website :

 

QUOTE

The Iowa Civil Rights Act prohibits discriminatory practices in these areas:

 

Employment

 

Unfair employment practices.

 

It shall be an unfair or discriminatory practice for any:

Person* to refuse to hire, accept, register, classify, or refer for employment, to discharge any employee, or to otherwise discriminate in employment against any applicant for employment or any employee because of the age, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion or disability of such applicant or employee, unless based upon the nature of the occupation.

 

Iowa Code section 216.6(1)(a).

 

* "Person" means one or more individuals, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, receivers, and the state of Iowa and all political subdivisions and agencies thereof.

 

Iowa Code section 216.2(11).

 

Housing

 

Unfair or discriminatory practices - housing.

 

It shall be an unfair or discriminatory practice for any person, owner, or person acting for an owner ...

 

1. To refuse to sell, rent, lease, assign, sublease, refuse to negotiate, or to otherwise make unavailable, or deny any real property or housing accommodation ... to any person because of the race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, disability, or familial status of such person.

2. To discriminate against any person because of the person's race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, disability, or familial status, in the terms, conditions or privileges of the sale, rental, lease assignment or sublease of any real property or housing accommodation ...

3. To directly or indirectly advertise, or in any other manner indicate or publicize that the purchase, rental, lease, assignment, or sublease of any real property or housing accommodation ... by persons of any particular race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, disability, or familial status is unwelcome, objectionable, not acceptable or not solicited.

4. To discriminate against the lessee or purchaser of any real property or housing accommodation ... or against any perspective lessee or purchaser ... because of the race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, age or national origin of persons who may from time to time be present in or on the lessee's or owner's premises for lawful purposes at the invitation of the lessee or owner as friends, guests, visitors, relatives or in any similar capacity.

Iowa Code section 216.8.

 

Public Accommodations

 

Unfair practices - accommodations or services.

 

It shall be an unfair or discriminatory practice for any owner, lessee, sublessee, proprietor, manager or superintendent of any public accommodation or any agent or employee thereof:

 

a. To refuse or deny to any person because of race, creed, color, sex, national origin, religion or disability the accommodations, advantages, facilities, services, or privileges thereof, or otherwise to discriminate against any person because of race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion or disability in the furnishing of such accommodations, advantages, facilities, services, or privileges.

b. To directly or indirectly advertise or in any other manner indicate or publicize that the patronage of persons of any particular race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion or disability is unwelcome, objectionable, not accepted or not solicited.

 

Iowa Code section 216.7(1).

 

Education

 

Unfair or discriminatory practices - education.

 

It is an unfair or discriminatory practice for any educational institution* to discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, or disability in any program or activity. Such discriminatory practices shall include but not be limited to the following practices:

 

1. Exclusion of a person or persons from participating in, denial of the benefits of, or subjection to discrimination in any academic, extracurricular, research, occupational training, or other program or activity except athletic programs;

2. Denial of comparable opportunity in intramural and interscholastic athletic programs;

3. Discrimination among persons in employment and the condition of employment;

4. On the basis of sex, the application of any rule concerning the actual or potential parental, family or marital status of a person, or the exclusion of any person from any program or activity or employment because of pregnancy or related conditions dependent upon the physician's diagnosis and certification.

Iowa Code section 216.9.

 

*"Educational Institution" includes any preschool, elementary, secondary, or community college, area education agency, or postsecondary college or university and their governing boards.

 

Iowa Code section 216.9(4).

 

Credit

 

Unfair credit practices.

It shall be an unfair or discriminatory practice for any:

 

1. Creditor to refuse to enter into a consumer credit transaction or impose finance charges or other terms or conditions more onerous than those regularly extended by that creditor to consumers of similar economic backgrounds because of age, color, creed, national origin, race, religion, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, physical disability, or familial status.

2. Person authorized or licensed to do business in this state pursuant to chapter 524, 533, 534, 536, or 536A to refuse to loan or extend credit or to impose terms or conditions more onerous than those regularly extended to persons of similar economic backgrounds because of age, color, creed, national origin, race, religion, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, physical disability, or familial status.

3. Creditor to refuse to offer credit life or health and accident insurance because of the color, creed, national origin, race, religion, marital status, age, physical disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or familial status. Refusal by a creditor to offer credit life or health and accident insurance based upon the age or physical disability of the consumer shall not be an unfair or discriminatory practice if such denial is based solely upon bona fide underwriting considerations not prohibited by title XIII, subtitle 1.

 

Iowa Code section 216.10.

 

UNQUOTE

 

 

What the hell is discriminatory about calling a holiday "Good Friday" and why the hell were they involved anyway!

 

 

I do hope the media investigates just who in this organization suggested the above!!!

 

 

 

 

[Bob Palin]

I think they did the right thing in changing the name.

[russell_bynum]

I think they did the right thing in changing the name.

 

Seems like a silly thing to waste time and resources on when cash is tight, but it wouldn't really make any difference to me one way or the other.

 

I know what I'm celebrating that day and that's all that matters.

[John Ranalletta]

Why shouldn't the majority of Americans for whom "Good Friday" has some significance capitulate to the very small minority who somehow can't abide it? How about Druid's Friday?

[Bob Palin]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

[russell_bynum]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

 

You can call it whatever you'd like...it really doesn't make any difference to me and my beliefs.

[Whip]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

 

Tell me where that is written????

[Shaman97]

I think they did the right thing in changing the name.

 

Seems like a silly thing to waste time and resources on when cash is tight, but it wouldn't really make any difference to me one way or the other.

 

I know what I'm celebrating that day and that's all that matters.

 

Why should it? You live in California.

[Bob Palin]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

 

Tell me where that is written????

I saw it on some clay tablets in a cave near Hanksville.

[Whip]

I love Hanksville. Good burger joint. Two gas stations ( one in a cave) and only an hour from Torrey.

 

Now they got stone tablets.....

 

Way coooool!!!!!

[hANNAbONE]

fREEKIN' iDIOTS in D-port...Tasker shot me this report earlier in an email.

 

Maybe they outta "D-Port" them.

 

Sounds like the town and area was getting the tar boiling.

 

 

 

@ Killer - I expected more outta you, brutha.

[TyTass]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

Why would we call it "Mid-winter's Holiday" then winter doesn't even start until 21 December? Actually Bob, I'm with you on this one, in principle. Separation of Church and State isn't a majority-rules issue.

 

How important is it to me that any community need to change the name of a holiday? Not very, especially when it's not my community and I'm not forced to live there.

 

But I will add - because I just want to stir the pot as could also use a little color on my skin (i.e., red) - that I still find it fascinating that people find it an affront the change the observed name of a holiday, as though that fact changes "to them" what that holiday is and means "to them."

 

[motoguy128]

The only reason it's a government holiday is because it's Good Friday. No matter what you call it, if you specifically give employees the Friday before Easter off, then you are recognizing Good Friday, no matter what you call it.

 

No matter what name you give it, it's still Good Friday and being recognized. In order for the government to remain neutral, they would need to recognize a different day altogether.

 

I have an idea, lets just call it April 2nd and not officially give it a name in the governemnt records.

 

I'm not of the opinion that the Freedom of Religion means that the government must completely purge itself of all religion. It's one thing ot recognize a religion that it practices by the majority and another to actively support a religion.

 

Honestly I could care less one way or the other, I've never had Good Friday off. The Governemnt isn't like some in the world that might punish you if you fail to follow and recognize the holiday. Religious freedom in the US means that not only can you practice any religion (as long as other laws are not violated in the process), more importantly, you are not forced to participate in the religion off the state. (example Taliban).

[Bob Palin]

@ Killer - I expected more outta you, brutha.

I'm not sure if yo mean in pounding on Whip or in my opinion. Surely you know by now that I think religion is evil and to blame for a good number of the world's problems.

[Paul Mihalka]

I have a solution for Davenport: Declare Good Friday a official holiday, but those who are offended by the name will have to go to work, as a protest.

[Bob Palin]

I have a solution for Davenport: Declare Good Friday a official holiday, but those who are offended by the name will have to go to work, as a protest.

My sister works for the US government and complains every year about not getting any days off at easter, in England she used to get Friday and Monday off.

[philbytx]

quote

Surely you know by now that I think religion is evil and to blame for a good number of the world's problems.

unquote

Yup! And so are a whole host of "ism's" to blame too!

I know, let's just ban naming all days of the week (They ARE named after God's after all) and cancel all holidays (and stop calling them that, as they all have religious connotations)!

 

Let's simply live in a nebulous world of a countless number of seconds, minutes and hours....

 

 

[Bob Palin]

Let's simply live in a nebulous world of a countless number of seconds, minutes and hours....

I don't believe in time either (seriously!)

[SageRider]

Seems to me that government ought to call it like it is. All government holidays should be renamed to:

"Just Another Government Day Off at TaxPayer Expense"

[beemerboy]

...........@ Killer - I expected more outta you, brutha.

 

What do you expect from a guy who spells the word "favor" as "favour?" Honestly, John Robert, there are times I wonder about you and the people you associate with.

[beemerboy]

.............But I will add - because I just want to stir the pot as could also use a little color on my skin (i.e., red) - that I still find it fascinating that people find it an affront the change the observed name of a holiday, as though that fact changes "to them" what that holiday is and means "to them."

 

 

To me it's not so much the religious aspect as it is the very concerted effort to chip away at certain institutions in order to bring about societal change. And in this case we're not talking about positive change, just changes for the sake of change. Why is it seemingly okay to go after and/or bash christian-based practices and establishments while simultaneously beating the populace over the head about respecting everyone's beliefs? We all know there are some protected religious establishments in this country and showing ANY amount of intolerance, whether real or perceived, towards them will earn one the enmity of the mainstream print and electronic media not to mention a whole host of loonies on the fringe.

 

If we allow this gradual erosion of respect for any institution there will come a day when we've lost it all. It will have happened slowly until they come knocking on your door to take away your right(s). In my opinion the Davenport Civil Rights Comission should be wearing brown shirts.

[upflying]

California has a solution for Good Friday.

Here state worker's call the day "furlough day".

 

Here is how one California city celebrated the winter festivus last Christmas.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2400497/posts

[Bob Palin]

Why is it seemingly okay to go after and/or bash christian-based practices and establishments while simultaneously beating the populace over the head about respecting everyone's beliefs

Only because those are the ones built into the system, it's not like they are being replaced with another religion, the replacement is a belief-neutral position. Why should your Christian beliefs be imposed on me in the naming of holidays? I don't see how having a "Spring Holiday" could possibly be offensive, if you want to celebrate easter then that's just fine. Perhaps the Spring Holiday should be moved to a different date to completely separate it from religion.

 

edit: even better get rid of official holidays altogether, given that many businesses seem to be open and target the holidays for business why not let people pick their own days to be off?

[LeftCoastMan]

Keep religious myths and fairytales out of the real world. Good for Iowa.

[LeftCoastMan]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

 

Tell me where that is written????

 

Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." The founding fathers were atheists, deists, and agnostics. They wanted to keep the myth and fairytales out of government. Good for them.

[tallman]

Keep religious myths and fairytales out of the real world. Good for Iowa.

 

And you know what is a myth or fairytale?

Someone made you the head Fairy?

 

Oh wait, you said the "real world", and we all know what that means to you.

[LeftCoastMan]

.............But I will add - because I just want to stir the pot as could also use a little color on my skin (i.e., red) - that I still find it fascinating that people find it an affront the change the observed name of a holiday, as though that fact changes "to them" what that holiday is and means "to them."

 

 

To me it's not so much the religious aspect as it is the very concerted effort to chip away at certain institutions in order to bring about societal change. And in this case we're not talking about positive change, just changes for the sake of change. Why is it seemingly okay to go after and/or bash christian-based practices and establishments while simultaneously beating the populace over the head about respecting everyone's beliefs? We all know there are some protected religious establishments in this country and showing ANY amount of intolerance, whether real or perceived, towards them will earn one the enmity of the mainstream print and electronic media not to mention a whole host of loonies on the fringe.

 

If we allow this gradual erosion of respect for any institution there will come a day when we've lost it all. It will have happened slowly until they come knocking on your door to take away your right(s). In my opinion the Davenport Civil Rights Comission should be wearing brown shirts.

 

Ah, first violation of Godwin's Law. Xtians are pushing their beliefs on others. That's why the First Amendment to the US Constitution was written. Religion is a private worship of myths, keep it away from rational people.

[LeftCoastMan]

Keep religious myths and fairytales out of the real world. Good for Iowa.

 

And you know what is a myth or fairytale?

Someone made you the head Fairy?

 

Oh wait, you said the "real world", and we all know what that means to you.

 

And you made no sense whatsoever. I do know what a myth and fairy tale is. Bronze Age people, who had no clue about the natural world, invented stories about the world. We're smarter, more rational now, and we understand that there is absolutely no evidence for these myths.

[tallman]

"We" do?

 

Isn't believing that you can read other people's minds and know what they are thinking, uh, well, er, irrational?

 

And if you think Bronze Age people had no clue about the natural world, you are sadly misinformed.

 

Do you hang out with these folks too?

[hANNAbONE]

wHAT wAS that quote again...??

 

"...there are no atheists in foxholes..."

[russell_bynum]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

 

Tell me where that is written????

 

Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." The founding fathers were atheists, deists, and agnostics. They wanted to keep the myth and fairytales out of government. Good for them.

 

That's not what the 1st Amendment says.

[Bob Palin]

wHAT wAS that quote again...??

 

"...there are no atheists in foxholes..."

Yup, that's a rational basis for believing in supernatural beings.

[SeanC]

If it's a religious holiday, the only correct action for the state is not to have the day off. To usurp a religious holiday for non-religious purposes is wrong. To further change the official name of that holiday to something non-religious is deceitful and wrong. To then justify the name change under the guise of the First Amendment is unprincipled, deceitful and wrong. It is cultural theft, and if any other religion (Judaism, Islam, etc.) were similarly hijacked, there would be outrage, but since the usurped holiday is Christian, the theft is "multi-culturalism."

 

Shame on those dishonest asshat f-wads in Davenport.

 

Today is César Chavez Day in the state of California, by the way. My wife has the day off. I think it's quaintly funny in a California way, but at least it honors someone without pissing on someone else's beliefs or culture.

[SageRider]

Bravo, Sean!

[beemerman2k]

I am not a formally religious man; to me, my faith and my convictions are my own and so, too, are yours. But at the end of the day, what do I care if anyone aside from me fails to honor my religious Diety and customs like I do? Whether the government or society at large honors my God has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy of my God, my religious traditions, or religious beliefs.

 

Now, is this some underhanded method to undermine the traditions of our country? If we take the concept of Diety out of government, will that also call into question many of our God given rights as acknowledged by our founding documents as well? If there is no God, then why do I have a right to free speech? A right to religious freedom? A right to be left alone? A right to be "endowed by my creator" with certain inalienable rights -- among these the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

 

If that really is the goal, then I don't see how the existence or removal of a religious holiday is going to make a bit of difference. You cannot force people to recognize or to ignore issues and events of importance to them.

 

Government cannot cancel Christmas, they can only say that as a political entity, they will have no formal recognition of the holiday. But if some entity out there says I cannot honor Christmas, now we really do have a problem. Until that time, I really don't see the problem. Christmas is no more a holy or important day because the government recognizes it, and it loses absolutely nothing if government ceases to acknowledge its significance. Government recognition has absolutely nothing to do with the sanctity of the day to me.

 

If society at large decided to vote out the formal government recognition of religious holidays, it wouldn't matter to me one bit.

[Couchrocket]

Wow, what a GREAT thread. Talk about getting to the crux of a real divide.

 

First, to the poster who talks about "the real world" - I humbly ask which one he is referring to? The one we fat, dumb, happy, Americans live in? Or the one the third world lives in? Or the one the average Chinese peasant lives in? Or? Are are they all equivalent and acceptable to you?

 

To the folk who are ascribing to the time, plus chance, plus nothingg else, model of existence I have several suggestions for thought:

 

If we are here merely by evolution and that evolution brought about religious fairy tales, and we're now so enlightened as to do away with them - are you happy with the results as experienced in the last century as brought to us from those of the same belief? And are you looking forward to a future for those you love based on survival of the fittest? (a 51% vote?) Is that fine with you? If not, on what basis do you opine? Fairness? Meaningless concept in random universe. Get ready, you ain't seen nothin' yet. There are plenty of bad actors in this "real world" who will eat you and your children for breakfast in the name of evolution. They were just getting warmed up last century. Until we discovered the Nazi death camps there was a popular and growing eugenics movement here in the U.S. - did you know that? And who was it that was appalled by that and killed it off? The voice of those folk is now muzzled. The majority now holds as true a world view that should logically embrace it. They just can't live with it yet as they live "functionally" on the memory of values provided by a now reviled world view.

 

At least Bob has taken things to their logical conclusion. Since in his thinking there isn't really any time - his sense of himself is just a "state" and he has embraced the ultimate in non-meaning. I respect that. It is honest.

 

Oops.. honest doesn't have any objective meaning, and certainly not relevant in a time-plus-change universe... strike that. No, it should be "noble" - that's it. Nope, can't use that one either for the same reason. Hummmm....

 

Integrity... nope.

Brave... nope.

Enlightned... nope.

Intelligent... nope.

Damn... can't use any of these "meaning-laden" words in a purely mechanical universe.

 

OK, I got it! EXTANT! That's what it is, extant.

 

As to religion in government. The sooner we divest ourselves of every shred of that the better - lest we kid ourselves into thinking that this nation has any hope of ongoing greatness (oops there's another one of those nasty value-laden terms... sorry). Hummm... I guess what I mean is that the sooner we embrace everything as being equal to everything else, the faster we will sink into mediocrity (did it again, sorry) and be replaced by a society who knows better. That will be an improvement.

 

So, celbrate nothing, value nothing, since the concept of value is an illusion in a time-plus-chance-plus-nothing universe. Remove values laden concepts from governance.

 

 

[SeanC]

Government cannot cancel Christmas, they can only say that as a political entity, they will have no formal recognition of the holiday.

So you'd be okay with the government declaring that from now on, December 25th will be known as "Winter Day," and any/all official references to "Christmas" will be prohibited?

 

I'd actually be okay with the a government decision not to recognize Christmas as a holiday (in fact, I'd welcome it), but I won't accept a decision to erase "Christmas" and supplant it with a different, official name. (And yeah, I really don't give a shit that early-Christian Rome adopted the date we now call Christmas, even though it used to be their Saturnalia and even though Christ most likely was not born on Dec. 25th.)

 

Pick another f'ing day for Christ's sake!

 

(sorry, couldn't resist the play on words)

 

Christmas is somewhat unique in that it always falls on Dec. 25, but Good Friday occurs on a different date each year -- for entirely religious reasons! -- as do many other religious holidays. E.g., What if government decided to declare "Autumn Day" to fall on Yom Kippur? Or "Late Summer Day" to coincide with the start of Ramadan?

 

Christmas is no more a holy or important day because the government recognizes it, and it loses absolutely nothing if government ceases to acknowledge its significance. Government recognition has absolutely nothing to do with the sanctity of the day to me.

I'm totally with you in that regard. I wish the government wouldn't recognize it, and I wish all federal and state employees had to report to work on Christmas Day.

 

If society at large decided to vote out the formal government recognition of religious holidays, it wouldn't matter to me one bit.

Me neither. But if they vote to rename religious holidays -- any religion -- it matters to me a lot. I will oppose it strenuously. But of course, they won't vote to rename just any religion's holidays; they would only attempt to change Christian holidays, the underlying deceit of which makes me despise the actions even more.

[Ken H.]

I still find it fascinating that people find it an affront the change the observed name of a holiday, as though that fact changes "to them" what that holiday is and means "to them."

Yeah me too. It’s sort of like the prayer in schools subject. Like some how an official edifice of what is or isn’t named how, what one can or can’t do; changes what I believe or do in my head.

 

It’s as if this coming Friday was suddenly called by everyone worldwide, “The Friday When Everyone Has Ice Cream” that would/could somehow change in believers’ (in the Christ story) minds what the Friday before Easter actually means to them.

 

Which I think is kind of Russell’s point too.

 

Specific to this particular story though, I have to vote with Bob. Governments shouldn’t be biasing their decisions (including granting and naming days off) for or against the recognitions of specific religions.

 

 

 

[Ken H.]

quote

Surely you know by now that I think religion is evil and to blame for a good number of the world's problems.

unquote

Yup! And so are a whole host of "ism's" to blame too!

All those 'ism's" are religions too.

[Whip]

Governments are not supposed to endorse religion, particularly a specific faith. I'm in favour of renaming Christmas Day too, mid-winters holiday would be good.

 

Tell me where that is written????

 

Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." The founding fathers were atheists, deists, and agnostics. They wanted to keep the myth and fairytales out of government. Good for them.

 

That's not what the 1st Amendment says.

 

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[Ken H.]

There are plenty of bad actors in this "real world" who will eat you and your children for breakfast in the name of evolution. They were just getting warmed up last century. Until we discovered the Nazi death camps there was a popular and growing eugenics movement here in the U.S. - did you know that?

People do lots of things in the name of this or that. It doesn’t mean they are accurately representing the true nature of the ideology upon which they are justifying their actions. Few people would argue that the actions of the Nazis were an accurate representation of, or manifestation of the scientific principles of evolution. Eugenics is an aberration of Evolution.

[Ken H.]

I won't accept a decision to erase "Christmas" and supplant it with a different, official name.

 

Pick another f'ing day for Christ's sake!

 

Me neither. But if they vote to rename religious holidays -- any religion -- it matters to me a lot. I will oppose it strenuously. But of course, they won't vote to rename just any religion's holidays; they would only attempt to change Christian holidays, the underlying deceit of which makes me despise the actions even more.

What holidays are there (in the USA) that are named after any religions but Christianity? (That could be changed, seeing as you are asserting that they are targeting to rename only Christian named holidays.)

 

So it would be okay then to rename say, “Labor Day” to “Muhammadmas”?

 

 

 

 

The “they” in this particular story about Davenport, IA BTW is some mid-level manager who wrote a memo, nobody voted on anything. So let’s keep the severity of this in perspective a little bit, eh? It’s not like we’re talking about an act of Congress or anything.

[LeftCoastMan]

 

That's not what the 1st Amendment says.

 

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

If you were able to read in the English Language, you would have seen that I said "The Establishment Clause". Please learn to read.

[Bob Palin]

Just so everybody knows Couch and I have been having this conversation for a couple of years now.

 

At least Bob has taken things to their logical conclusion. Since in his thinking there isn't really any time - his sense of himself is just a "state" and he has embraced the ultimate in non-meaning. I respect that. It is honest.

 

Oops.. honest doesn't have any objective meaning, and certainly not relevant in a time-plus-change universe... strike that. No, it should be "noble" - that's it. Nope, can't use that one either for the same reason. Hummmm....

 

Integrity... nope.

Brave... nope.

Enlightned... nope.

Intelligent... nope.

Damn... can't use any of these "meaning-laden" words in a purely mechanical universe.

 

OK, I got it! EXTANT! That's what it is, extant.

Extant is perfect.

 

So, given that nothing has any meaning what is the best thing we can do as these extants called people?

 

What I would like to do is build a philosophical system based on a principle that benefits all of us, the Golden Rule is a pretty good (incomplete) start but we don't need a supernatural being to give it 'meaning'. Its meaning comes from its adoption as a principle. This is of course idealistic since it requires everybody to buy in, but that's no different from a religion based philosophy in the absence of thunderbolts from heaven making His point.

 

Incidentally I think the Golden Rule existed long before we could articulate it, I think it is an essential part of human nature and is what led us to form successful societies in the first place. Later observers noticed this and in an effort to codify it attributed it to a supernatural being to try and give it authority. And that's where it all started to go wrong...

[LeftCoastMan]

I won't accept a decision to erase "Christmas" and supplant it with a different, official name.

 

Pick another f'ing day for Christ's sake!

 

Me neither. But if they vote to rename religious holidays -- any religion -- it matters to me a lot. I will oppose it strenuously. But of course, they won't vote to rename just any religion's holidays; they would only attempt to change Christian holidays, the underlying deceit of which makes me despise the actions even more.

What holidays are there (in the USA) that are named after any religions but Christianity? (That could be changed, seeing as you are asserting that they are targeting to rename only Christian named holidays.)

 

So it would be okay then to rename say, “Labor Day” to “Muhammadmas”?

 

 

 

 

The “they” in this particular story about Davenport, IA BTW is some mid-level manager who wrote a memo, nobody voted on anything. So let’s keep the severity of this in perspective a little bit, eh? It’s not like we’re talking about an act of Congress or anything.

 

Your appeal to silliness continues. I don't want any religious mention in any holiday. I don't care if it's Xmas or St. Swizzens day.

[David]

I suggest getting your facts right.

 

And I suggest adjusting your tone lest you be relieved of your posting privileges. (Not by me--I have no such authority.)

[LeftCoastMan]

There are plenty of bad actors in this "real world" who will eat you and your children for breakfast in the name of evolution. They were just getting warmed up last century. Until we discovered the Nazi death camps there was a popular and growing eugenics movement here in the U.S. - did you know that?

People do lots of things in the name of this or that. It doesn’t mean they are accurately representing the true nature of the ideology upon which they are justifying their actions. Few people would argue that the actions of the Nazis were an accurate representation of, or manifestation of the scientific principles of evolution. Eugenics is an aberration of Evolution.

 

Some people do argue that Evolution leads to Eugenics, but they would be wrong. Eugenics has nothing to do with evolution, because, by definition, evolution is the change of the genetics of a population over time by natural selection or genetic drift. Neither of those mechanisms can include eugenics.

[LeftCoastMan]

I suggest getting your facts right.

 

And I suggest adjusting your tone lest you be relieved of your posting privileges. (Not by me--I have no such authority.)

 

My tone is perfect.

[Bob Palin]

I suggest getting your facts right.

 

And I suggest adjusting your tone lest you be relieved of your posting privileges. (Not by me--I have no such authority.)

 

My tone is perfect.

Even though I agree with most of what you say you are coming across as intolerant, aggressive and shrill (angry maybe?). Take heed of the previous warning (and I have no authority either)