New Mexico silencing Christian views

[puggymom]

Is what going too far? The stupid state of NM telling me who I have to do business with and fining me if I don't?? I agree, that is going too far.

Being able to say I do not want to serve such and such. Like I guess it was like the whole Dixie Chick thing....with them whining about their freedom of speech or whatever. Someone said back "You have the right to say what you want just like I have the right not to buy your CD"

 

[puggymom]

We're all doing that this year....

Oh and now you know what it is like to be me...all the time!!
Heck I remember standing in line in 2004 to vote and still had no idea who to vite for. And I was fully educated on both Bush and Kerry...I just could not decide who was the lesser evil. I ended up voting for Bush. Not sure if I choose correctly or not since I am NOT nor ever was a fan of Kerry.

 

[Baja28]

Being able to say I do not want to serve such and such. Like I guess it was like the whole Dixie Chick thing....with them whining about their freedom of speech or whatever. Someone said back "You have the right to say what you want just like I have the right not to buy your CD"

I don't think refusing your private service to someone is going too far. You're not hurting anyone but your own income. They could go hire another photographer.

 

[puggymom]

I don't think refusing your private service to someone is going too far. You're not hurting anyone but your own income. They could go hire another photographer.

I definately see your point. I feel so conflicted with this issue because I can see both sides. And I know that this is a serious who really cares because it is just wedding pictures issue but it just opens the door for other much large more important issues.

 

[Sonsie]

Photography is an art. Can you force the artist to produce? Should they be able to force a sculptor to do an entwined stature of the "ladies" too? How about a painter? Photography isn't an essental service like transportation is. They should be able to choose their clients.

Too bad they didn't just shoot it and jack up all the pictures, cut off their heads, and get lots of thumb shots. Would have been cheaper than defending the lawsuit and resulting fine.

 

[SamSpade]

I am comparing the two because there are people who believe saying "Happy Holidays" discriminates against Christians after all ....

It IS, if employees are told they may NOT wish someone a Merry Christmas and must instead substitute the politically correct term in its place. And it's not 'discrimination' so much as censorship. Try to imagine the outrage if say, a Jewish person were forbidden from saying "Mazel Tov" or "Shalom" because it *offended* people.


I think the substitute term is ridiculous. If Christmas suddenly went away, *nobody* would be saying Happy Holidays.

 

[puggymom]

It IS, if employees are told they may NOT wish someone a Merry Christmas and must instead substitute the politically correct term in its place. And it's not 'discrimination' so much as censorship. Try to imagine the outrage if say, a Jewish person were forbidden from saying "Mazel Tov" or "Shalom" because it *offended* people.


I think the substitute term is ridiculous. If Christmas suddenly went away, *nobody* would be saying Happy Holidays.

Oh sorry, I forgot that Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Winter Solstice, and Boxing Day were not real holidays.
Or MAYBE it has nothing to do with that at all!! Maybe, just maybe it is because the 'holidays' encompasses EVERYTHING from Thanksgiving to New Years!!! Oh wait, I am just being naive to the so called 'war' on Christianity.

 

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

I agree with Mikey. NM has their head up the elitists' asses.

Just another way extremists are using anti-discrimination laws to attack people.

Okay, so I'm a reporter. That means if some gay couple wanted me to report on their wedding, even though I cover Motorsports, I'd have NO CHOICE but to cover it?

Great going New Mexico.

 

[TimAllen]

Oh and BTW I believe most of our founding fathers were Deists.

I have to disagree, So far as I can tell only 1.9% were deists which would be unitarian.


Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers # of
Founding
Fathers % of
Founding
Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

 

[SamSpade]

Oh sorry, I forgot that Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Winter Solstice, and Boxing Day were not real holidays.

What did I ever do to you? I'm not your enemy. And I'm just making observations. I'm not part of the whole 'war on Christianity' stuff.

Winter Solstice is a transitional spot on the calendar. It's the beginning of winter and the shortest day of the year. While there have been many traditions associated with it - including Christmas itself - it's not a holiday any more than the Summer Solstice is.

Boxing Day is only celebrated largely in a few British Commonwealth nations and its origins are - surprise - rooted in Christmas.

Unlike most holidays, which celebrate the anniversary of an event or religious observance - Kwanzaa was "created" in 1966 by Ron Karenga as an "alternative" to Christmas, because as he put it, Jesus was psychotic.

Christmas is the biggest holiday in the Western world and its strictly cultural and economic impact dwarfs everything else. Some nations and some businesses do almost all their commerce during this time. No other holiday has the same impact in the West. You could even eliminate everything relevant to Jesus Christ and Christmas would still be culturally and economically the biggest event all year long. Movies are released for the Christmas season, with Christmas themes. Sales and decorations adorn the whole country. The entire month of December is one long cultural festival.

Take it away and - what? - we're having a Passover party? we're gearing up for Ramadan? Take away Christmas and the whole season vanishes. It'd be like taking gambling out of Vegas. No one would show up.

Take it away and Kwanzaa, Hannukah and Boxing Day have less cultural and economic impact than All Saint's Day. This is not prejudice against the other holidays - they simply don't have the impact that Christmas does. If the whole world decided to move Christmas to say, April, the whole Happy Holidays thing would get a shrug from shoppers. Nobody would care.

 

[puggymom]

What did I ever do to you? I'm not your enemy. And I'm just making observations. I'm not part of the whole 'war on Christianity' stuff.

Winter Solstice is a transitional spot on the calendar. It's the beginning of winter and the shortest day of the year. While there have been many traditions associated with it - including Christmas itself - it's not a holiday any more than the Summer Solstice is.

Boxing Day is only celebrated largely in a few British Commonwealth nations and its origins are - surprise - rooted in Christmas.

Unlike most holidays, which celebrate the anniversary of an event or religious observance - Kwanzaa was "created" in 1966 by Ron Karenga as an "alternative" to Christmas, because as he put it, Jesus was psychotic.

Christmas is the biggest holiday in the Western world and its strictly cultural and economic impact dwarfs everything else. Some nations and some businesses do almost all their commerce during this time. No other holiday has the same impact in the West. You could even eliminate everything relevant to Jesus Christ and Christmas would still be culturally and economically the biggest event all year long. Movies are released for the Christmas season, with Christmas themes. Sales and decorations adorn the whole country. The entire month of December is one long cultural festival.

Take it away and - what? - we're having a Passover party? we're gearing up for Ramadan? Take away Christmas and the whole season vanishes. It'd be like taking gambling out of Vegas. No one would show up.

Take it away and Kwanzaa, Hannukah and Boxing Day have less cultural and economic impact than All Saint's Day. This is not prejudice against the other holidays - they simply don't have the impact that Christmas does. If the whole world decided to move Christmas to say, April, the whole Happy Holidays thing would get a shrug from shoppers. Nobody would care.

First of all
Secondly I just do not see a big deal in retailers saying 'Merry Christmas', 'Happy Holidays', 'Happy freaking Festivus'. Personally I think it should be left up to the retailer, without a huge debate over it. And I agree there should NOT be a policy of what en employee can or cannot say in regards to wishing someone a seasons greetings. You should be able to say 'Merry Christmas' BUT in the same note don't get your (general you, not specific) panties in a wad because someone else says 'Happy Holidays'.
This is just a hot issue with me because I feel that some (not all) Christians have such a sense of entitlement over privileges that they feel are their rights---well I feel like that with ANY group feeling like privileges should be rights to which they are 'entitled'.

 

[SamSpade]

Secondly I just do not see a big deal in retailers saying 'Merry Christmas', 'Happy Holidays', 'Happy freaking Festivus'. Personally I think it should be left up to the retailer, without a huge debate over it..

Then we agree.

At my workplace, we have an End of Year Party. Not a Christmas party. We're not allowed to EVEN CALL IT A "holiday party" because *that* would offend the non-religious types. We have a tree, and carolers, and candy canes, and people walking around in Santa hats while Christmas music plays. The place is ornamented with garland and red and green.

To anyone with an actual eye in his head - it's Christmas. Except you're not allowed to SAY it. Because - it's "offensive".

What makes it a "problem" is that it always was a Christmas party - and Santa would come. And people gave presents. Then it became Happy Holidays, because we had Jewish workers who wanted recognition, even though I grew up in a largely Jewish neighborhood, and they frankly didn't care most of the time. Some of them actually celebrated Christmas also, because it's celebrated in a secular sense as well - lots of non-religious people celebrate Christmas.

Now it's become what it is now - largely an excuse to not do work, because you can't "celebrate" anything - any direct reference offends.

I don't know if there's a "war" on Christianity, but it takes shots that Muslims wouldn't allow upon pain of death. Put a picture of Jesus on a cross in a jar of urine or a depiction of Mary with feces on her face, and people get insulted and ask for public funds not to be spent on it (which is reasonable - if religious themes aren't allowed by public funds, why should anti-religious themes be permitted). Draw a picture of Mohammed with a bomb on his head - and riots ensue and people are killed.

 

[kom526]

I remember going into bars in I was younger and seeing, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" signs. Why wouldn't the same thing apply here?

 

[puggymom]

I have to disagree, So far as I can tell only 1.9% were deists which would be unitarian.

I am a confirmed Episcopalian. That proves nothing about what I actually think.

 

[puggymom]

Then we agree.

At my workplace, we have an End of Year Party. Not a Christmas party. We're not allowed to EVEN CALL IT A "holiday party" because *that* would offend the non-religious types. We have a tree, and carolers, and candy canes, and people walking around in Santa hats while Christmas music plays. The place is ornamented with garland and red and green.

To anyone with an actual eye in his head - it's Christmas. Except you're not allowed to SAY it. Because - it's "offensive".

What makes it a "problem" is that it always was a Christmas party - and Santa would come. And people gave presents. Then it became Happy Holidays, because we had Jewish workers who wanted recognition, even though I grew up in a largely Jewish neighborhood, and they frankly didn't care most of the time. Some of them actually celebrated Christmas also, because it's celebrated in a secular sense as well - lots of non-religious people celebrate Christmas.

Now it's become what it is now - largely an excuse to not do work, because you can't "celebrate" anything - any direct reference offends.

I don't know if there's a "war" on Christianity, but it takes shots that Muslims wouldn't allow upon pain of death. Put a picture of Jesus on a cross in a jar of urine or a depiction of Mary with feces on her face, and people get insulted and ask for public funds not to be spent on it (which is reasonable - if religious themes aren't allowed by public funds, why should anti-religious themes be permitted). Draw a picture of Mohammed with a bomb on his head - and riots ensue and people are killed.

Yeah I think it does boil down to that...kind of. I am not religious meaning what I believe does not fit in any affiliation (even though yes I am confirmed in the Anglican religion and a member of a local congregation) but I think in general this country has become too darn sensitive. Every one's feelings are hurt and everyone is offended over this and that. I wish everyone would seriously get over themselves and realize that what works for one person's life might not work for another's.
And for what it's worth I do not think it is OK to disgrace one religion while walking on eggshells around another's. Personally I believe that everyone should respect everyone elses beliefs and their right to believe in them. But unfortunately that is not the reality.

**I hope this makes sense---my one year old is currently climbing all over me like I am a personal jungle gym**

 

[SamSpade]

I remember going into bars in I was younger and seeing, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" signs. Why wouldn't the same thing apply here?

Beats me. Clubs still do this - they will let certain people in - and others have to "wait" - sometimes all night.

I'm not sure if the sign you described is illegal - and if it isn't, why a sign that forbid people of a given race or ethnicity.

 

[TimAllen]

I am a confirmed Episcopalian. That proves nothing about what I actually think.

Prior to the 17th century the terms ["Deism" and "Deist"] were used interchangeably with the terms "theism" and "theist", respectively. ... Theologians and philosophers of the seventeenth century began to give a different signification to the words.... Both [theists and Deists] asserted belief in one supreme God, the Creator.... and agreed that God is personal and distinct from the world. But the theist taught that god remained actively interested in and operative in the world which he had made, whereas the Deist maintained that God endowed the world at creation with self-sustaining and self-acting powers and then abandoned it to the operation of these powers acting as second causes.[2]

Your statement that most of our Founding Fathers were deists was wrong. So what you think and your religious affiliation differ greatly?

This thread should be in the Religion Forum!

 

[puggymom]

Prior to the 17th century the terms ["Deism" and "Deist"] were used interchangeably with the terms "theism" and "theist", respectively. ... Theologians and philosophers of the seventeenth century began to give a different signification to the words.... Both [theists and Deists] asserted belief in one supreme God, the Creator.... and agreed that God is personal and distinct from the world. But the theist taught that god remained actively interested in and operative in the world which he had made, whereas the Deist maintained that God endowed the world at creation with self-sustaining and self-acting powers and then abandoned it to the operation of these powers acting as second causes.[2]

Your statement that most of our Founding Fathers were deists was wrong. So what you think and your religious affiliation differ greatly?

This thread should be in the Religion Forum!

You're right! It should be.
As for me, my parents were/are Episcopalian, I was baptised such and went to church most Sunday. After my kids were born I felt obligated by family (since I RARELY discuss religious or political opinions with people IRL) to have my children baptised. So they were also baptised Episcopalian. I continue to take them to church most Sundays as well as telling them my personal opinions and will allow them to choose for themselves how they see themselves when they are old enough.

And while maybe they were not Deists in the officially sense they definately had some deist philosophies.

 

[puggymom]

You're right! It should be.
As for me, my parents were/are Episcopalian, I was baptised such and went to church most Sunday. After my kids were born I felt obligated by family (since I RARELY discuss religious or political opinions with people IRL) to have my children baptised. So they were also baptised Episcopalian. I continue to take them to church most Sundays as well as telling them my personal opinions and will allow them to choose for themselves how they see themselves when they are old enough.

And while maybe they were not Deists in the officially sense they definately had some deist philosophies.

Actually I take that back. I do not discuss religion with them now as they are too young but I will whne they are old enough/mature enough to understand it.

 

[chernmax]

What was this thread about again?