quote: Atheists join religions in holiday display The group's tree at the county courthouse joins a Christian creche, a Jewish menorah, and the Chamber of Commerce tree.
By Walter F. Naedele
The head of Atheists Alliance International plans to put up a tree this weekend on the lawn at the Chester County Courthouse to stand beside three traditional holiday displays there.
The 20-foot tree will be hung with copies of covers of books, including "Why I Am Not A Christian," "Why I Am Not a Muslim" and "Judaism Beyond God."
This addition to last year's three holiday displays is sponsored by the Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia which, its president Margaret Downey said, is "welcoming to agnostics, atheists, humanists, skeptics, rationalists of all kinds."
In addition to the obvious atheistic book titles, the tree also has covers of the Bible and the Koran.
I live in Philly, so the whole thing is terrible amusing. I like the idea of this less-traditional tree being added.
It would have been nice if the group could have found some more positive symbol of atheism to celebrate instead of just knocking the other groups.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It would have been nice if the group could have found some more positive symbol of atheism to celebrate instead of just knocking the other groups.
Me, or the Freethough Society of Greater Philadelphia?
I'm not knocking anybody else. I just find it amusing that people are upset over it. And I don't think the FSGP is knocking anybody else either.
If you mean the title of the thread, it's meant entirely in jest.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It would have been nice if the group could have found some more positive symbol of atheism to celebrate instead of just knocking the other groups.
agreed.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider:
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It would have been nice if the group could have found some more positive symbol of atheism to celebrate instead of just knocking the other groups.
agreed.
OK, I honestly don't see how this is knocking the other groups. Please explain. Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
You're confused as to how "Why I am not a Muslim" and "Why I am not a Christian" is knocking other groups?
It does make the whole enterprise look it has nothing positive to say and no purpose but to tear down other people.
That can't be okay with the atheists here, right?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert:
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It would have been nice if the group could have found some more positive symbol of atheism to celebrate instead of just knocking the other groups.
Me, or the Freethough Society of Greater Philadelphia?
I'm not knocking anybody else. I just find it amusing that people are upset over it. And I don't think the FSGP is knocking anybody else either.
If you mean the title of the thread, it's meant entirely in jest.
The group that is putting up their display. It would have been nice to come up with a more positive symbol instead of "Why I am not X" books. I think that it is good that people are included, it is just unfortunate that the opportunity is being used just to say something negative about the others rather than saying something positive about themselves.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I think just a nice tree with a plaque identifying the group would have sufficed. Pro-atheism books are not exactly "symbolic" of atheism in the first place.
This sounds more like an Atheist Book Club tree than an atheist tree, though I guess if they are trying to be evangelical then they are kind of at a disadvantage, not having any miraculous stories to share like the other guys. Gotta fall back on books that more explicitly state why the other stories are wrong.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:The group that is putting up their display. It would have been nice to come up with a more positive symbol instead of "Why I am not X" books.
The new testament could reasonably be titled "Why I am not Jewish", couldn't it? Most religions only imply everyone else is wrong, but the message is still there. I don't know if being more explicit about it is necessarily a *bad* thing.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Javert, I think she means instead of putting up books like Why I'm not a Christian(which I love by the way), it would've been cool if they had put up books not specifically written against other religions. Lets stop defining ourselves this way.
Wouldn't it have been cooler if they had covered the tree with covers of A Brief History of Time, The Selfish Gene, How the Mind Works, Guns Germs & Steel, Walden, great philosophical works(religiously inspired or not), etc...
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
MattP, do you think that the emphasis was on promoting their own ideas or tearing down the beliefs of others?
There is a difference. What is atheism offering other than being anti-the other groups?
Showcase that. Celebrate that.
edited to add: As the New Testament was mostly written by Jews (who identified as Jews), not really.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Were the other groups allowed to put proselytizing literature as part of the display?
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert Hugo: You're confused as to how "Why I am not a Muslim" and "Why I am not a Christian" is knocking other groups?
It does make the whole enterprise look it has nothing positive to say and no purpose but to tear down other people.
That can't be okay with the atheists here, right?
You assume the negative.
These books are entitled "Why I am not", they aren't entitled "You shouldn't be X, and all people who are X are evil and stupid!"
You may be seeing that, but it's not there.
Granted, I have not read the books, so if they do say that I will apologize.
I see it as an invitation to the religious majority to educate themselves on the non-believing minority.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
I like Strider's suggestion
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
MattP, can you see the difference between "I believe and reverence X" and "This is why I don't believe Y"?
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
I can see going with books overall as the theme, but the "why I'm NOT" titles are pretty inherently negative. I'm sure one could find some non-theist philosophy books or something that would be more in the vein of positive humanism than trying to negate other beliefs.
Personally, if I was called upon to decide the decorations for an atheist tree, I would have filled it with monkeys!
--Enigmatic
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert:
quote:Originally posted by Javert Hugo: You're confused as to how "Why I am not a Muslim" and "Why I am not a Christian" is knocking other groups?
It does make the whole enterprise look it has nothing positive to say and no purpose but to tear down other people.
That can't be okay with the atheists here, right?
You assume the negative.
These books are entitled "Why I am not", they aren't entitled "You shouldn't be X, and all people who are X are evil and stupid!"
You may be seeing that, but it's not there.
Granted, I have not read the books, so if they do say that I will apologize.
I see it as an invitation to the religious majority to educate themselves on the non-believing minority.
I understand your point but let's be real. I find it hard to believe that these people were somehow ignorant of the fact that displaying these books would tick off others Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I like Strider's suggestion too, but there is nothing specifically atheistic about those books. Some of them make atheistic arguments and others can be interpreted to support atheism, but books that are strictly about atheism, by necessity, address perceived flaws in religious thinking.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Possible Positive Things to hang from the Atheist Christmas Display.
10) Gay Pride symbols 9) $$$ Signs (oops, the Chamber of Commerce tree may already have those.) 8) Fish with legs and other pro-Evolutionary things. 7) Symbols showing Fish with legs--Might smell less than hanging the actual fish. 6) Plant the freaking tree and take a stand against deforestation. 5) Test Tubes and other Scientific Paraphanelia 4) Stuffed animals aka Teddy Bears, with divine names. 3) Unlocked manacles and un-tied chains. 2) The Harry Potter Collection 1) "Peace" "Joy" and "Love" should be hung from the tree.
Of course, I know Joy's family wouldn't really mind, Peace and Love's families would really complain and ruin the whole effect.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Javert, I think she means instead of putting up books like Why I'm not a Christian(which I love by the way), it would've been cool if they had put up books not specifically written against other religions. Lets stop defining ourselves this way.
Wouldn't it have been cooler if they had covered the tree with covers of A Brief History of Time, The Selfish Gene, How the Mind Works, Guns Germs & Steel, Walden, great philosophical works(religiously inspired or not), etc...
To be fair, those are just the book titles that were used in the article. I don't know all the books that were included. I'm currently searching for the full list.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Threads: I understand your point but let's be real. I find it hard to believe that these people were somehow ignorant of the fact that displaying these books would tick off others
And it can help to bring attention to WHY it ticks other people off, and maybe help them understand why they SHOULDN'T be ticked off.
I imagine the menorah ticks a number of people off too. Does that mean they shouldn't have put it up?
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It would have been nice if the group could have found some more positive symbol of atheism to celebrate instead of just knocking the other groups.
Considering we know nothing about the books besides the title, I'd say it's premature to assume that they're just "knocking other groups."
More importantly, A) Those weren't the only books on the tree, just the ones the article deigned to mention (surprise surprise!) I'd be pretty shocked if The Origin of Species wasn't on that tree. Others might see that book as offensive too.
B) Because atheism is a negative position, it's inevitable that we'll have to explain why we haven't taken the positive position. It often seems to me that no matter how gently we might possibly put it, rather large groups of people will be offended. Atheists are still working to find a tone that respects others' beliefs while still accurately expressing who we are. All in all, I think we've done a pretty good job in a short amount of time.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
While driving into town I passed an Evangelical church. In big words it had a sign: "Put Christ back in Christ-mas please"
Next door was a Catholic Church. It had as sign that read "Put the Mass back in ChristMass please."
Next to them was the Mall. Out front, in big letters was the plea, "Put the $ back in Christma$$, PLEASE!!!!!!"
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert Hugo: MattP, can you see the difference between "I believe and reverence X" and "This is why I don't believe Y"?
I guess it's just a matter of judging a book by its cover. I don't know the content of those books, but the content of a book "Why I am not a Christian" and "Why I am an atheist" may be very similar, just as the content of "Why I am a Christian" and "Why I am not an Atheist" may be.
As I mentioned earlier, *I* wouldn't have put those book covers up myself, though I might have listed them on a placard below or next to the tree that included a brief blurb about atheism and a reading list for people that were interested in learning more.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
quote:I imagine the menorah ticks a number of people off too.
I don't know anyone who is ticked off by a menorah or why they would be.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Folks being honest with themselves is good. And considering how seldom atheists admit that their beliefs are purely religious...
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
I totally agree that it's a silly thing to get pissed off about, but it's not very constructive to intentionally piss people off about it either.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert Hugo:
quote:I imagine the menorah ticks a number of people off too.
I don't know anyone who is ticked off by a menorah or why they would be.
'Cause this is a Christian Nation and Christmas is about Jesus!
...something along those lines, or so I've been told...
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: Folks being honest with themselves is good. And considering how seldom atheists admit that their beliefs are purely religious...
Very funny aspectre. An organization practicing its freedom of speech does not equal religion.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: Folks being honest with themselves is good. And considering how seldom atheists admit that their beliefs are purely religious...
I'm tempted to say your post is borderline trolling.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:I don't know anyone who is ticked off by a menorah or why they would be.
I've seen some eye-rolling, but no ticked-offedness. The eye rolls were caused by disdain for the political correctness of representing multiple religions in a setting where only Christianity belonged, or something like that.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP: I like Strider's suggestion too, but there is nothing specifically atheistic about those books . Some of them make atheistic arguments and others can be interpreted to support atheism, but books that are strictly about atheism, by necessity, address perceived flaws in religious thinking.
good. As an atheist my agenda has never been to promote "not believing in god". I feel we should be out there promoting rationality. those books might not promote atheism, but they're what led me to becoming an atheist, and they represent the principles I believe in.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Javert, I think she means instead of putting up books like Why I'm not a Christian(which I love by the way), it would've been cool if they had put up books not specifically written against other religions. Lets stop defining ourselves this way.
Wouldn't it have been cooler if they had covered the tree with covers of A Brief History of Time, The Selfish Gene, How the Mind Works, Guns Germs & Steel, Walden, great philosophical works(religiously inspired or not), etc...
Or the Golden Compass! Cover it with little armor bears and Nicole Kidman looking eerie and hot!
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Uppity atheists, always wanting to express their views. Why can't they keep that filthy stuff at home where the rest of us good, upstanding folks don't have to look at it.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
The people who get disturbed by seeing a menorah (wrongly in my opinion) are bothered because they don't want to see other people's celebrations honoured.
Do you think the display was about being included in the celebration or about being disturbed by the celebrations of others? If the former, the choice of symbols should reflect that.
MightyCow, so far it seems (from the little information available) that the view that is being expressed is "your views suck". I can understand why this could be offensive.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: MightyCow, so far it seems (from the little information available) that the view that is being expressed is "your views suck". I can understand why this could be offensive.
I think that's a false assumption. To me it looks like the message is "We disagree, and here's why."
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Can your beliefs not be expressed except as a negation of other people's beliefs?
This is the problem with a display. All this group can do is rain on the parades of others. Can't it build a float instead?
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Can your beliefs not be expressed except as a negation of other people's beliefs?
This is the problem with a display. All this group can do is rain on the parades of others. Can't it build a float instead?
Ironically, in one interview they say they want to make it into a float.
Again, you're assuming that the only books that are on the tree are the ones included in the story.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I'm not assuming that. That has been the only information provided. Do you have any further information?
"We disagree" is still just negative. Assert what you have to offer instead of just, "we're not them."
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:And it can help to bring attention to WHY it ticks other people off, and maybe help them understand why they SHOULDN'T be ticked off.
Ahh, the KoM method: I shall persuade you by pissing you off!
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: The people who get disturbed by seeing a menorah (wrongly in my opinion) are bothered because they don't want to see other people's celebrations honoured.
I dunno... I remain a little weirded out after learning what a menorah is actually used to celebrate after learning about it in this thread. link
quote: The fanatics won. The Jews who wanted to be Greek by culture and Jewish only by ethnicity got their naked heinies handed to them. And I wonder, as I do every year, at the irony that has so many secular and assimilated Jews lighting candles for eight days in order to commemorate the victory of people who would have stuck a sword through them in a heartbeat. ... Hanukkah was about an all out war against Hellenists and Hellenism. And not a metaphorical war, either, but a serious bloodbath.
I mean, previously I already knew about the miracle itself in a very limited sense, just not the surrounding historical background.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I'm not assuming that. That has been the only information provided. Do you have any further information?
"We disagree" is still just negative. Assert what you have to offer instead of just, "we're not them."
Still looking for the list. As soon as I find it, I'll post it here.
That being said...scientific inquiry, secular humanism, skepticism...these are just a few things 'we' offer. (I'm not a member of the group, though I wouldn't object to supporting them.)
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:"We disagree" is still just negative. Assert what you have to offer instead of just, "we're not them."
But atheism, by itself, is just a negation or, more specifically, an absence. There's nothing to say in promotion of atheism that isn't potentially negative sounding to a theist.
What I think you want is a humanist tree or something of that sort, but this is apparently an atheist organization, not a humanist one.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
MattP,
So, really, you have nothing to offer except your desire to knock the beliefs of others?
I think that Javert has a better idea. Find symbols of those things and celebrate them.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
kmbboots: I think you're coloring this heavily with your own views. The Atheists aren't protesting the religious symbols. They aren't trying to get the other trees removed. They just want their own tree with their own stuff on it.
Obviously, you aren't happy with the decorations they picked for their own tree, but they're not inherently more negative than any other of the religious symbols.
You can look at the Christmas tree next to the menorah and interpret it as "Hey, we're not Jewish!" or you can interpret it as, "This is our belief, which can support itself next to the beliefs of others."
For people who aren't familiar with atheism, it seems to me that they might indeed be interested in why atheists aren't other religions, since they would believe that their religion is the default view.
It is because religious people are often less than willing to accept atheism as a valid viewpoint that atheists first must justify why they aren't some religious faith before they can get on to the rest of the stuff.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
MightyCow, it is a question of emphasis and celebration. See above.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: MightyCow, it is a question of emphasis...
I don't see how you can say that when we only have the names of three of the books that were on the tree. We have no idea what their emphasis was given the information available to us in this thread.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
Also, Javert did entitle the thread "Let the War on Christmas Begin!" which kind of signals hostile intent. I recognize it was probably a tongue-in-cheek reference to what he anticipates the response of us self-righteous religionists will be, but nonetheless, it is not particularly conducive to viewing the tree as a constructive symbol of atheism.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: MattP,
So, really, you have nothing to offer except your desire to knock the beliefs of others?
I think that Javert has a better idea. Find symbols of those things and celebrate them.
The things I celebrate about atheism, when put into sound bites, might sound more offensive than "Why I am not a Christian."
I don't know that atheism, by itself, is something to be promoted in isolation. I think it's much better presented wrapped up in humanism or any other positive atheistic philosophy.
Atheism is not about symbols and metaphor. Where The Christian has a nativity scene, the atheist has a book called "Why I am not Jewish". It's the same message, just the atheist doesn't have any symbolism to wrap around theirs - they just tell the message.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
The atheists want to celebrate the fact that they're not religious. Being non-religious is positive Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: The atheists want to celebrate the fact that they're not religious. Being non-religious is positive
No, dear, it is still a negative. Not meaning "bad", just meaning negative. it is "subtracting" something, rather than "adding" something.
In a symbolic emphasis kind of way.
twinky, of course. And I have acknowledged that. I would be delighted to hear about some more positive symbols in the display. I am tempted to suggest some...
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
If you don't mean negative to mean bad, then I have no problem with negative. The civil rights movement was largely a negative campaign in that it opposed the status quo and included a lot of "tearing down" of other people's ideas yet it's one that's almost universally regarded as a good thing.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Or, say, pacifism is largely defined by their negative violence.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Here, let me try to explain it another way...
There is a difference between a group having, say, a hurrah for being Irish parade and celebrating that. It would, however, be kind of offensive if we had a "Hurrah for not being Italian" parade.
MrSquicky, haven't you heard that peace is not merely the absence of war?
MattP, the civil rights movement was not about tearing down white people, it was about raising up African American people. See the difference?
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: MattP, the civil rights movement was not about tearing down white people, it was about raising up African American people. See the difference?
No. It was about tearing down the rules of the status quo. Not "white people", but the rules that had been set up by the white status quo.
Same thing with activist atheism. It's not about tearing down religious people. It's about tearing down what we view to be the negative aspects of religion.
And since we can't tear those things down, being the minority, (and not sure that those things should be teared down, as in outlawed, even if we were the majority) we can bring attention to ourselves and the issues. A season that happens to feature religious holidays seems to be a fitting time for it.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Javert, in the civil rights movement, the tearing down of the status quo was a means to an end, not the end itself. Tearing down obstacles to something better. The end was a positive lifting up. The rhetoric was "justice for everybody" not "no more privilege for white people". At least the rhetoric that was effective in changing people's minds and hearts for the better instead of playing into the anger of people who already wanted change.
What is the better thing that we will get if you tear down religion. Celebrate that.
If you want to take away Christmas, what are you giving us that's better?
What are you trying to accomplish? Do you think this type of display will do that. Do you want to get people to think? Do you want to provide a rallying point for other people who are angry about religion? Do you just want to annoy people?
(Not "you" specifically.)
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
"Truth over comfort."
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
MattP, why does "Truth" have to be over something? Why not just "Truth"?
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Javert, the tearing down of the status quo was a means to an end, not the end itself. The end was a positive lifting up. The rhetoric was "justice for everybody" not "no more privilege for white people". At least the rhetoric that was effective in changing people's minds and hearts for the better instead of playing into the anger of people who already wanted change.
What are you trying to accomplish? Do you think this type of display will do that. Do you want to get people to think? Do you want to provide a rallying point for other people who are angry about religion? Do you just want to annoy people?
(Not "you" specifically.)
Although I wouldn't want to compare atheists to African-Americans in how they are/were treated, it is similar.
"Justice for everybody" and "no more privilege for religious people" are two very worthy goals.
Part of the reason for this, and any vocal presentation, is to be vocal. Remaining silent can be seen as giving consent.
Last year (maybe two years ago now), there were two court cases dealing with ten commandment displays. One in Tennessee and one in Texas. They got rid of the one in Tennessee, which was only put in recently. The one in Texas stayed because the judge ruled something like "it's been there so long and nobody has complained about it until now."
So one of my goals as an atheist is to stop being silent about these things.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: There is a difference between a group having, say, a hurrah for being Irish parade and celebrating that. It would, however, be kind of offensive if we had a "Hurrah for not being Italian" parade.
Ah, I think I kind of get it. Let me work it out while bringing it back to America.
So the idea is that we should have constructive holidays such as a President's Day or a Thanksgiving Holiday.
However, it would just be offensive if we had a "Hurrah for not being British" day, a "Independence Day" if you will Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: MattP, why does "Truth" have to be over something? Why not just "Truth"?
Because the relationship is important. Many of the arguments against atheism are to the consequences of atheism rather than to the truth of it. "But if there's no God, then <insert horrible thing>!"
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by SenojRetep: Also, Javert did entitle the thread "Let the War on Christmas Begin!" which kind of signals hostile intent. I recognize it was probably a tongue-in-cheek reference to what he anticipates the response of us self-righteous religionists will be, but nonetheless, it is not particularly conducive to viewing the tree as a constructive symbol of atheism.
It's meant entirely tongue-in-cheek. Not in response to what I think you guys at Hatrack will say, but how the media will portray it.
If anyone is actually trying to wage a war on Christmas, they're either joking or confused. Either way, I wouldn't support them.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Javert, I would never ask you to be silent. I was on your side about the Ten Commandment displays.
I just don't think that trying to spoil people's holidays is either inclusive, free, or particularly effective.
Mucus, I think you are getting it. For Independence Day we have enough of our own to celebrate that our celebrations aren't all about how stupid British people are.
It is about emphasis.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Javert, I would never ask you to be silent. I was on your side about the Ten Commandment displays.
I just don't think that trying to spoil people's holidays is either inclusive, free, or particularly effective.
I never thought you weren't on my side.
That being said...how does this spoil anyone's holiday? It's a tree. They aren't standing around it and shouting out of bullhorns, as far as I know. They may be giving out fliers, but so what? Lots of people do that and are effectively ignored by everyone.
Does the fact that there's an atheist tree there really ruin the holiday for anyone else?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I don't know? It, for me, would depend on the display. And I don't know enough about it to judge. It could be quite lovely and an inclusive addition to holiday celebrations. But even liberal little Kate might get annoyed at a big (entirely hypothetical), "Ten Reasons Christmas is Stupid" sign blocking the pretty lights.
I am urging you toward the former type of display not no display at all.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I don't know? It, for me, would depend on the display. And I don't know enough about it to judge. It could be quite lovely and an inclusive addition to holiday celebrations. But even liberal little Kate might get annoyed at a big (entirely hypothetical), "Ten Reasons Christmas is Stupid" sign blocking the pretty lights.
I am urging you toward the former type of display not no display at all.
From what I know, it's smaller than the Christmas tree. It's not blocking it, and if you didn't know better it would just look like a smaller Christmas tree. Frankly, I think the pagans should get a tree there as well...if they wanted it, of course.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Off to dinner. More later.
Posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer (Member # 10416) on :
MattP, that's because atheism is all about denial of any God. And denial is hard to prove or disprove. It's like when Hermione says in Deathly Hallows that she knew the Hallows didn't exist, but she couldn't check every stone in the world to prove it. So opponents of atheism tend to avoid trying to prove anything, because it will never satisfy anyone, including themselves. So go for the societal implications.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer: MattP, that's because atheism is all about denial of any God. And denial is hard to prove or disprove. It's like when Hermione says in Deathly Hallows that she knew the Hallows didn't exist, but she couldn't check every stone in the world to prove it. So opponents of atheism tend to avoid trying to prove anything, because it will never satisfy anyone, including themselves. So go for the societal implications.
For what I hope will be the last time, it's not denial, it's lack of belief.
If you think you can prove it, by all means prove it. I will listen, and if you show good evidence, I'll believe you.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
Atheism has a problem in general when trying to kind any kind of symbol that represents it. The American Atheists symbol is an image of a lithium atom, with only one shell. It makes no sense at all. What does an atom have to do with atheism?
On alt.atheism from time to time people would suggest a symbol, but a lot of them were satanic, which implies belief in a deity. (Don't get me started on Anton LaVey). Other suggestions included the IPU and probably the FSM more recently, but they don't really make much sense either. How do you symbolize the lack of a thing? I've suggested the number zero, or a series of concentric circles (which coincidentally looks like a target, which sometimes feels appropriate).
quote: MattP, that's because atheism is all about denial of any God. And denial is hard to prove or disprove. It's like when Hermione says in Deathly Hallows that she knew the Hallows didn't exist, but she couldn't check every stone in the world to prove it. So opponents of atheism tend to avoid trying to prove anything, because it will never satisfy anyone, including themselves. So go for the societal implications.
This argument is a little twisted version of Antony Flew's argument on burden of proof. The burden of proof falls to the side making a positive assertion. It is unreasonable for a theist to demand that an atheist prove that there is no god because the atheist would be forced to argue to exhaustion (or ad infinitum). But if a theist insists that there is a god, it is very reasonable for an atheist to demand proof that that god exists before engaging in further debate on the characteristics of that god.
In any case, atheism is only about denial if there is a god to deny. Since there is no god (from this perspective), calling it denial makes no sense.
There is a controversy near me involving an attempt at compromise on the holiday display issue. I'm not clear on all the details, but the city used to provide assistance setting up a menorah on private property, but this year, they said that they couldn't use city workers to set up a religious symbol on private property, but offered to set it up on public property as part of a multiethnic display that included a creche, and some other religious holiday displays.
The rabbi of the synagogue who owns the menorah still want the menorah set up on the private property, but somehow it became the city's fault that they refused to set it up. In the meantime, the city had already come and picked up the menorah, but since the rabbi didn't want it on the public property, they wound up putting in in storage, which means that if the rabbi finds private help to put in up on private property, it will be extra work to go get it from where it's stored.
I thought maybe I should offer to help set it up., but I'm afraid to get in the middle of things.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I just read the article, how did I miss this:
quote: As there was last year, there is also a Chamber of Commerce tree - 32 feet high - meant to attract shoppers, as well as a Christian creche and a Jewish menorah.
When told of the Freethought display, Colin Hanna, a former county commissioner whose organization - Pennsylvania Pastors Network - is sponsoring the creche, said, "Their intention is to use the courthouse to make a political statement?
"That seems to me a pretty fundamental perversion of the purpose of holiday displays . . ."
Thats some pretty unintentional irony
[ December 06, 2007, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: Mucus ]
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I think the whole thing is silly.
Should atheists be allowed a tree? Sure. Should any religion that's represented in theh town be allowed a symbol? Sure. No skin off my nose - have the symbolic "happy" however you'd like.
But let's not delude ourselves into thinking that the titles selected for the tree were not inflammatory. And let's not delude ourselves that they mean anything more than the words on the cover to the average passerby - and if you think atheists are dumb enough to believe that everyone will think about the deeper message rather than the title, you have a pretty low view of the intelligence of most atheists.
Strider has the right of it - put up positive symbols, titles that uplift. If a real Christian Christmas tree decked itself out in "Why I'm not Jewish" or "Why I'm not Muslim" signs, it would be pretty gauche.
Say what's good about your thing, not what's bad about other things. While others are saying "Yay, Christmas tree!" and "Yay, Menorah!" the atheists could be saying "Yay, Science!" or "Yay, Logical Reasoning!". Strider's suggestions would have been great.
Instead, to go with "Why I'm not..." instead of "Why I am..." is pushing a negative, not a positive.
Just a poor choice, to me.
But, still, the whole thing is silly. As an agnostic (or atheist, depending on your definition) who enjoys both Christmas and Channukah, I don't see what the big deal is.
Maybe they should have installed a Festivus pole.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: Possible Positive Things to hang from the Atheist Christmas Display.
10) Gay Pride symbols
Why?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: Atheism has a problem in general when trying to kind any kind of symbol that represents it. The American Atheists symbol is an image of a lithium atom, with only one shell. It makes no sense at all. What does an atom have to do with atheism?
Not that I'm on their side, or anything, but I'd think it's fairly obvious. Their view is that they're looking at the world from a scientific POV, rather than a religious one (as though the two were necessarily mutually contradictory), and an image of an atom does represent "scientific" to most people.
Posted by Leonide (Member # 4157) on :
I think an Atheist tree is fine, but i would've been more interested in a Humanist tree, not the least because it would have been more interesting to look at. I'm a self-identified atheist, but there's nothing inherently "atheistic" that I would consider aesthetically pleasing to look at on a Christmas tree.
And being, as I also am, particularly enamored of Christmas decorations, the idea of book covers of any kind being used on a tree in place of pretty, shiny things is inherently displeasing to my sensibilities.
I protest the tree on the grounds of unprettiness!!
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: Possible Positive Things to hang from the Atheist Christmas Display.
10) Gay Pride symbols
Why?
Because atheists think gay people are cool. Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: Say what's good about your thing, not what's bad about other things. While others are saying "Yay, Christmas tree!" and "Yay, Menorah!" the atheists could be saying "Yay, Science!" or "Yay, Logical Reasoning!". Strider's suggestions would have been great.
I very partially agree, except for the menorah. A symbol celebrating a historical bloodbath is just weird, weirder than an inflammatory but relatively toothless "Yay! Why I am not a Christian" book or even a "Chamber of Commerce" tree Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Nah. It's the holiday that celebrates the bloodbath. The menorah (it's actually a hanukkiah) celebrates the miracle of the oil burning for 8 days.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
A miracle that is interpreted as support/approval for the bloodbath.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I think it's a shame that there aren't more beautiful metaphors representing a World Without A God. Perhaps a giant glass crystal shape, or a stalagmite, or a tree with symbols of learning and science and wonder all over it.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
quote:A miracle that is interpreted as support/approval for the bloodbath.
Really? You think the primary thought occurring to people who look at a menorah is "Yay, bloodbath!"?
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Lisa, because an Atheist has no problem with anyone's sexuality that isn't destructive. Many people of many religions do.
You don't have to be Atheist to be Gay, but you have to look hard to find an Atheist who would criticize you for your sexuality.
And note, that was number 10--the least important symbol I could come up with. Well behind the dollar signs already in use by the Chamber of Commerce.
--
As far as getting things positive, I see Atheism's main benefit is not a lack of guidance, lack of morality, or lack of God. I find it as an assault on Superstition. I would suggest some anti-Superstition symbols, but ones that aren't blatantly somebody else's religion.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
JH:
quote: Hanukkah, O Hanukka The festival of light The flames of our fanaticism Still are burning bright ... Hanukkah, O Hanukkah A savage celebration Of blood and death and war That saved the soul of our nation
But seriously, of course I don't. I just said I found it weird given the historical context. Its one thing to celebrate a book with a title such as "Why I am not a Christian", I figure that the writer was probably just happy about their freedom. That someone later went and *maybe* used just the title to poke someone doesn't really ruin it for me. Edit to add: The original event is also relatively toothless in terms of consequences
However, to use a symbol that was originally associated with a celebration about war and death and then bring that into a modern celebration while forgetting about the historical context, I just find that weird. (Alternatively, if you don't forget about the historical context, all power to you )
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
Why put up an Atheist Tree? Why pull this kind of thing on Christmas?
Posted by Saephon (Member # 9623) on :
I think instead of a tree, they should have erected 30 foot Atheist Magnifying Glass, and in very small script in the center of the lens: "There is no God."
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
quote:Originally posted by Saephon: I think instead of a tree, they should have erected 30 foot Atheist Magnifying Glass, and in very small script in the center of the lens: "There is no God."
I would lean it towards the other displays, so they know they are under scrutiny.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Flying Dracula Hair: Why put up an Atheist Tree? Why pull this kind of thing on Christmas?
Well, putting up an atheist tree in a time where people generally don't put up trees might be weird.
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert:
quote:Originally posted by The Flying Dracula Hair: Why put up an Atheist Tree? Why pull this kind of thing on Christmas?
Well, putting up an atheist tree in a time where people generally don't put up trees might be weird.
The whole "Tree of Knowledge" thing and with all that's hanging off of it just seems so goofy to me, it's out of an Onion article.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Mucus, the transformation of symbols to mean something better or bigger is not unique to the menorah. There is a certain sect, for example, that uses an instrument of torture and execution for an inspirational symbol.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
quote:Well, putting up an atheist tree in a time where people generally don't put up trees might be weird.
I'm thinkin' that ship has already sailed.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
kmbboots: Your assumption is that I don't find celebrating with a symbol of torture and execution a bit weird. Although I suppose the weirdness is helped a little by the fact that the subject in question was able to respawn after being fragged No such consolation exists for those that were killed in the bloodbath leading to the menorah.
In the case of the sect, I suspect many already actually feel this on a gut-level and thus either place more abstract versions of the cross on a tree or leave it out entirely in favour of Santa or an angel. They leave the more explicit versions with the nails and blood for more somber occasions.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Christmas tends to more specifically celebrate the Incarnation rather than the death and resurrection of Jesus, so that is true.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
quote:They leave the more explicit versions with the nails and blood for more somber occasions.
Like a Mel Gibson film festival.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
I like the giant magnifying glass idea. The atheists could aim it at their tree, and try to catch it on fire, while having the Christians pray that God burn their tree instead (no cheating with faulty wiring of the lights).
Posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer (Member # 10416) on :
Wait... are you saying the Christians pray that the Christmas tree catch fire of its own accord? Or are you saying that the Christians pray that the magnifying glass catch fire of its own accord?
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
He's referencing Elijah.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
The Festival of Trees that charity groups in town sponsor had a "literacy tree" this year from a pro-literacy group decorated with miniture books. I'm told it was quite lovely. (I didn't see it myself, but I know someone who bid on it.)
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I have a couple of miniature books on my Christmas tree. If anyone knows where I can get an itsy bitsy copy of The Origin of Species* , I would be delighted to hand it on my tree.
*or other suitable scientific tome.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Since Christmas (and many of the other holidays associated with this season) have roots in ancient winter solstice celebrations, I would think that the science of astronomy and perhaps space exploration would be an appropriate rallying point for athiests during this season.
Wouldn't it be fun to see a tree decorated with pictures of famous astronomers like Galileo, Copernicus and Kepler who challenged the religious view of the solar system. Add in a few planets, some celestial maps, some model telescopes, satellites, maybe even some rockets and you could have a very festive tree celebrating what secular humanist have contributed to human understanding of the winter solstice.
Unfortunately I've found that the breed of people who join groups like the Athiest Alliance are
A. Not representative of most athiests/secularists I've known.
B. More interested in slamming religion than in celebrating rationalism and humanism.
And I find those things to be a real pitty since there is a great deal to celebrate in the contributions of rationalism, science and humanism and furthermore most athiests I've known who are over 30 are very respectful to religion.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: Lisa, because an Atheist has no problem with anyone's sexuality that isn't destructive. Many people of many religions do.
You don't have to be Atheist to be Gay, but you have to look hard to find an Atheist who would criticize you for your sexuality.
If you were gay, I suspect you'd think otherwise. I've run into any number of homophobic atheists.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: JH:
quote: Hanukkah, O Hanukka The festival of light The flames of our fanaticism Still are burning bright ... Hanukkah, O Hanukkah A savage celebration Of blood and death and war That saved the soul of our nation
But seriously, of course I don't. I just said I found it weird given the historical context. Its one thing to celebrate a book with a title such as "Why I am not a Christian", I figure that the writer was probably just happy about their freedom. That someone later went and *maybe* used just the title to poke someone doesn't really ruin it for me. Edit to add: The original event is also relatively toothless in terms of consequences
However, to use a symbol that was originally associated with a celebration about war and death and then bring that into a modern celebration while forgetting about the historical context, I just find that weird. (Alternatively, if you don't forget about the historical context, all power to you )
Sort of like using the Santa Claus symbol while ignoring the whole Black Peter thing.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
quote:Since Christmas (and many of the other holidays associated with this season) have roots in ancient winter solstice celebrations, I would think that the science of astronomy and perhaps space exploration would be an appropriate rallying point for athiests during this season.
Rabbit, I love that idea. I would love to establish some kind of conventions around a Non-Religious Solstice Celebration which religious and non-religous people can participate in alike, and I think that it works very well considering the association of the stars with Christmas, and wider than that- light in darkness. In fact, a lighted tree works on many levels and is non-objectionable.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
I've actually suggested to Niki that if she wants to give me Christmas present, she should instead give me a solstice present. The idea of celebrating the solstices and the equinoxes has great appeal to me.
However, I do celebrate Christmas in a secular way, and enjoy it, even if on some level it makes me a little uncomfortable.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I've met a few homophobic atheists, too. The few of them who've been able to rationalize their position have done so based on (IMO, irrational) reproductive concerns and a concern that society requires gender roles.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I don't see the connection. You're going to have to explain that one.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
But I'm not Dutch. Why would Black Peter mean anything to me?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:Well, putting up an atheist tree in a time where people generally don't put up trees might be weird.
That's a pretty poor answer, Javert. If the atheists are correct, then the choice of time of when to commemorate...atheism, or humanism, pick your -ism, is completely arbitrary in and of itself.
So, let's say 1:12 odds. Unless the timing is picked not as a standalone concern, but rather picked so as to be directly concerned with something else.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Well, nobody gets the day off and gives presents on September 3rd. If the atheists want to join in a secular celebration of what has largely become a secular winter celebration in America, it's silly to do it another time of year.
On the other hand, if I get an extra holiday out of the deal, I vote we pick our own High Non-Holy Day of Celebration and Awesomeness some time in early September. There's not a lot going on there, but the weather's cooled off a bit Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: Well, nobody gets the day off and gives presents on September 3rd. If the atheists want to join in a secular celebration of what has largely become a secular winter celebration in America, it's silly to do it another time of year.
A significant part of the reason that Christmas is when it is.
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: Well, nobody gets the day off and gives presents on September 3rd. If the atheists want to join in a secular celebration of what has largely become a secular winter celebration in America, it's silly to do it another time of year.
Well, excuse me if I missed it, but I don't think anyone's arguing against atheists celebrating Christmas.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Flying Dracula Hair:
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: Well, nobody gets the day off and gives presents on September 3rd. If the atheists want to join in a secular celebration of what has largely become a secular winter celebration in America, it's silly to do it another time of year.
Well, excuse me if I missed it, but I don't think anyone's arguing against atheists celebrating Christmas.
And I do. I celebrate the secular holiday that we've turned Christmas into over the years. Which, I think, is one of the good things that have come from making it a national holiday, even if it was wrong to do it in the first place.
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert: I celebrate the secular holiday that we've turned Christmas into over the years. .
Yeah, me too. I got big love for Christmas. Go Christmas!
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
quote:Well, excuse me if I missed it, but I don't think anyone's arguing against atheists celebrating Christmas.
I hear lots of arguments against atheists celebrating Christmas.
Every time someone complains, "Its Merry Christmas, not Happy Holidays" they are arguing against it.
Every time someone chants, "Put Christ back in Christmas" they are arguing against it.
Every time that someone blocks my view of the community Christmas tree with a Cross or a Nativity scene, they are arguing against it.
quote:Its the most wonderful time, of the year--if your a Christian. But not if your a Jew Or Islamic, boo-hoo Or an Athiest, dear.... Its the most wonderful time, the Most Wonderful Time, The Most Wonderful Time--Of The Year If your a Christian.
(Dan Raven--NCA Non-Christian American)
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Whether or not your post is right, Dan_Raven, depends entirely on whether one views Christmas as a secular, or religious, holiday.
By this curious logic, Independance Day is actually celebrating, I dunno, pyrotechnics, beer, and barbecue. Easter celebrates colored boiled eggs.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:By this curious logic, Independance Day is actually celebrating, I dunno, pyrotechnics, beer, and barbecue. Easter celebrates colored boiled eggs.
Exactly! What the holiday originally represented and what is actually celebrated has diverged significantly. Many people *do* treat the 4th of July as a celebration of beer, bbq, and fireworks and easter a celebration of bunnies, chicks, and hidden candies.
I think it's great these holidays have all morphed into something which still *can* be celebrated according to their original purpose, but which can have a much broader and inclusive non-religious celebration as well.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
They have not morphed for all of us. That is the tricky area to negotiate.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
My atheist friends (whose whole families are atheist) celebrate Christmas. It's a great family bonding holiday and an overall fun day even if you aren't Christian.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:Exactly! What the holiday originally represented and what is actually celebrated has diverged significantly. Many people *do* treat the 4th of July as a celebration of beer, bbq, and fireworks and easter a celebration of bunnies, chicks, and hidden candies.
Well, no, not exactly. Celebrations are subjective. You can't just say, "This is what is really being celebrated," particularly when you're far from an objective observer. I could as easily say that people celebrate Christ-whether they know it or not-by giving gifts to others.
There are just a general set of things people do when they're celebrating. Gathering together and cooking large quantities of otherwise difficult-to-prepare food is one such way. It doesn't mean all celebrations in which this is done are celebrations about doing that.
A wedding isn't really a celebration of a union of two people, it's really a celebration of fancy cakes, pretty clothes, nice settings, and lots of flowers. Funerals aren't really there to publicly mourn and honor the dead, they're actually about wearing lots of mournful colors, getting florists some extra work to do, and admiring funerary carpentry.
Intent does matter. It doesn't trump all, but it makes a difference.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: They have not morphed for all of us. That is the tricky area to negotiate.
No doubt. Easter is somber for very many people and Christmas is a truly a celebration of Christ's birth, but what these holidays meen, in the aggregate, to the population at large has definitely morphed over time. Even for many Christians, Christmas has become a largely secular time, with an hour or two at church now matched by weeks of shopping and otherwise engaging in the commercial and non-religious aspects of the holiday season.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Intent does matter. It doesn't trump all, but it makes a difference.
I think it does matter too, but when a 4th of July passes with me giving little thought to the original purpose of the day because I'm so caught up in the family campout, bbq, and fireworks, was that holiday really, for me, about celebrating independence? I would like it to be and I think our freedom is an important thing to celebrate, but holidays to which we attach festivity tend, over time, to become more and more about the festivity.
This, of course, doesn't prevent people from celebrating the original purpose of the holiday, but in a way that mask of secular festivity provides a means of including everyone in the holiday regardless of whether they share the beliefs of those who created the holiday in the first place. I think that's a good thing.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Easter somber? I had not noticed that. The triduum is pretty somber, but, in my various Christian experiences, Easter itself has always been pretty celebratory.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Easter somber? I had not noticed that. The triduum is pretty somber, but, in my various Christian experiences, Easter itself has always been pretty celebratory.
Not somber in a bad way, but easter services I've been to have been somewhat more somber than other services and the music tends to be down-tempo. That's sort of neither here nor there though, the point was that I agree that there are people who do still recognize the original purpose of the holiday.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Oh, I know. Just surprised. I have sung a lot of pretty darn up tempo Easters! Maybe it is an evangelical thing?
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Oh, I know. Just surprised. I have sung a lot of pretty darn up tempo Easters! Maybe it is an evangelical thing?
Most of my experience was with a Presbyterian church.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Huh. Ive done Presbyterian. No alleluias? Mo Handel? No trumpets? Odd.
Oh well. Different strokes.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I was young. I've also been to several other denominations. So, I could be misremembering which was which. I could also be misremembering entirely. Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Matt, I think you might be remembering Good Friday and/or Lenten services, which are generally somber. Easter Sunday itself is much more likely to be joyous.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
That could be. I've been in the Mormon community so long that I'd completely forgotten about services not held on Sunday morning.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Well, Easter is an older celebration and is still more religious. In my experience it is more religiously significant. And the days before are very somber. All that could add up to a more "somber" recollection from a young child.
No matter. Just curious.
Posted by The Flying Dracula Hair (Member # 10155) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven:
quote:Well, excuse me if I missed it, but I don't think anyone's arguing against atheists celebrating Christmas.
I hear lots of arguments against atheists celebrating Christmas.
Meant in the thread, dude.
Posted by Eowyn-sama (Member # 11096) on :
If atheists want to put up decorations in a group display, they need a holiday. There's Jewish stuff for Hanukkah and Christian stuff for Christmas. If atheists want their own display, they need to create their own holiday. They can celebrate secular Christmas or secular Hanukkah if they like, but I don't see why they should have a separate display, just because they want to be contrary.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
The Christians did a pretty good job of co-opting every major pagan celebration, be it calendar-based or themed. This was not accidental, but it does mean that there's not a lot of room out there for catchy new holidays (by design). Perhaps atheists could create Zombie Ninja Pirate Day some time in early September...?
Posted by Lord Solar Macharius (Member # 7775) on :
Well...I guess we could co-opt Talk Like a Pirate Day from the Pastafarians(FSM) - it's on the 19th of September IIRC.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I suppose atheists could do worse than pirates for branding. Maybe if we also got Keira Knightly naked?
Hm. We could celebrate all the good things about being atheists, like tasteful porn and alcoholic beverages and barbecued ribs.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
That would have made a much better tree.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
We already have Billtmas in September. Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
My mother in law (who is divorced) tried to argue this year that my husband shouldn't spend time with his father on Christmas day because his father is Chinese and so it isn't like Christmas means anything to him anyway. Of course, she isn't Christian, so her argument isn't that it is a Christian holiday, but more that it is an American holiday.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I'm an atheist and I celebrate Christmas wholeheartedly, because I and my family are culturally Christian. Christmas, even without Christ, is a wonderful celebration (imo) of light, life, togetherness, plenty and giving. Its rich history of a variety of winter celebrations only makes it more interesting and important to me.
Posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer (Member # 10416) on :
Yes, Christmas and giving don't have to be limited to Christians. Giving is a great practice that makes the world such a better place, and it's nice to reserve a day, religious or otherwise, to celebrate by giving.
The only darn spoiler of the whole fiasco is the fact that the commercial market has to step in and take advantage of a good spirit for the sake of greed.
Maybe this year, I'll buy nothing for anyone else that I saw on TV. Just to present an interesting counterpart to the "China-free year of buying" stories that you hear about.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer: Yes, Christmas and giving don't have to be limited to Christians.
Though it should definitely be limited to non-Jews.
Posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer (Member # 10416) on :
No, I have Jewish friends who celebrate Christmas, they just don't celebrate Christ. They are nonetheless adapting a spirit of giving, and I can't begrudge them for that. They can celebrate just giving, but I'll say my Christmas will commemorate the birth of Christ. It's the commercial market that should be limited.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
I wasn't meaning to imply in my post that a non-Christian can't celebrate Christmas, just that I found it a bit off for a non-Christian to claim who can value Christmas, or specifically that a Chinese man (who lived in the US for 30 years) can not value the holiday.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
My wife's family celebrates Christmas Eve by getting together and singing Christmas carols. In recent years (being like, the last 20 years or so) we've been increasingly joined by our jewish friends, who have brought Chanukah songs, and then other jewish songs to be added to the mix.
We aren't celebrating giving, we're celebrating togetherness, and the willingness to share the joyous aspects of our cultures and heritage.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: A wedding isn't really a celebration of a union of two people, it's really a celebration of fancy cakes, pretty clothes, nice settings, and lots of flowers.
Sadly, some are.
Posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer (Member # 10416) on :
A wedding isn't a celebration OF cakes, clothes, and flowers, but it is very often a celebration WITH cakes, clothes, and flowers. Let us not forget the crucial preposition here.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
And in those cases where considerably more time, energy, and money is spent on the grand event than in preparing for the marriage it is supposed to begin, what exactly is being celebrated? I am not forgetting the preposition. I am saying that it is quite clear that some celebrants do.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
You know, I don't believe that. Setting aside that we can't know what's in someone's heart and so maybe such a judgment is unfair, I think even those who care little for the other person or the future and are addicted to the flowers and cake are not actually valuing the flowers and the cake. Maybe they are instead thrilled by the chance to be queen for a day, or thrilled to be given something that seems to be a prize for them. Maybe it makes they think they won, or maybe they think all the hoopla is a symbol that they matter in the world.
While I certainly think attention must be paid to the marriage, I can understand the...desire the touch the stars, the desire to feel like you matter, the desire to win or make a mark. Most people won't be in the news or win a prize anyone will ever care about or score a perfect bowling game or be President or have a ticker tape parade thrown in their honor, and a lot more people have a desire for that than ever achieve it. My guess is those who gets wrapped up in the trappings of the biggest party starring them that will ever exist don't care about the cake nearly as much as they care about...self-actualization.
It's one lousy way to do it, but I really don't fault those that long for it. It's amazing what the desire to stand out and win will drive people to achieve. I think the materialistic phenomena of ill-thought-out wedding bashes is a darker manifestation of that same drive.
Not great, but not about the invitations.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
I like Strider's suggestion too.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:While I certainly think attention must be paid to the marriage, I can understand the...desire the touch the stars, the desire to feel like you matter, the desire to win or make a mark. Most people won't be in the news or win a prize anyone will ever care about or score a perfect bowling game or be President or have a ticker tape parade thrown in their honor, and a lot more people have a desire for that than ever achieve it. My guess is those who gets wrapped up in the trappings of the biggest party starring them that will ever exist don't care about the cake nearly as much as they care about...self-actualization.
That's just about the worst definition of self-actualization I've ever heard.
Self-actualization is an internal state where you are deeply involved and engaged in what you are doing and what you are doing is an extention of how you are and something that pushes you towards growth.
It is most definitely not being the belle of the ball. What you are describing is a running away from who you are and embracing external fame and internal fantasy.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Ahh, the KoM method: I shall persuade you by pissing you off!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)