posted
I'm reposting part of a post I made elsewhere, edited slightly to stand alone. It was peripheral to the topic in which I wrote it, and has sort of gotten lost.
I've seen so many people here defend the idea of trying to legislate their particular religious views here in the US that I wanted to put this into a thread of its own.
For those of you who don't know, I'm an Orthodox Jew. A rabid right-wing religious fanatic, according to every other Jew I know. I'm very much a pluralist when it comes to valid views within Torah Judaism. I tolerate other religious views purely as a matter of practicality. I don't consider my view to be faith-based; rather, I think that anyone with sufficient education and honesty would agree.
Normally, I don't say such stuff, because it's wicked offensive, and there's no point in offending people without a reason. I mention it here because too many posters on this forum have implied that only secularists favor keeping religion out of our laws. And they're wrong about that.
There used to be such a thing as trial by combat. The basic idea was that neither side was ever going to admit to being wrong. So they'd fight, and whoever won was clearly in the right.
Nowadays, we generally look down upon such a procedure, because we know full well that wrong and evil can and does often win out, at least in the short term, over right and good.
But short of trial by combat, or the variation known sometimes as a jihad or a crusade, how can we resolve a dispute between people who know themselves to be right?
Voting is just as bad as trial by combat, because it can't determine truth any more than a swordfight can. And the First Amendment doesn't exist to stifle religion, but rather to prevent a trial by combat in the ballot box.
I don't have any problem looking at issues from a dual perspective. I will fight within Judaism against any attempt to have same-sex marriage. I will fight in the secular realm of this country to have same-sex marriage either recognized or not, but exactly as opposite-sex marriage is recognized or not.
I'll fight within Judaism to stop Jews from opening stores on Shabbat. And I'll fight just as hard against Blue Laws that use the force of secular law to try and shut down businesses for religious reasons.
I'll fight within Judaism to prevent Jews from marrying non-Jews, and I'll never recognize such "marriages" as being anything of the sort. But if someone were to try and pass a law to disallow marriage between members of different religions, I'd go to the barricades to fight it.
This isn't hypocrisy. This isn't schizophrenia. This is a recognition that supporting religious freedom in this country does not run counter to the absolute conviction that ones own religion is not only true, but is the only true religion.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I submit that it is easier for you to hold this view because your religion does not actively recruit members for "salvation."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I submit that this would make no difference if true. I am part of a religion that does recruit, and I don't want government to take a position on religion (other than to tolerate it).
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the government went ahead and endorsed any particular religion, that would be about the worst thing that could happen to us. First of all it would turn the war on terror into a war of Christians against Muslims as opposed to free people against murderers and tyrants. Secondly, we'd end up alienating the non Christian people of America, which runs counter to the basic principals it was founded on.
My problem is when the far left tries to stifle religious expression. There shouldn't be a problem with having a Christmas break in December, or wearing an exposed cross to school. However that's the exact kind of trivial stuff the ACLU-types flip out over. I think we all just need to be a little more tolerant of everyone else’s beliefs and not leave it up to the government to decide where the line is.
Posts: 959 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are certainly many members of faiths that prosetylize that don't feel that legislating their faith would be a good thing, Will, but nonetheless Tom has a point. If your religion is a closed group, you don't really have a motivation to get other people to behave as you do. In fact, doing so might even be something you actively didn't want, as it could blur the line between "us" and "them". If "us and them" is a big deal for you, as it is for starLisa, you're not going to want that.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm very much a pluralist when it comes to valid views within Torah Judaism.
Would it be fair if when I read the above, I hear you mentally inserting the phrase "what I consider to be" between the words "to" and "valid?"
Given what you've said about other Jews' opinions, I suspect that it'd be more fair of your to state that there are clearly defined limits to your pluralism, and that they are not universal among even Orthodox Jews, or "Torah Judaism," let alone all of Judaism.
In a way, I find you very consistent, sL -- you find the most rule-based, strictest interpretation of EVERYTHING you believe in, and then insist upon it as the ONLY possible stance to take.
That's not schizo unless you believed whole heartedly in things that are mutually incompatible.
Sorry to derail. It just struck me as odd that you had to give this particular preamble to your position. What does it matter how religious you are if we're talking about America's values? I mean, I'm not shocked that an Orthodox Jew would adhere to America's principles while living here. I simply expect it. Otherwise, there are plenty of other places to go.
Same for Christians who try to insist on their principles being inshrined in laws. There've got to places you can go if you really want that. This is America built by and for the people, all the people, and started explicitly to escape both the tyranny of government-based religions AND the tyranny of religious persecution.
(how's that for a derail and rerail all in one post?)
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now when you say Jews marrying non-Jews, where do you draw the line with people who are only culturally Jewish and do not actually go to a Synagogue on a regular basis, only participate in the High Holidays (kind of like Christmas and Easter Christians)?
What about Reform Jews or Conservative Jews who don't necessarily follow all of the same guidelines that Orthodox Jews do? What if one of them wanted to open a store on Shabbat?
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
IIRC, starLisa has said that she considers those groups to be failed Jews. I'd imagine they fall under the "Gentile" category, if not something worse.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
No idea what Lisa considers such Jews. But traditional Jewish law (i.e., Orthodox) has no such categories. If your biological mother is Jewish or if you convert properly, you are Jewish.
There are no "cultural Jews" no "failed Jews"; just Jews. Some may not be observant -- by choice, by upbringing, for other reasons -- but they are still Jews.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe we ought to be discussing the purpose of her post i.e.
"But short of trial by combat, or the variation known sometimes as a jihad or a crusade, how can we resolve a dispute between people who know themselves to be right?"
There is alwasy the Elijah method "lets see which God brings fire from heaven"
Or the Shadrak Meshak and Abidnego "Toss us in a fiery furnace and see what happens"
Daniels "I can buddy up with the lions if you toss me in that pit"
Moses' "Lets have a plague war and see which God is stronger"
All joking aside I would need to think of a good method first, before I could suggest one. So I may jump in a later point in this discussion.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are no "cultural Jews" no "failed Jews"; just Jews. Some may not be observant -- by choice, by upbringing, for other reasons -- but they are still Jews.
Ok, I just know some people who call themselves culturally Jewish, which is why I made that distinction.
The jury's still out as to whether or not I'm Jewish (mom's mom's lineage, mom's cousin's doing some research).
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's objectionable about calling it a Christmas break? It's just asinine to have to go through and change everything to winter break. I sincerely hope no one's so offended by the word Christmas in and of itself. It’s not affirming the Christian faith; it’s recognizing the federal holiday of Christmas.
Posts: 959 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I submit that it is easier for you to hold this view because your religion does not actively recruit members for "salvation."
In fact, what most people don't know about Judaism is that we absolutely have requirements for both Jews and non-Jews. We hold that the non-Jewish obligation to abide by the Noachide laws is every bit as absolute as the Jewish obligation to abide by Jewish law.
There've been times in our history when we've actively sought to convert non-Jews to this proper observance, and the fact that we don't do it much nowadays has a little to do with a fear of being the victims of mass murder.
Also, we are very much obligated to get Jews to observe. So even if we aren't obligated to get everyone in the US (or the world) to become religious Jews, we certainly are obligated to do so with regards to a segment of the population.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dantesparadigm: My problem is when the far left tries to stifle religious expression. There shouldn't be a problem with having a Christmas break in December, or wearing an exposed cross to school.
We are currently in the Jewish month of Tishrei. During Tishrei, there are 7 days in which we cannot work. Kids can't go to school, adults can't go to work.
Sometimes, if we're lucky, 6 of those days fall on the weekend, and we only have to take one day off. In a year like the current one, all seven are on weekdays.
I have to take those days off from work. But I have to take them as vacation, or personal days. I can't volunteer to work Christmas, because it's a legal holiday. There's nothing I can do to reduce the burden on myself. A burden which Christians in this country do not share.
Before you get irked at "leftists" objecting to a Christian holiday being a state holiday, take a moment to consider that it's not only leftists who might have a problem with it. Consider how easy it is for a majority population to step on a minority.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm very much a pluralist when it comes to valid views within Torah Judaism.
Would it be fair if when I read the above, I hear you mentally inserting the phrase "what I consider to be" between the words "to" and "valid?"
"Fair"? No. Politically correct, perhaps, but that's never been one of my strong suits.
What I consider doesn't matter. To the extent that what I consider may differ from what God's Torah says, that just means I have stuff to work on.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Given what you've said about other Jews' opinions, I suspect that it'd be more fair of your to state that there are clearly defined limits to your pluralism, and that they are not universal among even Orthodox Jews, or "Torah Judaism," let alone all of Judaism.
I don't really think so. I think it's utterly unnecessary to insist on glatt meat or chalav yisrael milk in the US. I don't myself. But I'm completely accepting of those who do. In the other direction, I make a point of standing up during the Kaddish prayer during services. So I was taught, and so I consider proper. But I also know that there are valid views that permit sitting during Kaddish, and I accept that some people go according to those views.
But when someone starts talking about driving on Shabbat, or allowing a Kohen to marry a divorcee, and they want to pretend that Judaism can in any way be twisted so as to make those things acceptable... well, it's not even a question.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: In a way, I find you very consistent, sL -- you find the most rule-based, strictest interpretation of EVERYTHING you believe in, and then insist upon it as the ONLY possible stance to take.
Heh. You're so wrong. I was sitting here while writing the above paragraphs trying as hard as I could to think of something I'm more strict about than the average Orthodox Jew. I was a little surprised to realize that it was so hard to find something. It was far easier for me to find ways in which there are extra stringencies within Judaism that I don't do.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: That's not schizo unless you believed whole heartedly in things that are mutually incompatible.
Sorry to derail. It just struck me as odd that you had to give this particular preamble to your position. What does it matter how religious you are if we're talking about America's values?
I think I addressed that. I'm tired of the repeated false claims around here (even in this thread) that you have to be secular or leftist to want to keep religion out of government. If I were secular or a leftist, my saying that wouldn't mean much.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I mean, I'm not shocked that an Orthodox Jew would adhere to America's principles while living here. I simply expect it. Otherwise, there are plenty of other places to go.
Same for Christians who try to insist on their principles being inshrined in laws. There've got to places you can go if you really want that. This is America built by and for the people, all the people, and started explicitly to escape both the tyranny of government-based religions AND the tyranny of religious persecution.
Amen v'amen.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: (how's that for a derail and rerail all in one post?)
quote:Originally posted by kojabu: Now when you say Jews marrying non-Jews, where do you draw the line with people who are only culturally Jewish and do not actually go to a Synagogue on a regular basis, only participate in the High Holidays (kind of like Christmas and Easter Christians)?
A Jew is a Jew is a Jew. Declaring "I don't accept the law" doesn't make someone exempt from it. Imagine that in any other context: "Well, I don't really hold by all that business of robbing banks being against the law, so fill up that bag right quick, or I'm going to start shooting."
quote:Originally posted by kojabu: What about Reform Jews or Conservative Jews who don't necessarily follow all of the same guidelines that Orthodox Jews do? What if one of them wanted to open a store on Shabbat?
Like I said, I'd fight against any government law that tried to restrict them from doing so. And I would fight at least as hard against any attempts (such as the Conservative and Reform movements) to try and label such an act as anything but a forbidden desecration of Shabbat and of God's Torah.
In certain cases, I might try to boycott the store. Like if they were a store selling Jewish books, I would make a point of buying elsewhere. If they were a restaurant, I wouldn't patronize them even during the week. If I thought other Jews weren't aware of what was going on, I'd try to publicize it in order to encourage the store owner to behave more properly, or failing that, to hurt his business enough that he'd have to eventually close. Nothing illegal.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:This isn't hypocrisy. This isn't schizophrenia. This is a recognition that supporting religious freedom in this country does not run counter to the absolute conviction that ones own religion is not only true, but is the only true religion.
Your religion is obviously fundamentally different from other religions. Thus your own standards of hypocrisy regarding secular and religious life do not necessarily apply to the standards of others.
You're an orange. They might be apples. What is true of an orange is not always true of apples. ----------- Dantesparadigm,
quote:What's objectionable about calling it a Christmas break? It's just asinine to have to go through and change everything to winter break. I sincerely hope no one's so offended by the word Christmas in and of itself. It’s not affirming the Christian faith; it’s recognizing the federal holiday of Christmas.
This appears to me to be an obvious problem. 'Federal holiday of Christmas'? Christmas is the holiday celebrating the birth of Christ as the birth of the Messiah, the Son of G-d. Just because you tack on the words 'federal holiday of' in front of it, doesn't change what the holiday commemorates.
Christmas is a word like any other word. It's not just a bunch of letters which strung together create a sound, it's an idea. That's why people get irritated by it. It's not like the idea of a holiday in December came first and then Christmas came along. ----- starLisa,
quote:I have to take those days off from work. But I have to take them as vacation, or personal days. I can't volunteer to work Christmas, because it's a legal holiday. There's nothing I can do to reduce the burden on myself. A burden which Christians in this country do not share.
This is an iniquity. But am I to understand your views expressed elsewhere, that you believe there should be no religious holidays for anyone?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: IIRC, starLisa has said that she considers those groups to be failed Jews. I'd imagine they fall under the "Gentile" category, if not something worse.
Not at all. My family is coming over today for a late lunch. My parents, and most of my siblings and their kids. Except for one sister-in-law, who keeps kosher (mostly) but is otherwise not observant, Judaism is really a side issue or a cultural one for them. They just don't know any better.
"A Jew who sins is still a Jew". Also, someone who was raised without an understanding of what Judaism is can't be considered culpable for what they do wrong.
My complaint isn't actually so much with Jews who aren't observant. It's with the movements that take advantage of them by offering them "permission" and guilt-free violations.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have to take those days off from work. But I have to take them as vacation, or personal days. I can't volunteer to work Christmas, because it's a legal holiday. There's nothing I can do to reduce the burden on myself. A burden which Christians in this country do not share.
Except that many places stay open on Christmas, and many more likely would close even if the federal government didn't make it a holiday. There's no general prohibition on work on that day.
And in the federal government, the day is a vacation day that cannot be switched. You lose nothing by having it off, because if you didn't, you wouldn't get an additional vacation or personal day.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:This isn't hypocrisy. This isn't schizophrenia. This is a recognition that supporting religious freedom in this country does not run counter to the absolute conviction that ones own religion is not only true, but is the only true religion.
Your religion is obviously fundamentally different from other religions. Thus your own standards of hypocrisy regarding secular and religious life do not necessarily apply to the standards of others.
But I'm talking about one of the fundamental bases upon which the US was founded. It wasn't exactly founded by Jews, right?
And in certain areas, Judaism does not differ. Premarital sex is as forbidden (if not more so) in Judaism than it is in, say, Christianity. So is abortion as a form of birth control. So is euthanasia. So is blasphemy. So is something like Wicca (for instance).
And not just for Jews. We consider those things (well, maybe other than the first one) to be forbidden for non-Jews as well.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: You're an orange. They might be apples. What is true of an orange is not always true of apples. ----------- Dantesparadigm,
quote:What's objectionable about calling it a Christmas break? It's just asinine to have to go through and change everything to winter break. I sincerely hope no one's so offended by the word Christmas in and of itself. It’s not affirming the Christian faith; it’s recognizing the federal holiday of Christmas.
This appears to me to be an obvious problem. 'Federal holiday of Christmas'? Christmas is the holiday celebrating the birth of Christ as the birth of the Messiah, the Son of G-d. Just because you tack on the words 'federal holiday of' in front of it, doesn't change what the holiday commemorates.
Christmas is a word like any other word. It's not just a bunch of letters which strung together create a sound, it's an idea. That's why people get irritated by it. It's not like the idea of a holiday in December came first and then Christmas came along. ----- starLisa,
quote:I have to take those days off from work. But I have to take them as vacation, or personal days. I can't volunteer to work Christmas, because it's a legal holiday. There's nothing I can do to reduce the burden on myself. A burden which Christians in this country do not share.
This is an iniquity. But am I to understand your views expressed elsewhere, that you believe there should be no religious holidays for anyone?
I have no problem with an employer giving off whenever that employer wants. I have a problem with government recognition of a religious holiday.
I wonder how the Christians in the US would feel about Wiccans celebrating Beltane on the White House lawn. Probably a little bit like how I feel seeing a Christmas tree there.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have to take those days off from work. But I have to take them as vacation, or personal days. I can't volunteer to work Christmas, because it's a legal holiday. There's nothing I can do to reduce the burden on myself. A burden which Christians in this country do not share.
Except that many places stay open on Christmas, and many more likely would close even if the federal government didn't make it a holiday. There's no general prohibition on work on that day.
Suppose I'm a bank teller. Suppose I'm a mail carrier. Please.
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: And in the federal government, the day is a vacation day that cannot be switched. You lose nothing by having it off, because if you didn't, you wouldn't get an additional vacation or personal day.
Then let's have it switched to December 5. Cool. That way no one gets a federally granted favor. Why do Christians get one of their holidays declared a bank holiday, and Jews don't get the same thing? What makes them special?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Suppose I'm a bank teller. Suppose I'm a mail carrier. Please.
Banks are allowed to stay open. Any private business is. Please. As for mail carriers, they're federal so consider my next response to cover them.
quote:Then let's have it switched to December 5. Cool. That way no one gets a federally granted favor. Why do Christians get one of their holidays declared a bank holiday, and Jews don't get the same thing? What makes them special?
Because there is something to be said for putting the federal holiday on a day when many people will take off anyway. My mom went to a school with a large enough Jewish population that they just decided to close the school on high holy days. It wasn't a support of Judaism or reasonable accomodation, but recognition that the religious beliefs of a large portion of the population will have a serious effect on the ability of the institution to function.
The government, when operating as an employer, is a market participant. As such, responding to the wishes of a majority of its employees is good business sense.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most cultural celebrations of long standing have religious roots. Christmas has become very much a secular and cultural phenomenon. So much so that many Christians complain about it.
The majority of my atheist/agnostic friends celebrate Christmas as a secular thing and have Christmas trees, etc. with absolutely no relationship to the birth Christ. It has become a cultural holiday.
It's not like the government has institutionalized all the Christian holidays.
Posts: 251 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:There's a difference between a day federal employees get off and a federal holiday.
Not a practical one: federal employees get federal holidays off, and there's little practical effect otherwise.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have to take those days off from work. But I have to take them as vacation, or personal days. I can't volunteer to work Christmas, because it's a legal holiday. There's nothing I can do to reduce the burden on myself. A burden which Christians in this country do not share.
There are Christians who don't celebrate Christmas. There are Christians who don't celebrate Easter or celebrate Easter on a different day than the majority. And there are very few Christians who cannot work on Christmas, Easter, etc. Church services come at all hours of the day as well as midnight so they can't have the excuse that they need the whole day off just to go to church. Few Christians have a religious requirement to take the day off work. I volunteer to work on holidays so the people with families can enjoy the day. I see a lot of nonChristians looking forward to such holidays too, to spend the day with family. And it is a choice to pick a job where you know you'll be required to take federal holidays as well as your Jewish days. Christians who have jobs where they may be required to work Christmas have to take that into consideration too.
Seems to me the real difference is that you have so many days you can't work for religious reasons, and Christians don't have that many, if any.
Although I do agree that governments should stay out of religion more than they do. And if they took away my Christmas holiday I wouldn't be upset at all.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: A Jew is a Jew is a Jew. Declaring "I don't accept the law" doesn't make someone exempt from it. Imagine that in any other context: "Well, I don't really hold by all that business of robbing banks being against the law, so fill up that bag right quick, or I'm going to start shooting."
With secular laws, you can opt out, either by direct rebellion as you suggest, or by voting with your feet. How do you move away from being Jewish? A law which relies purely on coercion is an unjust law.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In that case, I think removing the symbolically and religiously especial status would make good sense .
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have no problem with an employer giving off whenever that employer wants. I have a problem with government recognition of a religious holiday.
I wonder how the Christians in the US would feel about Wiccans celebrating Beltane on the White House lawn. Probably a little bit like how I feel seeing a Christmas tree there.
Is there any religious signifigance to a Christmas tree? This is an unrelated question. I'm not sure if there is or not, but given its signifigance, I don't think it should be put on the lawn of the White House.
Then again...would you be upset if the President put up a Christmas tree in the family portions of the White House? I don't think I'd see a problem with that.
As for employers giving off what holidays they wanted...well, wouldn't that result in mostly Christian holidays being given off? I see your point, though.
-------
KoM,
quote:With secular laws, you can opt out, either by direct rebellion as you suggest, or by voting with your feet. How do you move away from being Jewish? A law which relies purely on coercion is an unjust law.
Just because someone isn't exempt from something doesn't mean they're being coerced. I could be mistaken, but I was taking sL's statements to mean that even though a Jew might say, "I am no longer living under these laws," they are. Not that they should necessarily still be forced to obey by other human beings.
And I think you'll have to go further than just saying a law which relies solely on coercion is an unjust law in order for it to be true.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
fugu, could you repeat that in words of fewer syllables? I don't know what you just said. (I'm also not entirely sure of who you are responding to.)
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm responding to Dagonee. I said there was a difference between a day federal employees get off and a federal holiday, he said not a practical one, so I'm saying it would make sense to remove the symbolic/religious status of Christmas as a federal holiday and have Dec. 25th just be a day federal employees get off because so many of them would try to get it off anyways.
After all, if there's no practical difference, then the difference that remains would seem to be religiously motivated.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:With secular laws, you can opt out, either by direct rebellion as you suggest, or by voting with your feet. How do you move away from being Jewish? A law which relies purely on coercion is an unjust law.
Just because someone isn't exempt from something doesn't mean they're being coerced. I could be mistaken, but I was taking sL's statements to mean that even though a Jew might say, "I am no longer living under these laws," they are. Not that they should necessarily still be forced to obey by other human beings.
And I think you'll have to go further than just saying a law which relies solely on coercion is an unjust law in order for it to be true.
I think then that we have slightly different understandings of what it means to live under a law. I agree that in a purely formal sense, people might be living under a law they do not obey. If that's what comrade sL meant, fine. But I think that living under a law requires recognition that the law is just or at least reasonable, and some degree of willingness to obey.
For the other, can you think of any just laws that are upheld purely by coercion? (Note my careful use of the qualification "purely".) I haven't got my Homecoming books here, but in the last one, two characters have a dialogue something like this :
General : You can hardly argue that your subjects will obey purely from love of the law. King : Ah, but they do. General : Oh? I thought it was because of all those soldiers and judges. King : Quite so; but why do the soldiers and judges obey?
Now, unjust laws can be upheld other than by force, but I think I am safe in saying that laws upheld only by force are unjust.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Christmas tree isn't actually Christian. And the date of December 25th, I'm pretty sure, was actually the date of some big pagan festival or something, and when people X conquered people Y, they just decided to change their pagan festival from the worship of people Y's original gods to the celebration of the birth of Christ.
posted
I think celebrating midwinter was pretty universal across Northern Europe; when it gets that cold and dark, knowing that the sun will come back eventually is worth a big celebration.
I don't think this kind of historical root is very relevant, though; what matters is surely what the Christmas tree means to people today. And really, Christmas is a highly secular holiday these days.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: A Jew is a Jew is a Jew. Declaring "I don't accept the law" doesn't make someone exempt from it. Imagine that in any other context: "Well, I don't really hold by all that business of robbing banks being against the law, so fill up that bag right quick, or I'm going to start shooting."
With secular laws, you can opt out, either by direct rebellion as you suggest, or by voting with your feet. How do you move away from being Jewish?
You don't.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: A law which relies purely on coercion is an unjust law.
Do tell. If I tell my daughter (who is 5) that she has to clean her room, she can't opt out of it. Is that unjust? No. I'm her Mom. I have that appropriate authority, and it's based on a lot of things. Among them are the fact that she wouldn't exist had it not been for me. She would not have a roof over her head or food to eat if it were not for me. That room I want her to clean? That's mine. I bought it and gave it to her for her use, but it's still mine. Also, I know things that she doesn't know. I understand why it's proper for her to clean her room, even if she doesn't quite grasp it herself yet.
Now replace me with God and replace my daughter with me and you and the rest of the human race.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have no problem with an employer giving off whenever that employer wants. I have a problem with government recognition of a religious holiday.
I wonder how the Christians in the US would feel about Wiccans celebrating Beltane on the White House lawn. Probably a little bit like how I feel seeing a Christmas tree there.
Is there any religious signifigance to a Christmas tree? This is an unrelated question. I'm not sure if there is or not, but given its signifigance, I don't think it should be put on the lawn of the White House.
Agreed. And there is definitely a religious significance to it for some Christians, and I think most Jews. It's a symbol of some really bad history. <shrug> We have a long memory.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Then again...would you be upset if the President put up a Christmas tree in the family portions of the White House? I don't think I'd see a problem with that.
I think I agree with you. I mean, it's their home, right?
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: As for employers giving off what holidays they wanted...well, wouldn't that result in mostly Christian holidays being given off? I see your point, though.
Maybe. It could also result in swing holidays. For example, where I work, we were given a choice of Memorial Day or Columbus Day to take as a swing holiday. Well, other than the fact that Columbus Day used to be my half-birthday until they moved it to the nearest Monday, I don't know why I'd want either of those off.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Just because someone isn't exempt from something doesn't mean they're being coerced. I could be mistaken, but I was taking sL's statements to mean that even though a Jew might say, "I am no longer living under these laws," they are. Not that they should necessarily still be forced to obey by other human beings.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: comrade sL
Just as a point of information (this is open to anyone), is "bite me" a legitimate form of expression this board? If not, then I'll refrain, and just let King of Clowns take the hint.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: QUOTE]You don't.
Yes, that was kind of my point.
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Do tell. If I tell my daughter (who is 5) that she has to clean her room, she can't opt out of it. Is that unjust? No. I'm her Mom. I have that appropriate authority, and it's based on a lot of things. Among them are the fact that she wouldn't exist had it not been for me. She would not have a roof over her head or food to eat if it were not for me. That room I want her to clean? That's mine. I bought it and gave it to her for her use, but it's still mine. Also, I know things that she doesn't know. I understand why it's proper for her to clean her room, even if she doesn't quite grasp it herself yet.
Now replace me with God and replace my daughter with me and you and the rest of the human race. [/QB]
There is a difference between laws intended for adults, and the rules we impose on children. And since your god is a figment of your over-active imagination, the "Yahweh-knows-best" bit is just silly.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't Jewish people celebrate Christmas, not in the traditional sense, but with a movie and Chinese takeout?
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep, my Jewish friends do. They say the lines are much shorter that day.
quote: wonder how the Christians in the US would feel about Wiccans celebrating Beltane on the White House lawn. Probably a little bit like how I feel seeing a Christmas tree there. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is there any religious signifigance to a Christmas tree? This is an unrelated question. I'm not sure if there is or not, but given its signifigance, I don't think it should be put on the lawn of the White House.
Well, the Christians co-opted them from the Wiccans, so, it's kind of both, neh?
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:And since your god is a figment of your over-active imagination, blah blah blah blah blah ...
King of Men, we've heard this from you before, and no one was impressed then, either. I can't imagine why you might think returning to it now is at all helpful to the discussion. We know you don't believe in any religion, and no one is asking you to. The mockery is out of line.
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The White House is part government building, part private residence. Why not leave it up to the occupants at the time what they want on their lawn/grounds? If we had a Jewish president, or a Wiccan president, we wouldn't have a Christmas tree on the lawn, and there's nothing whatsoever wrong with that.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well, the Christians co-opted them from the Wiccans, so, it's kind of both, neh?
I'm not aware that there were any Wiccans in the days before Christians adopted the Christmas tree as a symbol ...
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh, I was going to make that point as well. Wiccans are pretty new, definitely newer than Christmas trees.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
(I'm also not entirely sure of who you are responding to.)
