No, but my tax dollars pay for that play, the same as they pay for a copy of the New Testament on courthouse steps. The Wall of Separation, as established now in historical practice, is there for a reason. The no-preference doctrine is ridiculous, and does not work: Would you object if a "Satan's Playground" festival was also staged? How about "Ramadan - the Month of Glory," or "Santeria Cultural Days" at your local kindergarten? The moment you object to these other publically funded events is the moment you abrogate your vow to uphold a "no preferential doctrine." Again - I do not have anything against you practicing your religion. Just don't do it on my dime, or my child's time, while at school.
Hm...kind of like Iowa's residents' tax dollars being grabbed up by Muslims wanting to build a youth camp? A simple Google search will alert you to thousands, perhaps millions, of results of the U.S. allotting tax dollars for religious organizations, not just Christianity. Where is your protest of that? Christmas is just an easy target, I guess.
If the organization had a strong enough population that organized that type of event, then similar practices would be wholly embraced. But this issue starts to delve more into federal government encroachment into state's rights.
Don't presume. Were I in Iowa, and affected by the tax, I'd be actively campaigning against that as well. "Traditional American values." I could never put a finger on that, exactly. The avoidance of religious tyranny is one American value I hold especially dear. Manifest Destiny, well...
So - if you were the lone Christian family in a town of satanists, and as part of the curriculum, they held a "Satan's Day" festival - You'd not raise a peep?
No, I'd probably just move. But that's just me. If it made me that uncomfortable to live in a town of Satanists, then I probably wouldn't be in that town to begin with.
I think the term "traditional American values" is very ambiguous. It's meaning is as personal to the person as their own American experience. To me, it's celebrating Christmas and not feeling like a villain just for wishing someone a "Merry Christmas" as I pass them on the street. Not having to worry that my child will slip up and say something about God or her religion in school and be reprimanded because she didn't know any better. For her to be able to learn about other cultures and accept them as she would have them accept hers.
So, to bring it back down to a bit less extreme example - You are not a Christian. You have family all over the area, and your livelihood is squarely in the town where you live. Generally, you're really happy where you are. Your child's school is mounting a Christian play, with your money; As a citizen of the United States - are you required to assent to the play's production?
This what I meant about federal encroachment. Shouldn't the majority of that township decide the best way to spend the money? If the majority wants the play to happen, then a vote would show that.
How can the term "traditional American values" be very ambiguous, and yet, any rational person can see, given the "senseless nature of the attacks" the (patently evident) traditional American values? This is the problem - you are right in the first quote, and wrong in the second. The two are wholly contradictory to each other, yet they were both made by you. If the very concept of what it means to be American is ambiguous, and up to each individual to define, why do you rest your argument on the publically funded promulgation of those same (ambiguous) American values?
That is interesting, I didn't know schools had been doing Christian plays. Christmas plays I have heard of and those things about santa claus, trees, elves, etc... which aren't "Christian" but are now being outlawed because it is celebrated on the same day.
The constitution was not drawn to effect the will of the majority. It was drawn to protect the individual - no matter how minority in viewpoint. It was drawn to ensure that no citizen - no matter how "minority" - would ever be subject to the tyranny our country had just left. An illustrative example - say, the majority of a town viewed pre-marital sex as punishable by death. A pre-teen is discovered to have committed just that. Should that pre-teen be stoned to death, given the majority town vote? I think not - that teen is a citizen, and as a citizen, is afforded protection not granted under a "state of nature" rule by the majority. This is the lynchpin of our Founding.
I take offense to "Christmas"! It's a non-Christian holiday! Inviting woodland spirits in your house via cutting down evergreens. The idea of flood toys and stupid gifts to loved ones, when you should be celebrating the gift of love God gave us. Down with it! Don't get me on a roll about Hanukkah, miracle of the lights? What freaking oil BS, it's about vanquishing your enemy, and killing those who interfere with your way of life! Read if for yourself! The oil BS is what we tell children, and soon the adults started believing it. Maccabees Rock! tom
Yes, debunked, you are right. Personally, I'd rather they just chanted 5000 year old fertility rites, to keep it clean, but you are right. My debate with SD is a broader one - going to what it means to embrace "traditional American values" by the caveat of public law. Usually, yes. Uptight prigs who deserve to be hung and quartered and burned at the stake. Oh, wait... Most folks who view America as having gone too secular, however, do not read the stats that show we are a land of religious zealots when compared to our western industrial confreres. I am deeply alarmed by the swing the religious right has been able to effect in my land, and find it a wholly ahistorical, unjustified presence. But as I said, Merry Christmas. There are more important battles.
I whole-heartedly agree. But it's nice to see that I'm not alone in my opinion and that someone out there can present their counterpoints in a rational manner.
After reading more into the thread and having a better understanding of the issue - i have to agree with northpoint, christmas events paid for by tax dollars have no place in schools. The work place, school break, etc... if someone wants to say it.. that's no big deal. But tax payers shouldn't be footing any of the bills.
Question: Before Christ's existence, how did we formulate the date? Now we say BC or AD...in reference to his existence...but what did we say before he was even around? Anyone....? Just curious.
Well, considering there was no "BC" or "AD" before Christ was around, they said nothing. The line is drawn at the time of the birth of Christ. I don't think any one anticipating that event was too worried about categorizing the milliniums around His birth at the time.