The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Little Chuchok

But the xmas tree has nothing to do with religion?Especially if it's got a little fairy at the top.

Anyway,you don't have to endure it...just turn the other cheek and don't look.

keda

Difference is that I was referring to traditional links; still, if we dismiss plagiarisms such as the tree, then so are the halo, the events leading to and the celebrations of Easter, the Mass, the cross, and other than in name the event itself that's celebrated at Christmas, little to do with Christianity since their roots are all in Paganism, as are most symbols and events adopted by early Fathers.

Butterfly

I have jewish friends who celebrate Christmas, so at the end the whole confusion doesn't really matter. I wouldn't mind celebrating jewish hollidays, so why not.

One could argue that the lack of integration is due to racism and lack of opportunities. When you are not accepted and welcomed in the first place, it's hard to integrate. Knowing the Brits long history of ethnic tolerance when they were a colonial power, it's not hard to imagine why such an integration is not happening in the UK.

The French have an immigration problem with Algerians. Basically they are regarded as scums. They probably are but that's not the point. They can't integrate because the French don't want them period. OTH, we have Cambodgians and Vietnamese being fully integrated. Why ? because the French don't think Cambodgians and Vietnamese are scums. It's simple as that.

friscofrankie

Founded on religious freedom in the beginning, the US as become a place where you can have your religious freedom as long as you keep it behind closed doors. Bullshit. It offends you? YOU Stay indoors.

You do not have the right to be protected from cultures and religions not your own. You have the obligation to tolerate other religions. You have the obligation to not whine every time you hear a Yiddish or Muslim prayer. You have the obligation to not be offended bny religions and cultures other than your own. If you can't handle your obligations stay indoors, awaty from the rest of the world.

While tolerance of other religions, cultures, ethnicities and ideals are supposed to a foundation of the so-called freedoms in the US. Intolerance is not an ideal protected under them. A nativity scene may be a Christian symbol; a Christmas tree? BAH! You don't believe, or like the Christmas season? don't look.

The liberals want you to hide your religion lest you "offend" some one else, the Christian conservative want only Christian symbols displayed. They can all go to hell for all I care.

Display a baby Jesus, a Menorah or whatever symbol you want, write "Happy Ramadan" on a wall. Don't take someone else's symbol down, to prove how even the playing field is. Raise your own. Tolerate, go ahead, make damn sure you are tolerated too. Do not complain about some other culture's celebration take heart and joy in the fact that you, too, are welcome to enjoy your own celebrations.

People that complain about other's religious symbology should have "intolerant Nazi scum" tattooed on the foreheads, even if they are Jewish rabbis.

__________________
For art to exist, for any sort of aesthetic activity to exist, a certain physiological precondition is indispensable: intoxication.

insanity...

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

man with no head

At the same time the government is not supposed to endorse any particular religion over another. Putting a menorah or a manger on public property amounts to endorsement of Christianity or Judaism and is verboten.

Until worship of trees adorned with ornaments and other objects becomes the foundation of a religion I say the decorative trees stay and the other symbols remain out of bounds on public grounds.

Nobody is stopping the rabbi from putting a menorah on his house, on his car, or outside his synogague. Nobody is infringing on his right to worship. Nobody is forcing him to remove a shirt with a menorah on it. That's what religious freedom is about.

The government is supposed to be neutral towards everyone and it can't be neutral if it allows divisive symbols to be displayed on property used by all.

friscofrankie

IN fact the government does not have to be "endorsing" one religion over another but as endorsing all religions. All cultures are steeped in their religions some cultures combine religions. By this definition, the government is "endorsing " a religion as long as Christmas is a public holiday.

These symbols are divisive only due to intolerance of others. By not displaying them they are playing up to the intolerant. I say display the symbols and celebrate the differences. Those that are offended? Tough shit.

Milo2

A government is located in the present yet it has its foundations in the past. Sure a government "is not supposed to endorse any particular religion over another"; yet is still needs to acknowledge past influences on its present mode of existence.

A government only lasts for 3-10 years until its elected out of office but the political system in which it exists continues with only minor changes from decade to decade or even century to century.

To argue a government should not acknowledge any influence Christianity, Islam, Buddhism or whatever other religion has had on its development is to view governance ahistorically.

Even if it doesn't acknowledge such influence, the influence (c.f. influence of Chistian equality of all men before God on modern concepts of democracy) is still there.

__________________
viva thai cuisine

raycarey

in the public square (schools, govt. buildings, airports, parks, playgrounds, etc....) religious exhibitionists force their particular dogma and fantasies on a captive audience...it's in shopping malls, songs on elevators, and the ubiquitous advertising on all media formats .

look the other way? give me a break.


just give me a sec to look in the bathroom mirror.........

stroller

Regarding the trees mentioned, we don't know whether there is a manger scene with them or not, often there is.

Acknowledge in form of public seasonal displays in airports? I can think of less obtrusive ways ...

Milkman

I read through all of the posts in this thread. It's interesting (actually, not interesting) to see the number of times "Islam/Muslims" is mentioned in this thread.

This thread is about:

1. Xmas trees being removed from a public airport in the U.S.

2. Whether the Rabbi should have complained to have his Menora put up.

3. Whether the airport should have added the Menora and/or other symbols.

4. Whether the airport should have removed the trees.


In this day in age, with many views on this issue in the public domain, I'm not surprised that the trees were removed. Not any different than a public courthouse removing the Ten Commandments, or school prayer, or other religious icons.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

_____________

Boon Mee

Christmas trees are going back up at Sea-Tac airport

The reaction to the trees' removal had been swift and vociferous. News outlets nationwide picked up the story.

"There's been such an outcry from the public — from people of all faiths — who believe that the trees should be reinstalled," Davis said. "I'm very thankful that we can return the trees and get back to running our airport during this very busy holiday season."

Update

__________________
ผมเป็นคนบ้านนอก

man with no head

It's not about tolerance or intolerance: it's about giving the government power it should not have. If the government appears to endorse something then comes the power to suppress something else. This has been the long standing thinking of Constitutional scholars since the time of the founding of the United States and it's why the meaning of the First Amendment draws even more scrutiny than the Second.

As we all know every right guaranteed in the Constitution has limitations. One cannot yell fire in a crowded theater, one cannot libel or slander another without consequences, one may not practice religious ceremonies or exhibit such if it infringes upon another's rights to enjoy or not enjoy their religious freedoms, one may not own a firearm if one has a criminal or other record, one may not prohibit police searches of his body or property if implied consent has been given, etc......

And as far as Christmas is concerned it was recognized as a Federal holiday in the late 1800s not to elevate Christianity above all other religions but due to the fact that the government could not force people to work on that day (because it would infringe upon their religious beliefs).

The most recent case dealing with all this was Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU, 492 U.S. 573 in which the Supreme Court set the following conditions to determine whether or not a particular display violates the Constitution: Christmas displays must deal with the secular nature of the holiday versus the religious aspects: trees, snow men, and Santa would be allowed on public property (even if the display is privately funded it won't matter) but a manger would not under most circumstances; the context, composition, and location are all important considerations in determining illegality: a small display in someone's office would be less likely to invite scrutiny than a big display at the public entrance of an airport, for example. With regards to location, one has to consider the function of the public property (United States v. Grace, 461 U.S. 171 (1983).). Is it a place designed for public discussion like a sidewalk, park, or open area? Is it a place for public use that generally is secure and therefore not a place for public forums (such as a government building, military base, or court)? Is it a public place operated by the government but used for private functions (such as a place designated for public rallies or speeches)? An airport is considered a public area, but, a secure area where one generally would not be allowed to enter without a specific purpose (i.e. flying). The fact that airports are secure facilities controls the applicability of whether one's rights might be infringed or not. One cannot yell "bomb" in an airport; one cannot carry guns; one cannot go where one pleases in an airport; one cannot hold rallies; one cannot hold protests; etc. Therefore, one cannot expect the same religious freedoms inside an airport as one would have in other places.

Another consideration is the special tax status of port authorities. According to Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing Township, 330 U.S. 1947 the government may not levy taxes for the purpose of promoting or sponsoring religious "activities" or "institutions." This has been taken to mean that a government cannot use tax money to sponsor and kind of religious display.

Thus, following recent and long standing SCOTUS rulings: the Port Authority of Seattle acted correctly in replacing the trees but keeping the menorah (and other religious symbols) out.

medallion

Now do the Satanists get to put up their secular symbold? The Wiccans, Zoroastrians, Sihks, Jains, Hindus? how can a symbol be both sacred and profane simultaneously? A Christmas tree is obviously celebrating....CHRIST for Christ's sake! Oh, it's not as obvious as a 25 feet-tall crucifix with a dying Jew bleeding onto the concourse....

stroller

Do Satanists have any secular symbols?
Isn't it the birth of Christ, rather than the crucifixion, which is celebrated at Christmas?

Anyway, what is it you're wanting to say regarding the topic, medallion?

Fabian

Christmas is a pagan holiday which has been celebrated long before someone made the barbarians to christians.

RDN

A bunch of posts removed. Keep it on track people, please.

Little Chuchok

Well, I'm going to ask the wife if we can put this flag up outside the house.I wonder if anybody will complain?


[IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Owner/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-2.jpg[/IMG]

Sir Burr

^Khmer Rouge flag is a political symbol, not a religious one.

Little Chuchok

^Yep I know.Just threw it in for fun.