Moderator: Alyrium Denryle
1. They can celebrate it by having a day off, or being paid penalty rates for working.Magus wrote: 1) What about people who don't celebrate any holidays? Aren't we excluding them? Maybe we should be saying "Happy Winter Break."
.
to "the school is being obnoxious for telling kids not to do anything overtly religious in the school".idiots who think "Merry Christmas" is a religious attack and sue somebody
Btw: That's one of the cases that O'Reilly "misrepresented" and used in the past, see:Magus wrote:I don't have names - but I can cite some examples:Darth Wong wrote: Name these people.
Lawsuit: School bans Christmas colors, Christian-themed gifts
You are correct that there isn't a major (or perhaps any) threat of a lawsuit from the overly PC people in these situations. You called me out on it immediately after that post was made, and I conceded immediately afterwards that "lawsuit" was an exaggeration. I know I'm often not without fault in argumentation, I come from a background where much of argumentation lies in pathos and such, and am trying to adjust to a more technical method. But I thought we'd worked that exaggeration out of the mix long ago.Darth Wong wrote:Magus, I have been following your careful backpedaling bullshit, and you have shifted your claim from:to "the school is being obnoxious for telling kids not to do anything overtly religious in the school".idiots who think "Merry Christmas" is a religious attack and sue somebody
That's a neat trick, but it won't fly. Your claim about fundie PC people who sue others for saying "Merry Christmas" was never substantiated. Either concede that you made an unfounded claim or produce some actual evidence. If you want to just say that the school is trying too hard not to offend anyone, that's a completely different claim from your previous claim that people are running in fear of lawsuits from these imaginary fundie PC people of yours.
Once more: the only people launching lawsuits here are the Christians.
That's an interesting link. But Mr. O'Reilly's ability to twist anything he lays his hands on doesn't make the truth of the matter all that acceptable.R. U. Serious wrote:Btw: That's one of the cases that O'Reilly "misrepresented" and used in the past, see:Magus wrote:I don't have names - but I can cite some examples:Darth Wong wrote: Name these people.
Lawsuit: School bans Christmas colors, Christian-themed gifts
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512130006
"O'Reilly falsely claimed a Texas school district banned red and green clothing, called move "fascism"".
P'raps if you weren't high, you'd realize secular institutions allow holidays at the same time. Oh, what, you're a fucking retard. Because you can't grasp that 'holiday' no longer means 'holy day'.Magus wrote:1) What about people who don't celebrate any holidays? Aren't we excluding them? Maybe we should be saying "Happy Winter Break."SirNitram wrote: 1) Merry Christmas is explicitly exclusive: It excludes everyone who doesn't celebrate Christmas, you fucking imbecile.
2) It is indeed against the school's mission to exclude against other religions by using something which explicitly endorses just one holiday. Why don't you go read the fucking Establishment Clause?
Now, why do I flatly not beleive this crap? Could it be because every time it's claimed, a few seconds of investigation discovers that it's not what the blubbering retards claiming it is?2) There's a difference between using something in the school's publications and forbidding students from bringing in Christmas stuff during a time set aside for sharing one's holiday heritage.
It's not just an exaggeration; it's a complete fabrication. Who are the people who are seriously afraid of retribution from this mythical "PC fundie" crowd? Not only did your articles not substantiate your bullshit claim about people living in fear of the "PC fundie" brigade, but it doesn't even substantiate your claim that they accuse anyone who says "Merry Christmas" of being automatically intolerant, rather than merely being presumptuous.Magus wrote:You are correct that there isn't a major (or perhaps any) threat of a lawsuit from the overly PC people in these situations. You called me out on it immediately after that post was made, and I conceded immediately afterwards that "lawsuit" was an exaggeration.
No we hadn't. You call it an exaggeration, but you still imply that something akin to it is happening. You still argue that private citizens are afraid to say "Merry Christmas" because they'll be accused of bigotry. You have not provided a SINGLE example of this actually happening, nor have you substantiated your assertion that a policy directive about not using religiously specific language in a government institution is somehow exclusive of any particular religion.I know I'm often not without fault in argumentation, I come from a background where much of argumentation lies in pathos and such, and am trying to adjust to a more technical method. But I thought we'd worked that exaggeration out of the mix long ago.
