PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on this ???



denmom
12-09-2013, 06:02 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/09/air-force-removes-nativity-scene/

I am in no way a religious person but what others choose to believe in/celebrate/etc is no concern to me. I think the AF caved on this one and should have left it up.

efmbman
12-09-2013, 06:21 PM
Well... the article you linked to is certainly not written in an objective manner. No surprise there. It seems that any time religion is the focus, the warring factions line up and prepare for battle.

Giant Voice
12-09-2013, 06:24 PM
"Apparently, an undisclosed number of Airmen were so emotionally troubled by the sight of a manger scene that they immediately notified the MRFF"

Whether its true or not...SMH!

AJBIGJ
12-09-2013, 06:24 PM
Well... the article you linked to is certainly not written in an objective manner. No surprise there. It seems that any time religion is the focus, the warring factions line up and prepare for battle.

Pretty much my thoughts here as well, hard to speculate towards an article which is so littered by all of the hyperbole and demagoguery to try to get people to spew out standard talking points. I would have to say the devil's probably in the details.

denmom
12-09-2013, 06:29 PM
Sorry about the link, definitely a biased author. Tried to find other but haven't had any luck yet.

AJBIGJ
12-09-2013, 06:36 PM
Sorry about the link, definitely a biased author. Tried to find other but haven't had any luck yet.

I'm not sure you'll find a lot of plain, factual information about it unless you discover something more local.

Greg
12-09-2013, 06:42 PM
Sorry about the link, definitely a biased author. Tried to find other but haven't had any luck yet.

Sorry? Don't be sorry. I think this is a great tie-in to another, currently, active thread.

Fox News commentator Sarah Palin, the author of the new book, “Good Tidings and Great Joy,” said what happened at Shaw Air Force base is not surprising.

'We see stories like this every day and yet leftwing pundits still claim that the so-called ‘War on Christmas’ is a figment of the imagination,' Palin told me. 'The War on Christmas is just the top of the spear in a larger battle to marginalize expressions of faith and make true religious freedom a thing of the past.'

Palin’s book is a call to arms for Americans to 'stand strong on America’s faith-filled foundation.'

“Never let these scrooges strip away the true meaning of Christmas,' she told me."

Spoken like a woman, a mom, and a patriot! Bet she could pass the Marine's infantry officers school.

AJBIGJ
12-09-2013, 06:44 PM
I actually kind of stand corrected, some of what sounds like "exaggeration" seems to be fairly legit!

MRFF Article:
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/press-releases/2013/DailyKos_Loebe_12-6-13.html

AJBIGJ
12-09-2013, 06:50 PM
I think we seem to be experiencing people seeking "Freedom From Religion" more and more frequently. If I'm not mistaken (not in the AF or anywhere near the locality myself), the individuals responsible are rather notorious for these types of complaints. It would seem they have a little more clout on that base than they used to. Or it could just be the base commanders find it easier just not dealing with them because they sound like a giant pain in the ass.

efmbman
12-09-2013, 06:54 PM
Sorry about the link, definitely a biased author. Tried to find other but haven't had any luck yet.

No need to apologize. It is becoming more and more difficult to find objective reporting in the media. Soon, it will be:

"And now for the weather report, sponsored by the Nazi Party... Over to you, Tom!"

Greg
12-09-2013, 07:01 PM
I think we seem to be experiencing people seeking "Freedom From Religion" more and more frequently. If I'm not mistaken (not in the AF or anywhere near the locality myself), the individuals responsible are rather notorious for these types of complaints. It would seem they have a little more clout on that base than they used to. Or it could just be the base commanders find it easier just not dealing with them because they sound like a giant pain in the ass.

I'm inclined to go with the latter, and not the former. As someone who has had the responsibility to trouble shoot customer complaints, sometimes it's far too tempting to hand off in certain circumstances.

Chief_KO
12-09-2013, 07:02 PM
AFI 1-1 "Air Force Standards"
2.11. Government Neutrality Regarding Religion. Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for an individual’s free exercise of religion or other personal beliefs and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. For example, they must avoid the actual or apparent use of their position to promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion. Commanders or supervisors who engage in such behavior may cause members to doubt their impartiality and objectivity. The potential result is a degradation of the unit’s morale, good order, and discipline. Airmen, especially commanders and supervisors, must ensure that in exercising their right of religious free expression, they do not degrade morale, good order, and discipline in the Air Force or degrade the trust and confidence that the public has in the United States Air Force.

AJBIGJ
12-09-2013, 07:05 PM
AFI 1-1 "Air Force Standards"
2.11. Government Neutrality Regarding Religion. Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for an individual’s free exercise of religion or other personal beliefs and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. For example, they must avoid the actual or apparent use of their position to promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion. Commanders or supervisors who engage in such behavior may cause members to doubt their impartiality and objectivity. The potential result is a degradation of the unit’s morale, good order, and discipline. Airmen, especially commanders and supervisors, must ensure that in exercising their right of religious free expression, they do not degrade morale, good order, and discipline in the Air Force or degrade the trust and confidence that the public has in the United States Air Force.

I think the big question is who was responsible for putting up the nativity, sounded like this was supported by people in the chapel.

efmbman
12-09-2013, 07:10 PM
I actually kind of stand corrected, some of what sounds like "exaggeration" seems to be fairly legit!

MRFF Article:
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/press-releases/2013/DailyKos_Loebe_12-6-13.html

I took notice of this from your linked article:


The assistant put him on hold. A minute or two later she came back saying that the Chaplain indicated a volunteer group put up the scene and that as they were speaking it was being taken down!!!

They are certainly patting themselves on the back for this action. However, I feel it is just as likely that someone else on the base noticed this violation of regulation and did what leaders do: take the appropriate action in the absence of orders. If the MRFF wants to take credit for it, so be it.

AJBIGJ
12-09-2013, 07:11 PM
I took notice of this from your linked article:

They are certainly patting themselves on the back for this action. However, I feel it is just as likely that someone else on the base noticed this violation of regulation and did what leaders do: take the appropriate action in the absence of orders. If the MRFF wants to take credit for it, so be it.
I imagine so.

kool-aid
12-09-2013, 09:22 PM
I enjoy how the government cannot be a part of recognitions of the religious aspect of Christmas, yet it is a federal holiday.

efmbman
12-09-2013, 09:32 PM
I enjoy how the government cannot be a part of recognitions of the religious aspect of Christmas, yet it is a federal holiday.

It does seem contradictory. I have wondered why the MRFF has not called one of their senior contacts at the Pentagon to demand the DOD spare the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines from the potential emotional trauma. They could be doing the government and the taxpayers a huge favor - could exposure to such a religious holiday lead to an increase in PTSD or mental illness claims to the VA later in life?

Chief_KO
12-09-2013, 09:35 PM
I enjoy how the government cannot be a part of recognitions of the religious aspect of Christmas, yet it is a federal holiday.
Nor do I recall any "work-in" protests by Atheists, Agnostics, Wiccans, Druids, Muslims, Hindus, or others demanding to work on December 25 and work a full day on December 24.

sandsjames
12-09-2013, 11:15 PM
Nor do I recall any "work-in" protests by Atheists, Agnostics, Wiccans, Druids, Muslims, Hindus, or others demanding to work on December 25 and work a full day on December 24.

Exactly...people will bitch about the term "Christmas Party" and nativity scenes, yet they all happily take the Federal Holiday of Christmas off.

By the way, I'm glad it's that time of year again to rehash these same old discussions. If only Joe Bonham was around things would even be more exciting.

CORNELIUSSEON
12-10-2013, 02:02 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/09/air-force-removes-nativity-scene/

I am in no way a religious person but what others choose to believe in/celebrate/etc is no concern to me. I think the AF caved on this one and should have left it up.

The better response would have been to follow the example of many the US Cities that allow religious displays, which is to add Hanukkah and Quanza displays so as to avoid the "favoritism" issue altogether.

sandsjames
12-10-2013, 02:48 PM
The better response would have been to follow the example of many the US Cities that allow religious displays, which is to add Hanukkah and Quanza displays so as to avoid the "favoritism" issue altogether.

For once we agree. Of course than the argument comes in about other displays...Satanism, Wicca, etc. Then you have more problems to deal with...

CORNELIUSSEON
12-10-2013, 03:05 PM
For once we agree. Of course than the argument comes in about other displays...Satanism, Wicca, etc. Then you have more problems to deal with...

I spent most of my life in NYC, and NYC early on went with the "The More, The Merrier" approach, and - as of last Christmas - they have Christian, Jewish, Quanza, and Muslim displays, and the chosen sites for the displays is outside City Hall and outside the Borough Halls. To make their point, NYC sets up the official displays at each of the 6 locations, which means tall Christmas Tree, lights, and numerous power strips. The other organizations provide the display materials for the religious or other displays, and - if necessary - plug into the City Power. The displays get established the day after Thanksgiving, and are taken down on January 6, which is the traditional end date for "The 12 Days Of Christmas". They have been doing this for more than 20 years, with nary a peep from the naysayers. As for the Wiccans and others along that line, they are welcome as well as long as their displays are judged to be in good taste.

sandsjames
12-10-2013, 03:14 PM
I spent most of my life in NYC, and NYC early on went with the "The More, The Merrier" approach, and - as of last Christmas - they have Christian, Jewish, Quanza, and Muslim displays, and the chosen sites for the displays is outside City Hall and outside the Borough Halls. To make their point, NYC sets up the official displays at each of the 6 locations, which means tall Christmas Tree, lights, and numerous power strips. The other organizations provide the display materials for the religious or other displays, and - if necessary - plug into the City Power. The displays get established the day after Thanksgiving, and are taken down on January 6, which is the traditional end date for "The 12 Days Of Christmas". They have been doing this for more than 20 years, with nary a peep from the naysayers. As for the Wiccans and others along that line, they are welcome as well as long as their displays are judged to be in good taste.

Again, I agree...but the argument from the other side is what's considered "good taste"? And if ones religion supports things that the majority don't deem to be in "good taste" then where do we go? Freedom for one means there must be freedom for all.

socal1200r
12-10-2013, 05:33 PM
Yet another example of the gutless PC police up at the Pentagon caving in. This ultra liberalism being forced upon us by Nobama is destroying our country, from the repeal of DADT, to not defending DOMA, to kissing the feet of the likes of Karzai and Kim Jong Un. I would've told that organization to go pound sand, and get the hell off my base.

CORNELIUSSEON
12-10-2013, 05:53 PM
Again, I agree...but the argument from the other side is what's considered "good taste"? And if ones religion supports things that the majority don't deem to be in "good taste" then where do we go? Freedom for one means there must be freedom for all.

NYC uses the rule that says you may display anything you would otherwise display visibly to the general public in other venues. So, if you are with a wiccan group, and your group has gotten no push back from displaying a specific wiccan display at their own location over the rest of the year, then the display will be considered in good taste for the purposes of the Christmas Display. Likewise would be true for Satanists and other fringe groups. Further, if there is any push back for displaying it at the Christmas Display, and the City learns that the protest group has a display that has been given permission to be added to the Christmas Display, then the permission can be withdrawn until they agree to allow the full display. In other words, if your group has a dog in the race, you have no room to complain about any of the other dogs.

71Fish
12-10-2013, 06:56 PM
Since Christmas falls on a "normal" work day this year, I'm sure they people who complained won't be taking the day off. If their work centers are closed, they can augment security forces so they can have the day off to spend with their spouses and kids.

Rusty Jones
12-10-2013, 08:08 PM
The big problem that I see here is that Christians are arguing this from the standpoint that this is religious holiday... when everyone else sees it as a secular holiday.

sandsjames
12-10-2013, 10:56 PM
The big problem that I see here is that Christians are arguing this from the standpoint that this is religious holiday... when everyone else sees it as a secular holiday.

How could it possibly be seen by anyone as secular? I'm sure I don't have to break down the term "Christmas" for you.

Rusty Jones
12-10-2013, 11:02 PM
How could it possibly be seen by anyone as secular? I'm sure I don't have to break down the term "Christmas" for you.

You're a smart guy. I feel that if were to "break down" what December 25th meant to others LONG before Christianity, I'd be insulting your intelligence. Let me know if that's not the case.

sandsjames
12-10-2013, 11:28 PM
You're a smart guy. I feel that if were to "break down" what December 25th meant to others LONG before Christianity, I'd be insulting your intelligence. Let me know if that's not the case.

I'm not talking about before. I'm not talking about the Pagan references. I'm talking about Christmas, in the United States, since we became a country.

If the government felt the need to change the name of the holiday for secular purposes I would have no issues. What others do and choose to believe doesn't affect the way I celebrate December 25th. But to claim that it currently can be viewed as a secular holiday is naïve. Should people have to be Christian to take the day off, buy presents, put up a tree, etc??? Of course not. But Christmas, by definition, is a religious holiday.

Rusty Jones
12-10-2013, 11:37 PM
I'm not talking about before. I'm not talking about the Pagan references. I'm talking about Christmas, in the United States, since we became a country.

If the government felt the need to change the name of the holiday for secular purposes I would have no issues. What others do and choose to believe doesn't affect the way I celebrate December 25th. But to claim that it currently can be viewed as a secular holiday is naïve. Should people have to be Christian to take the day off, buy presents, put up a tree, etc??? Of course not. But Christmas, by definition, is a religious holiday.

Okay, we could go back and forth all day on whether it's religious or secular. In the end, it's up to the individual to decide that. My point was that I don't see any hypocrisy in non-Christians not working that day, regardless of their views on Christianity.

sandsjames
12-10-2013, 11:57 PM
Okay, we could go back and forth all day on whether it's religious or secular. In the end, it's up to the individual to decide that. My point was that I don't see any hypocrisy in non-Christians not working that day, regardless of their views on Christianity.

And I was agreeing with you.

WeaponsTSGT
12-11-2013, 04:22 PM
SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, S.C. (CBS Charlotte/AP) — Officials at Shaw Air Force Base are trying to determine what to do about a holiday display after a Nativity scene was taken down last week.

Air Force spokeswoman Lt. Keavy Rake said Tuesday a Nativity display was set up Friday by a group of volunteers from the base chapel at a small lake on the installation. The site was near where a tree lighting ceremony was scheduled Friday evening.

Rake says the Military Religious Freedom Foundation lodged a complaint about the display through the Air Force in Washington.

Paul Loebe, spokesman for the foundation, said the Nativity scene was in violation of the Constitution.

“It was very sectarian in nature and a direct violation of the US Constitution as well as a blatant violation of Air Force Instruction 1-1 Section 2.11,” Loebe said in a statement.

Rake says Air Force officials want a holiday display that reflects more than a single group, so the Nativity scene was taken down and officials are trying to determine the proper placement and arrangement of a new display.

Loebe thanked the Air Force for taking the Nativity scene down quickly.

“Within 2 hours and 15 minutes of initially being contacted by MRFF, the nativity scene had been promptly removed,” Loebe’s statement read. “MRFF wants to congratulate the Air Force on acting so swiftly to reverse this egregious violation and hopes that in the future they will ensure that no such violations continue to occur.”

(TM and © Copyright 2013 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2013 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)



I'll keep my thoughts to myself and see where the discussion goes.

efmbman
12-11-2013, 04:41 PM
I'll keep my thoughts to myself and see where the discussion goes.

The discussion went into this thread:

http://forums.militarytimes.com/showthread.php?1597498-Thoughts-on-this

Sergeant eNYgma
12-11-2013, 05:29 PM
If only they'd pay travel vouchers and other crap they owe YOU that fast......

Kalbo607
12-11-2013, 05:38 PM
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is by far the most powerful group i seems the Air Force fears. Once a complaint is filed by them the Air Force instantly acts. Very sad that the Air Force has allowed an organization to have that much power.

hugomk
12-11-2013, 08:10 PM
"...reverse this egregious violation..."

Egregious, really? I bet this guy's been waiting to use that word for awhile now.

OtisRNeedleman
12-11-2013, 08:14 PM
In the AAF (Adult Air Force) we never worried about such crap. The display went up, everyone wished each other a Merry Christmas or whatever applied to them, and Mikey Weinstein was just another bitter blowhard.

Rainmaker
12-11-2013, 08:27 PM
I think the big question is who was responsible for putting up the nativity, sounded like this was supported by people in the chapel.

People in the chapel support putting up a nativity scene? WTF?? OH THE HORROR!! This has to be stopped immediately! Next thing you know men will be wanting to paint nose art of attractive women on planes

kool-aid
12-11-2013, 08:31 PM
I don't see the hypocrisy either, just like a white supremacist enjoying the day off on MLK day.

Kicker47
12-11-2013, 09:00 PM
Interesting point raised while discussing this topic today...Could a nativity scene be considered a "religious symbol"? If so, could it be a LOAC violation to place such a symbol on or near a non-religious building, such as a maintenance building or other "lawful" target?


I'm on the fence on this one...just looking for opinions. :behindsofa

Mjölnir
12-11-2013, 09:38 PM
Two threads on same topic merged.

Bunch
12-11-2013, 10:50 PM
Interesting point raised while discussing this topic today...Could a nativity scene be considered a "religious symbol"? If so, could it be a LOAC violation to place such a symbol on or near a non-religious building, such as a maintenance building or other "lawful" target?


I'm on the fence on this one...just looking for opinions. :behindsofa

My opinion on this matter is that proselytizing while in uniform shouldn't be allowed. All this issue was goes back to the USAF Academy proselytizing scandal. That was one instance were religious proselytizing got out of hand. Out of this scandal the pendulum has swung to the other extreme side in were nothing even hinting religion should be allowed.

Obviously both sides of the issue were and are being driven by those who reside on the extreme of the issue. We need to find a balance on whats proselytizing and what is to accomodate that portion of service members who have religious beliefs.

TREYSLEDGE
12-12-2013, 09:44 AM
Interesting point raised while discussing this topic today...Could a nativity scene be considered a "religious symbol"? If so, could it be a LOAC violation to place such a symbol on or near a non-religious building, such as a maintenance building or other "lawful" target?


I'm on the fence on this one...just looking for opinions. :behindsofa

Just my opinion, but no. I don't think a nativity scene is a recognized symbol which designates a place of worship. Neither does a Christmas tree. Churches have crosses on them to designate it is a Christian place of worship, just like Judiasm uses the star of David as their symbol not a menora. I think a majority of religions have an official symbol for places of worship that if used on a non-religious building could be a LOAC violation.

But, I'm sure there may be some lawyers who disagree.

imported_WILDJOKER5
12-12-2013, 12:14 PM
"Military Religious Freedom Foundation". What a crock. If your symbol of your "religion" in no signs of any other religion, doesnt that make you refusing the freedom of religion for everyone else to best serve your own "religion"?

Kicker47
12-12-2013, 12:46 PM
I find it hard to understand why people can't just decorate their houses. Put up your tree or your menorah or whatever, string some lights around the front yard, and call it good. Why do you have to put something in a public place? Can I hang a giant New York Jets banner on base on Sunday? Probably not.

SgtS
12-12-2013, 04:01 PM
Be careful what you wish for:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/08/satanists-oklahoma-statehouse/3908849/

"OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — In their zeal to tout their faith in the public square, conservatives in Oklahoma may have unwittingly opened the door to a wide range of religious groups, including Satanists who are seeking to put their own statue next to a Ten Commandments monument outside the Statehouse."

Kicker47
12-12-2013, 04:59 PM
Be careful what you wish for:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/08/satanists-oklahoma-statehouse/3908849/

"OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — In their zeal to tout their faith in the public square, conservatives in Oklahoma may have unwittingly opened the door to a wide range of religious groups, including Satanists who are seeking to put their own statue next to a Ten Commandments monument outside the Statehouse."

Just want to point out that "Lucien Greaves" is an awesome name for the guy picked as the spokesman for the Satanic temple. :salook:

imported_WILDJOKER5
12-12-2013, 06:41 PM
Be careful what you wish for:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/08/satanists-oklahoma-statehouse/3908849/

"OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — In their zeal to tout their faith in the public square, conservatives in Oklahoma may have unwittingly opened the door to a wide range of religious groups, including Satanists who are seeking to put their own statue next to a Ten Commandments monument outside the Statehouse."

Its tit for tat. But hey, if the satanist want to do such a thing, so be it. No human sacrifices please.

TomTom093
12-14-2013, 12:37 AM
In my mind, if you get to have your nativity scene, every one gets to have their display. If you don't want to see their display, you don't get to have your own. Of course, if everyone put their display up, the entire base would be covered. But it's either all or none.

And I will believe there's a "War on Christmas" when I can walk into a mall on November 1st and NOT hear Christmas music and see them setting up the photo booth with Santa.

retiredAFcivvy
12-14-2013, 01:14 AM
In my mind, if you get to have your nativity scene, every one gets to have their display. If you don't want to see their display, you don't get to have your own. Of course, if everyone put their display up, the entire base would be covered. But it's either all or none.

And I will believe there's a "War on Christmas" when I can walk into a mall on November 1st and NOT hear Christmas music and see them setting up the photo booth with Santa.
The "war" is about trying to take Christ out Christmas.

CORNELIUSSEON
12-14-2013, 01:42 AM
Just my opinion, but no. I don't think a nativity scene is a recognized symbol which designates a place of worship. Neither does a Christmas tree. Churches have crosses on them to designate it is a Christian place of worship, just like Judiasm uses the star of David as their symbol not a menora. I think a majority of religions have an official symbol for places of worship that if used on a non-religious building could be a LOAC violation.

But, I'm sure there may be some lawyers who disagree.

Historically, the Nativity Scene was the property of the Catholic and Orthodox Christians, with the Protestants not bothering with such a scene. Of late, Christian groups in general have adopted the Nativity Scene, with individual congregations making their own choices for and against.

There are non-Christian religious connections to December 25th. Jews observe Hanukkah in December, with the date moving annually because they link it to the Winter Solstice. Likewise, non-Judeo-Christian religions the world over observe the Winter Solstice, so it certainly would be within the realm of reason for them to put up displays at what the Christians would call "Christmas. Incidentally, it was the Romans - when they adopted Christianity - that made the connection between December 25th and Christ's Birthday. They made the connection deliberately so that the activities connected with the Winter Solstice holiday could be incorporated into Christmas, therefore making it less objectionable for the Roman Pagans to become Christians. Indeed, they incorporated many Roman Pagan ideas and practices, some of them that require devout people to look the other way when they are told about them.

LogDog
12-14-2013, 06:42 AM
Speaking for myself as an atheist, I agree that the display shouldn't have been put up unless there was a policy allowing other religions the same opportunity. This would mean there would be Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist (non-religion religion), or even Satanists displays on their appropriate days. As long as you don't show a preference to one or two religions but equal respect for all religions then I don't see a problem since all are being treated the same.

As for the idea that you can't say "Merry Christmas" but have to say "Happy Holidays" is a bunch of male bovine fecal material. I'd like someone to show me a regulation, order, or some other directive stating you can't say "Merry Christmas." The reasons for this lie is due to a small, vocal group of Christians who keep pushing this lie. The reasons they are doing this are: 1. To promote their political agenda, and 2. to convince the rest of the over 75% of the nation that is Christian that they are being persecuted (another lie). The real reason for people saying "Happy Holidays" is because there are a number of religious observances from November to January and instead of trying to determine what each person's preference is it is easier to say "Happy Holidays." Retailers are the ones most likely to say "Happy Holidays" because it covers all the bases in just two short words. If saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" gets your panties in a was then you either don't have anything important to worry about or you're just being petty minded.

Most atheists I know, including myself, don't mind Christmas observances, decorating the office, or having Christmas parties. In face, we usually take an active part in them. When it comes to working during the last two weeks of the year, we usually agree to work Christmas week and we take the New Years week off.

Chief_KO
12-14-2013, 02:37 PM
Well said Log Dog. It is supposed to be all about respecting each other opinions and view points.
We decorated our office space (cube farm) this past week, had our ugly Christmas Sweater competition, Secret Santa, and office Holiday Social.
I decorated my cubicle with Festivus Pole, ala Seinfeld.
I am a Christian (United Methodist), with many Agnostic, Atheist, Jewish, Catholic, Baptist, (and probably a few more) friends. I really avoid religion discussions because they tend to always end poorly. My Dad's sage advice was "There are three things you never discuss: Politics, Money, Religion".
Personally, the only "Holidays" I dislike are "Black Friday" and "Cyber Monday". BF truly brings out the worst in people.

TJMAC77SP
12-14-2013, 05:24 PM
Historically, the Nativity Scene was the property of the Catholic and Orthodox Christians, with the Protestants not bothering with such a scene. Of late, Christian groups in general have adopted the Nativity Scene, with individual congregations making their own choices for and against.

There are non-Christian religious connections to December 25th. Jews observe Hanukkah in December, with the date moving annually because they link it to the Winter Solstice. Likewise, non-Judeo-Christian religions the world over observe the Winter Solstice, so it certainly would be within the realm of reason for them to put up displays at what the Christians would call "Christmas. Incidentally, it was the Romans - when they adopted Christianity - that made the connection between December 25th and Christ's Birthday. They made the connection deliberately so that the activities connected with the Winter Solstice holiday could be incorporated into Christmas, therefore making it less objectionable for the Roman Pagans to become Christians. Indeed, they incorporated many Roman Pagan ideas and practices, some of them that require devout people to look the other way when they are told about them.

Hanukkah has nothing to do with the Winter Solstice and can fall anywhere from late November to the end of December. This year it started the day before Thanksgiving.

CORNELIUSSEON
12-14-2013, 07:47 PM
Hanukkah has nothing to do with the Winter Solstice and can fall anywhere from late November to the end of December. This year it started the day before Thanksgiving.

Wanting to be able to phrase my response to get the point across without dragging this out, there IS a connection between Hanukkah and the Winter Solstice, but it isn't a direct connection. This is one time where I agree completely with the wording Wikipedia uses, so here goes:

“…There is some discussion as to whether Hanukkah should be classified as a winter-solstice holiday. The Jewish calendar is neither solar, nor lunar, but exists as a tension between the two. As such, while the events that are commemorated by Hanukkah happened on or around the solstice, because of the use of the lunar calendar, Hanukkah is sometimes celebrated as early as late November.”

TJMAC77SP
12-14-2013, 09:32 PM
Wanting to be able to phrase my response to get the point across without dragging this out, there IS a connection between Hanukkah and the Winter Solstice, but it isn't a direct connection. This is one time where I agree completely with the wording Wikipedia uses, so here goes:

“…There is some discussion as to whether Hanukkah should be classified as a winter-solstice holiday. The Jewish calendar is neither solar, nor lunar, but exists as a tension between the two. As such, while the events that are commemorated by Hanukkah happened on or around the solstice, because of the use of the lunar calendar, Hanukkah is sometimes celebrated as early as late November.”




There is also some discussion about whether the WTC was taken down as part of a vast conspiracy but that is hogwash as well.

There is absolutely no need to 'drag this out'. As I said Hanukkah has nothing to do with the Winter Solstice. Pearl Harbor day is in December as well and ALSO has nothing to do with the Winter Solstice. My first wife's birthday was near the Winter Solstice and THAT TOO had nothing to do with it.

imported_UncommonSense
12-16-2013, 11:07 AM
To clear some of this up, any organization was permitted to put up a holiday display in the lake area. The only ones that did were the chaplains group. This is why the only display was a nativity scene. Some complained because they aren't happy unless everyone is unhappy. In typical fashion, the base let the pendulum swing all the way to the other side and removed it rather than relocate it or just tell everyone to piss off and explain why it was there. This caused the off-base religious folk to go into full-on rabble rabble mode with protests planned near the base. Since Shaw has been a cauldron of bad publicity over the last year, the base put it back up by the chapel.

fog
12-19-2013, 05:38 PM
I have had the displeasure of having to answer the mail on Mikey Weinstein and his officer son at Wright-Patterson. Seeing their bully tactics made me almost want to quit. In my opinion, their agenda and their unrelenting pursuit is very dangerous and disruptive.

They are disengenous and the Air Force Times is in bed with them. These two organizations are subversive and should not be trusted at all costs.