Jews Strive To Restore Christmas Trees At Seattle Airport
in [Airline Travel]
|
Prev: AF IAH - CDG
Next: BA overbooking - a bad experience
From: James A. Donald on 15 Dec 2006 00:20 James A. Donald wrote: > > > any one who not only does not celebrate > > > [Christmas], but gets upset and offended by other > > > people celebrating it, is indeed a bigot. Tchiowa > > Exactly right. "brique" > So, anyone who isnt a christian or who doesn't pretend > to be a christian for christmas is a bigot? I am not a christian, I don't pretend to be a christian, and I celebrate christmas. -- ---------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald
From: James A. Donald on 15 Dec 2006 00:24 On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 18:13:36 -0500, "Sancho Panza" > If the trees have no connection to Christianity, why > do basically just Christians use them? You live in a world of your own. Everyone celebrates Christmas except people who have an axe to grind. I celebrate Christmas, and I am not Christian, most Asians in Asia celebrate Christmas, and most Asians in Asia are not Christian. -- ---------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald
From: brique on 15 Dec 2006 00:23 Constantinople <constantinopoli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1166139809.763807.20080(a)73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com... > > brique wrote: > > <constantinopoli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1166119034.117505.237550(a)f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > Mark K. Bilbo wrote: > > > > > > > I notice nobody asking why it is tax money has to be spent on ornaments > > > > rather than silly things like, you know, fixing potholes or even > > something > > > > really absurd like airport security... > > > > > > That attitude could help explain why socialist countries have such a > > > reputation for being ugly, spirit-killing places. > > > > > > > What........ like the Bronx and South LA ? > > Did you pick average, representative places in America (in which case > you have a point) or did you cherry pick the worst places in America > you could think of (in which case you don't)? > Why would it matter, random or cherry-picked, I produced two places which could fairly be described as ugly-spirit-killing places. But they are not in socialist countries, have liitle publicly-funded ornamentation and lots of potholes. What explains that again?
From: brique on 15 Dec 2006 00:28 <constantinopoli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1166152114.360883.173610(a)t46g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Mark K. Bilbo wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:43:29 -0800, Constantinople wrote: > > > > > brique wrote: > > >> <constantinopoli(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >> news:1166119034.117505.237550(a)f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > >> > > > >> > Mark K. Bilbo wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > I notice nobody asking why it is tax money has to be spent on ornaments > > >> > > rather than silly things like, you know, fixing potholes or even > > >> something > > >> > > really absurd like airport security... > > >> > > > >> > That attitude could help explain why socialist countries have such a > > >> > reputation for being ugly, spirit-killing places. > > >> > > > >> > > >> What........ like the Bronx and South LA ? > > > > > > Did you pick average, representative places in America (in which case > > > you have a point) or did you cherry pick the worst places in America > > > you could think of (in which case you don't)? > > > > With something over half our population packed into cities, the Bronx and > > South LA rather *are representative these days... > > It's obvious that he picked two names that are associated in American > culture with negatives, same way as Beverly Hills (which is a city, > hence one of those places you say we're "packed into") is one of the > names that will easily come to mind if you're thinking of wealth. Its obvious you wish to associate 'ugly, spirit-killing places' with socialist countries. It may well be true that socialist countries are ugly and lacking in public ornamentation, but my examples point out that non-socialist countries are not immune to the same combination. > > "By the time of the 1992 Los Angeles riots, which began in South > Central and spread throughout the city, South Central had become a > byword for urban decay, its bad reputation spread by movies such as > South Central, Menace II Society, Friday, South Central native John > Singleton's Boyz N the Hood, and rap group N.W.A's album Straight Outta > Compton." > > http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/South_Los_Angeles > > More than half of America is not "packed into" places like South LA. > South LA is well known because it stands out from the norm. If it were > average it would not be as well known. > > That said, to say that I would much rather live in South LA than in > Pyongyang (the capital of a socialist state) is to make an > understatement so extreme as to establish a new category of > understatement. >
From: James A. Donald on 15 Dec 2006 00:36
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:38:37 -0800, "PTravel" > I haven't heard anyone get upset or offended by anyone > celebrating Christmas. The concern in Seattle was > using government funds, i.e. tax dollars paid into the > general fund, to pay for it But if secular trees are objectionable, then any money spent on the holiday is objectionable, then the holiday itself is objectionable - after all the holiday must cost the government money. And if the menorah is conceded, then the principle that anything associated with Christmas is establishing a religion is conceded, in which case everything Christmassy has to go. And on past performance, we can expect those lawsuits to follow shortly. When the government lets employees go home for Christmas and thanksgiving, it is establishing a religion :-) -- ---------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald |