RE: The war on christmas

RE: The war on christmas (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Apocalypso -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 8:47:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 And of course African Americans are allowed to refer to each other as "niggas" but not any other races. That's easy enough to explain. I can refer to my friend as a "fat fuck", but if you did it he'd tell you to fuck off.

PeonForHer -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 10:49:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apocalypso quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 And of course African Americans are allowed to refer to each other as "niggas" but not any other races. That's easy enough to explain. I can refer to my friend as a "fat fuck", but if you did it he'd tell you to fuck off. That's what it boils down to, really. A lot of that "political correctness" stuff is actually a lot more pragmatic than its detractors would have us believe. Here in the UK 'black' and 'oriental' are used frequently and don't generally cause offence (as far as I know). In the USA, I get the sense (though I could be wrong) that those two particular terms would cause wincing. So what would I do in the USA? I'd change the terms I use. The right terms to use are those that a) don't make the hearer feel insulted and b) aren't perceived as being meant nastily. That's really all there is to it.

farglebargle -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 12:02:19 PM)
If I say dog, you say... tree? http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/f02d0b8cca/word-association-from-nino

Moonhead -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 1:28:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead What's the problem with PC? Most of what histrionic drama queens like Rush Limpdick and DEnnis Leary dismiss as "political correctness" is basically good manners. Is being a rude cunt something to be proud of now? It's not rude to put up banners that says Merry Christmas in Malls or public areas, neither is it rude to put up banners that says Happy Deepavali, you get what I mean? It's all well wishes! How can that be rude? Yet friendly messages like that could cause offense, that is PC gone mad. It would be if you (or anybody else) could cite an example of that actually happening rather than just being whined about by fuckwits with an overdeveloped sense of entitlement. [:D]

EdBowie -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 1:56:51 PM)
You've 'been told' a lot of things that you present as absolutes, and they run contrary to the reality here. 'Black' is not by itself a racist term. Saying 'the/those blacks' in a condescending manner can be received as a slight. The other term you mention cannot possibly be used in a non-racist manner, per the dictionary. It is a term that was created to denigrate an entire race. quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 It's not rude to put up banners that says Merry Christmas in Malls or public areas, neither is it rude to put up banners that says Happy Deepavali, you get what I mean? It's all well wishes! How can that be rude? Yet friendly messages like that could cause offense, that is PC gone mad. I'll give another example, in Singapore, we have Indians from India. And we call them Indians and that is fine. But I notice that the African Americans in US, cannot come to a mutual agreement on what is the best way to label them. Even the word "African Americans" comes off as racist to some of them, and I was told when I was in LA that I can never call a black person, black, or I'd get in trouble and cause offense. But yet, it's not offensive to call a white dude, white. Those are PC crap! And of course African Americans are allowed to refer to each other as "niggas" but not any other races. I know for sure we yellow folks won't be using gook on ourselves at all! And I'm okay with being yellow :) Like the simpsons! But I noticed Asian Americans, at least the "yellow" ones, hate that word and find it offensive. More annoying PC, getting offended over nothing. I remembered being called gook by a white American dude, well the exact statement was, "Are you a gook?" and it's suppose to be derogatory in US but um, the word means nothing to me, I didn't even care. That guy ended up becoming a friend, because I was well, I didn't grow up in US, and really that word is alien to me, so I had no reaction. Point is, Problem with too much PC, is people get offended over nothing and everything.

jlf1961 -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 2:07:44 PM)
You know what is funny? At everywhere I had to go yesterday, I got a merry Christmas, this included Citibank, Walmart, Books a Million, Hastings, 1st Financial, all national firms who I have been told has forbidden the use of "Merry Christmas." I also got a Merry Christmas from the person I spoke to at the Social Security office and the insurance company handling my other disability settlement. Last night I attended a presentation at my old high school and would you believe that religious Christmas hymns were sung? The local philharmonic orchestra which plays in the civic center, a public building is performing a Christmas concert to be accompanied by the choirs of the two high schools and in the two hour show of traditional Christmas carols will have religious songs. Of course I may be hallucinating and all this is a dream.

Apocalypso -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 2:32:48 PM)
I got a Merry Christmas from my local (Muslim) newsagents and the (Hindu) guys in the off license. Perhaps nobody has told them there's a war on?

PeonForHer -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 3:48:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apocalypso I got a Merry Christmas from my local (Muslim) newsagents and the (Hindu) guys in the off license. Perhaps nobody has told them there's a war on? I've had that frequently from Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists (at the localChinese takeaway - whose proprietors gave me a calendar again this year) . . . and many whose religion I couldn't even name. And I've seen their shops and restaurants festooned with xmas decorations. They don't care. Why should they? They probably think, 'Hey, people in this country get all excited and have fun this time of year. Feck it: we should join in.'.

Apocalypso -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 3:51:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I've had that frequently from Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists (at the localChinese takeaway - whose proprietors gave me a calendar again this year) . . . and many whose religion I couldn't even name. And I've seen their shops and restaurants festooned with xmas decorations. They don't care. Why should they? They probably think, 'Hey, people in this country get all excited and have fun this time of year. Feck it: we should join in.'. Where I grew up in Brum, the local curry place does a special turkey balti for Christmas. Which I think is multiculturalism at its very best.

PeonForHer -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 4:06:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apocalypso Where I grew up in Brum, the local curry place does a special turkey balti for Christmas. Which I think is multiculturalism at its very best. Turkey balti? Wow. But Brum is at the cutting edge when it comes to curry innovations, so I hear.

Zonie63 -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 5:08:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Apocalypso quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 And of course African Americans are allowed to refer to each other as "niggas" but not any other races. That's easy enough to explain. I can refer to my friend as a "fat fuck", but if you did it he'd tell you to fuck off. That's what it boils down to, really. A lot of that "political correctness" stuff is actually a lot more pragmatic than its detractors would have us believe. Here in the UK 'black' and 'oriental' are used frequently and don't generally cause offence (as far as I know). In the USA, I get the sense (though I could be wrong) that those two particular terms would cause wincing. So what would I do in the USA? I'd change the terms I use. The right terms to use are those that a) don't make the hearer feel insulted and b) aren't perceived as being meant nastily. That's really all there is to it. I don't know if it's really all that pragmatic, though. I mean, if people are dealing with each other on a one-to-one basis, then it's up to the two individuals as to how they want to relate to each other and what kind of banter they might use. Simple politeness and civility are called for in most neutral situations. Just be nice to people. It's really that simple. Don't need PC for that. If I call someone a name and they tell me to fuck off, that's not PC. PC is invoked whenever third parties have to be brought in (sometimes even in an official capacity) and goes beyond the individual "man-to-man" level, usually involving committee meetings and "sensitivity training." PC has a little too much melodrama attached to it. It's also a bit inconsistent, far too mutable, and seems somewhat ad hoc in determining which words/phrases are "offensive" versus those deemed "not offensive." It's also counterintuitive in that there's no way for the uninitiated to actually know where the boundaries are drawn. Just learning how to be civil and polite is not enough anymore. Now, people have to learn the latest terminology and be able to keep up with it.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 6:40:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Alright, we know that there are cities and school districts that have "banned" the saying of Merry Christmas, others have disallowed christmas songs of a religious nature from schools. While FOX news decries this as attacks on Christmas and Christianity, it must be pointed out that school districts are a government entity, and as such come under the "separation of church and state" clause in the first amendment. Of course FOX news attacks any effort or move by any other religion to get the same treatment in public places. (example: The FOX and friends bullshit fest over a YMCA catering to the special needs of Muslim women.) Now, facts that FOX news seems to be unaware of: 1) The date for Christmas December 25th, was chosen at the order of Constantine so that the christian feast of christ's birth was on the same day as the feast of the roman sun god, Sol Evictus. This was done so that the Christian Church got more widespread acceptance. 2) Information in the bible indicate that Jesus could have been born as early as mid march, and as late as mid autumn. December is too cold and rainy in Judea for shepherds to be in fields at night tending their flock. 3) When you take into account the birth of John the Baptist, it moves the time of Jesus' birth to early summer. So until FOX realizes that it is screaming against parts of the Constitution they claim to support (as long as it only applies to christians) about a war against a holiday that has no basis in Christian belief or writings, this continued crap is going to go on. I'd just like to say that; 1) Occasionally it feels REALLY fucking good to grab a plastic injection molded comb and just fucking RIFF on your leg. 2) Fox News is selling soap.

sweetgirlserves -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 8:19:28 PM)
Honestly, I think much of the Spirit of Christmas was destroyed when Paul met Jesus on the Road to Damascus. But, I still do love Christ, and Christmas. Sincerely, ~sgs

Rule -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 8:46:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 I was told when I was in LA that I can never call a black person, black, or I'd get in trouble and cause offense. It may be best to paint everybody green, and in order to not cause offense - nor any confusion with dollar bills - to call them pinks instead of greens.

EdBowie -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 9:16:00 PM)
Not necessarily. quote: ORIGINAL: wanderingjew Wouldn't banning a given religion from making religious statements or displays be prohibiting the free practice thereof?

Zonie63 -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 9:34:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wanderingjew Wouldn't banning a given religion from making religious statements or displays be prohibiting the free practice thereof? Not really. This is more a matter of who's paying for it.

EdBowie -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 11:02:04 PM)
Seriously? That's the best you've got? Juvenile debate team tactics and strawmen? There is no guarantee of rights in the constitution that is unlimited. All of them have to pass the test of reasonableness. That's why prohibiting members of one religion from killing heretics isn't a violation of the Constitution. As you are well aware Thanks for the time wasting trollage. quote: ORIGINAL: wanderingjew quote: Not necessarily. quote: Not really. Please be so kind as to explain how making a law prohibiting somebody from practising their religion would not be making a law prohibiting them from practising their religion?

EdBowie -> RE: The war on christmas (12/20/2013 11:23:34 PM)
You can 'play', after you prove that what I just said about freedoms not being unlimited is false. Which of course, we both know you can't do, so you are done before you even start.

Zonie63 -> RE: The war on christmas (12/21/2013 4:00:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wanderingjew quote: This is more a matter of who's paying for it. I didn't realize that people were paid to say Merry Christmas. That wasn't my point. Thing is, no one is prohibited or prevented from freely practicing their religion. But it's also a matter of where they actually do it. If it's on property owned by the taxpayers, then the taxpayers are paying for it.

DaddySatyr -> RE: The war on christmas (12/21/2013 5:38:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie Interesting fantasy. I hope you find a planet where it comes true. Here on Earth, the US Constitution says no such thing. 'Respecting' and 'not policing' are not the same thing. Wow! Here on planet earth, the US Constitution says EXACTLY that. Look at how the word "respecting" is used. It has nothing to do with "avoiding violation of or interference with" any or all religions. It that case it means: "regarding" Before you attack what I write, perhaps you should read what I wrote (and the direct quote from the constitution) carefully. People reading your post to me might think you're just spoiling for a fight. quote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ... quote: ORIGINAL DaddySatyr I always find it amusing that lefties like to refer to "separation of church and state" (which doesn't exist in the constitution but appears in a letter that Jefferson wrote during his presidency) but they seem to forget that government is specifically enjoined from interfering in how a person practices their religion. It's a logically flawed argument for someone to say: "You can't have a nativity display in a post office because of 'separation of church and state' and a letter carrier can't sing Christmas carols while they deliver the mail."

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.2333984