calfoxwc Posted December 6, 2008 Report Share Posted December 6, 2008 UNC librariy to forgo Christmas trees Chapel Hill library chief says staffers complained about the display. By Eric Ferreri eric.ferreri@newsobserver.com Posted: Friday, Dec. 05, 2008 More Information Chancellor Thorp responds to complaints Poll Should public libraries present Christmas displays? Yes, it is part of our culture. No, government buildings should be religion neutral. Your vote has been counted, thank you for voting. CHAPEL HILL For as long as anyone can remember, Christmas trees adorned with lights and ornaments have greeted holiday season visitors to UNC Chapel Hill's two main libraries. Not this year. The trees, which have stood in the lobby areas of Wilson and Davis libraries each December, were kept in storage this year at the behest of Sarah Michalak, the associate provost for university libraries. Michalak's decision followed several years of queries and complaints from library employees and patrons bothered by the Christian display, Michalak said this week. Michalak said that banishing the Christmas displays was not an easy decision but that she asked around to library colleagues at Duke, N.C. State and elsewhere and found no other one where Christmas trees were displayed. Aside from the fact that a UNC Chapel Hill library is a public facility, Michalak said, libraries are places where information from all corners of the world and all belief systems is offered without judgment. Displaying one particular religion's symbols is antithetical to that philosophy, she said. “We strive in our collection to have a wide variety of ideas,” she said. “It doesn't seem right to celebrate one particular set of customs.” Michalak, chief librarian for four years, said at least a dozen library employees have complained over the last few years about the display. She hasn't heard similar criticism from students, though they may have voiced concerns to other library staff. Public libraries generally shy away from creating displays promoting any single religion, said Catherine Mau, deputy director of the Durham County library system, where poinsettias provided by a library booster group provide holiday cheer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2008 Christmas is celebrate in many nations around the world. http://www.the-north-pole.com/around/ Unless your staff is from Yemen ? the PLO ? Some people can't handle too much information in school. Then, they lose their perspective everything, because of a giant wapred matrix of learned facts that don't tell them what they should do. So, they let themselves be dominates. That's my theory and I'm stickin to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicopee John Posted December 6, 2008 Report Share Posted December 6, 2008 Some people are so darned determined to erase God from having any influence on our lives, that they will stop at nothing. Unfortunately, so many other people lack the intestinal fortitude to stand up for what is right. We all lose. The Rabbi in our town complained so loudly that SNOWMEN were removed from our Winter Wonderland park. Can you believe that? The Rabbi complained that snowmen were, de facto, a representation of Christmas. The town had no balls and allows this travesty to continue. People who hold John Lennon's, "Imagine" so close to their hearts cannot accept the concept of God or Heaven. Imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 6, 2008 Report Share Posted December 6, 2008 Where I work no religious decorations are allowed. I purposely say "Merry Christmas" to all I see. It is called "CHRISTmas" after all. What is wrong with our country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." For publicly funded institutions it should be secularized. For private organizations, let them do whatever the hell they want to. That snowman thing was bullshit though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 7, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." ******************************************************************************** **************** Christmas trees, etc, are NOT ESTABLISHING A RELIGION. Even the Nativity is NOT ESTABLISHING A RELIGION. It is simply celebrating a holiday, and in terms of the Nativity, a religious holiday, that the majority of PEOPLE in a town are comfortable with, believe in, ... and given the historical nature of our nation's Christian background during the creation of our country, I find that the prevention of Christian or Christmas symbols is an abridgement of freedom of speech and religion, and it prohibits the free exercise and expression of the majority's Christian basic faith and values. To censor the majority of expression is a control mechanism, and is unconstitutional. Let towns vote. Majority rules. Then, let the minority accept it. The prevention of religion, is a religion in itself. Stopping Christmas is a bunch of baloney. THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS HAVE RIGHTS, TOO ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 I doubt you would enjoy it if a government funded institution displayed any symbols other than a christmas tree or nativity scene alone. If there is government funding then anything that is displayed is being endorsed by the government. And lucky for us, the united states is not a democracy. One of the cornerstones of the constitution is to protect the minority from being oppressed by the majority. Not displaying christmas trees in a publicly funded building isn't destroying christmas. It is in no way getting in the way of your rights. And anyway, f**k christmas. It is all about buying diamonds and other bullshit for people, and there isn't even any evidence of Jesus Christ as a real man from a contemporaneous source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy.E.Munson Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." For publicly funded institutions it should be secularized. For private organizations, let them do whatever the hell they want to. That snowman thing was bullshit though. get the wording right! God is in control! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 “First Amendment freedoms are most in danger when the government seeks to control thought or to justify its laws for that impermissible end. The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought.”—Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition couldn't of said it any better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 7, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 But I don't see that the minority should have exclusive rights to infringe on the majority's exercise of free speech. and the VAST majority of Americans are Christian based in their beliefs. Didn't a Kansas City airport put in footbaths for Muslims to wash their feet? and the ACLU concurred. So, don't be messin with small town Christmas. Denying Christmas in public settings is an abridgement of the majority's right to free expression of the holiday. Although, I have never heard of a non-Christian employee being angry that he got a paid Christmas holiday... Sometimes the world just seems to be becoming a bit backwards. If the majority aren't allowed to have Christmas in their libraries, then the majority should simply not vote for tax levies for the libraries and let the several nose out of joints pay for maintaining and upgrading the libraries. Then, I could see not having Christmas in the libraries... almost. Hands off my Christmas !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 Well, I guess if the vast majority of people are christian it makes it okay. While we are at it, let's also put the ten commandments in the library too, and a holy-water fountain in the capital building! Taking religion out of government funded institution is not an abridgment of anybodies rights to celebrate any holiday. It is simply making government secular, just like it should be. The majority you talk about isn't putting the christmas crap up anyway, it is a few people who work at the libraries that don't understand exactly what the government funding means. And all this "rights of majority" stuff, sounds a lot like communism. I know you love communism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiperBowl Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 just beautiful man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 Yeah, a mother and child is beautiful. But Jesus? Probably never existed. No contemporary accounts of him (and there were lots of scribes in 1st century Palestine) There was no 1st century city of Nazareth. Nazareth comes around a couple of centuries later in both the archaeological and historical record. Jesus probably was just a composite of ancient pagan and Jewish heroes and never actually existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiperBowl Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2TjQqdRg5U Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 I actually watched that video. It tells nothing. Half of it is about the bible, which cannot be taken as truth no matter how much anybody says you can. All of the pagan writers referred to are not contemporary to Jesus. Some of those writers don't even refer to Jesus Christ, just the virgin birth and etc. But that could refer to lots of different pagan myths with a similar story (virgin birth, miracles, persecution) not necessarily Jesus. We would probably have a better idea if the Christians weren't dicks who killed all of the pagans that said, "Hey this jesus story is the same as our Horus/Dionysus stories." and then burned all of the books of the ancient pagan world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiperBowl Posted December 9, 2008 Report Share Posted December 9, 2008 i suppose in your twisted world the Nazis didn't commit genocide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 9, 2008 Report Share Posted December 9, 2008 i suppose in your twisted world the Nazis didn't commit genocide. That makes sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiperBowl Posted December 9, 2008 Report Share Posted December 9, 2008 Well to those who believe .......Merry Christmas Jesus Christ is King! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 9, 2008 Report Share Posted December 9, 2008 It's fine if you don't want to believe Jesus was the son of God, it's your perogative, but to intentionally poke people with such absurd claims that Jesus never existed is just asinine. I've been down that debate many many times, and there is overwhelming evidence of the existance of Jesus the person. Whether or not He was divine is a matter of faith, but don't be a simpleton with such claims that He is a composite of other "heroes" There actually is no evidence of Jesus as a person. Almost all "evidence" were fakes hundreds or even a thousand years later. There probably was a guy named jesus at some point, but not Jesus Christ. Nazareth didn't exist until the second century at the earliest, and yes, jesus shares many strikingly similar characteristics of pagan heroes/godmen that were worshiped thousands of years before the alleged existence of Jesus Christ. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa3.htm http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 9, 2008 Report Share Posted December 9, 2008 PB&J likes to stir the pot, like some other people on here. Who cares what he/she believes. Your own beliefs are the only ones that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 9, 2008 Report Share Posted December 9, 2008 There actually is no evidence of Jesus as a person. Almost all "evidence" were fakes hundreds or even a thousand years later. There probably was a guy named jesus at some point, but not Jesus Christ. Nazareth didn't exist until the second century at the earliest, and yes, jesus shares many strikingly similar characteristics of pagan heroes/godmen that were worshiped thousands of years before the alleged existence of Jesus Christ. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa3.htm http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr.htm So, you are a Pagan? Do you paint your face black? You sound like a freak. Dismissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted December 9, 2008 Report Share Posted December 9, 2008 So, you are a Pagan? Do you paint your face black? You sound like a freak. Dismissed. mz the pussy cant take criticism. He resorts to insults. Look at his history. I would can his ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB&J Posted December 10, 2008 Report Share Posted December 10, 2008 I believe it is an illustration of your hypocrisy. So, you are a Pagan? Do you paint your face black? You sound like a freak. Dismissed. I never said I was a pagan, I don't paint my face black and who gives a damn if I did? You sound like the xenophobic and bigoted god described in the old testament. How are you so sure you are correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damajuki Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 There actually is no evidence of Jesus as a person. Almost all "evidence" were fakes hundreds or even a thousand years later. There probably was a guy named jesus at some point, but not Jesus Christ. Nazareth didn't exist until the second century at the earliest, and yes, jesus shares many strikingly similar characteristics of pagan heroes/godmen that were worshiped thousands of years before the alleged existence of Jesus Christ. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa3.htm http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr.htm Oh, PB&J, you don't really believe this, do you? You claimed before (I think) that you are an educated fellow and an educated fellow like yourself should be able to a. use Google and b. understand that the historical Jesus Christ and the theological Jesus Christ are two very different things. It seems from your tone here (and elsewhere) that your real purpose is to argue against Christianity. Which would make more sense than arguing about the historical accounts of Jesus because it's a pointless enterprise. There's very little we can KNOW for a FACT about the ancient world, and especially about the people who lived then. And ultimately, what does it matter how much of the accounts of Jesus or other ancient figures are factually true? Enough people believed in Jesus Christ from the very beginning to talk and write about him incessantly. Obviously the life of Jesus had a huge impact on that time and on history. So what's your point exactly? It's silly to argue about the veracity of historical figures like Jesus because it's missing the forest for the trees. I mean, would you argue that Socrates didn't exist? He was just a character in Plato's writings. What about Aristotle? Do we have any historical accounts of Aristotle that change your opinion of his writings? Back to the google thing. It's not hard to find people who know what they're talking about online if you want to actually learn something. Try this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 There's a fine line? between disagreeing legitwise, and "blatantly stirring the pot" like dama said, to provoke and insult other people. Personally, I'm not an expert at telling the difference... is anybody? Can we all? just try not to intentionally cross the line? Maybe just discuss things ? Try to be real so it's worth the trouble to try to understand where somebody is coming from? Or not..... ? @@ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.