Intolerance In France

[MagicNakor]

There always is Hallowitnessing.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker+18 January 2004 - 00:56--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker &#064; 18 January 2004 - 00:56)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@17 January 2004 - 19:57


In Chicago, just before Chistmas, a passerby happened to look into the window of a neighborhood firestation and glimpse, deep in the bowels of the building, a Christmas tree and decorations.

A formal complaint forced the immediate and summary removal of the "offending" items.

How (or where) did you hear about this, j2?

It has the ring of "urban legend" about it, to me. [/b][/quote]
Try this, Clocker-

http://www.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/print.cgi

Hope it works, I&#39;m not terrific at this, as well you know.

Edit:

Just discovered the Sun-Times archive has expired.

Here are a couple of other recountings of the story.

CHRISTMAS CENSORS NEUTER A FIREHOUSE: TAKING A PAGE FROM CASTRO&#39;S PLAYBOOK, GLENVIEW ILLINOIS TOWN OFFICIALS ORDER CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS TO BE TAKEN DOWN
12/25/2003 4:04:00 PM - Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights
Town officials in Glenview, Illinois, a northern Chicago suburb, have ordered all Christmas decorations removed from the inside of a firehouse. Some residents complained that they could see Christmas lights, a Christmas tree and a Santa Claus inside Glenview’s Station No. 7 when they drove down Glenview Road. Village officials declared that they want “to make sure that our public buildings remain neutral.” They pointed out that they also banned a menorah from public property.

Catholic League president William Donohue commented as follows:


“Glenview’s town officials are free to develop their own policies, but no one has to accept their lies. This has nothing to do with remaining neutral-it has everything to do with deliberately seeking to snuff out Christmas. Everyone knows that Christmas lights, Christmas trees and Santa Claus are secular symbols, but because they are obviously associated with a religious holiday, it is enough for those who hate Christianity to ban them. Moreover, to say that the policy is neutral because it also bans menorahs from public property is another lie: a menorah is a religious symbol.


“In Castro’s Cuba, Catholics celebrate Christmas with their curtains drawn. This is exactly what the cultural fascists would like to do in the U.S. It is not sufficient that they avert their eyes when they see something that reminds them of Christmas-now they literally peer in the windows of firehouses in their annual search and destroy operation. And make no mistake about it, all of this is done because they are offended by any reference to Jesus.”


###


The following article by Bill Stotzer appeared in the Sterling Daily Gazette on Christmas Eve, 2003:


THE TRUE MEANING OF CHRISTMAS

by Bill Stotzer


Recently in Glenview, Illinois, the fire department was required by the city to take down a Christmas tree which was put up at the fire house. This pressure came from a fringe element of society and is supported by portions of the legal community to assist them in their goal to take out the religious meaning of the holiday. This position is illogical and inconsistent with our Constitution.


First of all Christmas is a Federally mandated holiday. By DEFINITION, Christmas is a day recognized by Christians as the birth date of their Savior, Jesus Christ. It is so widely recognized that days of vacation are afforded to schools, government employees, and businesses as a matter of fact. It is a time of year that tradition and our culture accepts as a way of life.


Secondly, the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights guarantees 5 specific fundamental rights, the first of which is freedom of religion(isn’t this a religious holiday?). The opening clause of the Bill of Rights states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or PROHIBITING the free expression thereof. Therefore, it logically follows that the Government( Federal, State, Local) is denying this fundamental right by prohibiting free expression of religious freedom during a federally mandated Christian holiday. Not being able to erect a nativity scene, even on public property, is to deny its citizens a fundamental right of expression guaranteed to them by the Constitution, which clearly allows religious diversity and freedom.


A remark attributed to Thomas Jefferson, “seperation of church and state”, has become a catch phrase used in the ideology of atheists and lawyers to overturn the meaning of the 1st Amendment. But this phrase is not written in the Constitution, and is used by extremists and even the Supreme Court to interpret its meaning. Over 95% of the citizens of this country disagree with their conclusion that it means to deny a reference to God not only at Christmas time but also applies to prayers in schools. Apparently our Senators, Representatives in Congress and even our President violate the law on a daily basis ( which is unreasonable and illogical).


The ACLU , atheists, and others should put up or shut up. They should try to pass legislation to abolish the Federal Holiday, Christmas, or be quiet and allow the majority their freedom of expression and to live in peace.

Sorry to have refuted your urban legend assertion, old buddy.

[Wizard_Mon1]

is this subject linked in anyway to the french national party as they were so close to getting into power, do you think this attempt might have been partly thier doing?

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by j2k4@18 January 2004 - 13:29
This has nothing to do with remaining neutral-it has everything to do with deliberately seeking to snuff out Christmas.

oh, dear. is there no end to the madness of those damn grinches. i can only think of one way to combat this-- another simultaneous showing of the white house&#39;s "barney cam" video on the major television networks, next december. that oughta even the odds and put christmas back on top where it belongs.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+18 January 2004 - 18:18--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC &#064; 18 January 2004 - 18:18)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@18 January 2004 - 13:29
This has nothing to do with remaining neutral-it has everything to do with deliberately seeking to snuff out Christmas.

oh, dear. is there no end to the madness of those damn grinches. i can only think of one way to combat this-- another simultaneous showing of the white house&#39;s "barney cam" video on the major television networks, next december. that oughta even the odds and put christmas back on top where it belongs. [/b][/quote]
This is just a bit misleading, as it is a quote from a C&P, and was offered merely as proof the Chicago firehouse story was, in fact, true.

If I had the time, 3RA1N1AC, I would certainly have tried to find a less "rhetorical" version of events, just for you.

EDIT: As the topic was a story from France, I offer my humble apologies for leading the thread astray.

I did not intend to interject any American content into an otherwise worthwhile thread.

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by j2k4@18 January 2004 - 14:32
If I had the time, 3RA1N1AC, I would certainly have tried to find a less "rhetorical" version of events, just for you.

i agree that the official handling of the incident (and others like it) was, shall we say, rather heavy handed and unnecessary. but my contention is that, much more often than not, u.s. gov&#39;t employees (including the president) still do have plenty of freedom in the way of personal expression where it doesn&#39;t equate to an official endorsement of one denomination or another. i think a schoolteacher devoting time from the educational clock to involve students in religious observances, or a judge erecting a religious monument in the middle of a courthouse, is a different matter from some regular joes decorating a firehouse.

as for france... i don&#39;t feel it&#39;s my place to comment on france.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Wizard_Mon1@18 January 2004 - 23:12
is this subject linked in anyway to the french national party as they were so close to getting into power, do you think this attempt might have been partly thier doing?

I hadn&#39;t thought of that and am not sure if there is any truth in the suggestion.

However it is a very good point.

Who know what Machiavellian plots and deals go on behind the scenes. Other than the Machiavellian plotters obviously.

This may well form part of a much larger picture and their support ,or at least lack of opposition may be required re other things.

Good lateral effort that man.

[Biggles]

This is just a bit misleading, as it is a quote from a C&P, and was offered merely as proof the Chicago firehouse story was, in fact, true.

If I had the time, 3RA1N1AC, I would certainly have tried to find a less "rhetorical" version of events, just for you.


The only case of Christmas tree removal I can recall in recent years on this side of the pond was by a Wee Free Minister. It wasn&#39;t one of them visiting relations in the US perchance?


Wee Frees have a rather strict take on all matters Biblical and as far as they are concerned there is no birth date given and therfore no birthday. Furthemore, Celtic trappings like trees and Yule logs are right out&#33; I believe they prefer to observe the day with a little cold porridge and several hours contemplating the perils of damnation. I believe technically they are correct but it seems a tad cheerless to me.

Apologies for perpetuating this diversion

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Biggles@18 January 2004 - 21:35
Apologies for perpetuating this diversion

You&#39;re such a spammer&#33;

I&#39;m reasonably sure you don&#39;t live in France, either; double trouble for you.

[lynx]

Originally posted by Zedaxax@18 January 2004 - 03:32
In some local neighbourhood in the UK the local muslim community complained about a woman who had a hobby of collecting ceramic pig sculptures, which she placed in her window - this was seen as very offensive to the muslim community as they had to pass her house on the way to the nearby mosque.
She removed them from the window but there was ofcourse alot of hubhub

You call having her house firebombed until she left "a lot of hubbub"?
Call it what it is - religious intolerance from those who complain most about religious intolerance.

France has had a policy of secularisation of education since Napoleonic times, the new laws merely restate the existing situation to make sure the position is clear. Not only that, if you disregard the fact that the hijab is worn for religious reasons they would still not be acceptable, in exactly the same way that wearing baseball caps would not be acceptable.