Illinois School District Nixes Christmas and Jello

[ElfBot]

So long Halloween parade. Farewell Santa’s gift shop.The long-celebrated holiday traditions are facing elimination in some Oak Lawn schools this year after complaints the activities are offensive, particularly to Muslim students.Final decisions on which of the festivities will be axed will fall to the principals at each of Ridgeland School District 122’s five schools, [...]http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/waronchristmas?i=CoVQcl3V</img> (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/waronchristmas?a=CoVQcl3V) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/waronchristmas?i=E16fvAG0</img> (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/waronchristmas?a=E16fvAG0)


More from Defend Christmas... (http://defendchristmas.com/2007/09/29/illinois-school-district-nixes-christmas-and-jello/)

[Montana's Santa]

Following the dictates of Muslims in American schools violates the separation of church and state, doesn't it? How long are we going to kiss foreign butt in this country?

[Jeff Westover]

There is no such thing as separation of Church and State. It is not even in the Constitution.

[JollySteve]

Let me see if I get this straight. The Halloween parade, and Santa's gift shop will be cancelled from some schools because it offends a few Muslims. When will it end. Why stop with just Halloween, and Christmas. I am sure that you can find fault with just about any other Holiday. Heck, if 95% enjoy these events, but 5% find it offensive, lets just ruin it for eveybody.

What in the world is happening to this country.

[Ladybugkisses]

My question is if the shoe were on the other foot so-to-speak and it was that this country was majority Muslim would they be willing to change their traditions for a few Christian or Jewish or Atheist children? Probably not. Just look at how they run their own country, it's whatever the majority does that is the rule everyone else must learn to adapt. Why are we so willing to part with our traditions that have been longstanding for generations for everybody else's when they don't seem to respect our culture. No one forced them to come here, they probably had a good idea of what our culture and traditions were before hand. They have the right to practice whatever they choose but to imply that the majority must bend or do away with things just to make them feel comfortable is insane to me. If the do not wish to participate in certain events make that clear to the teachers in advance and other activities/assignments can be found to accommodate the kids. More than likely it's the parents that are making a big stink outta things and not the kids. Most kids could careless and the few that do should be more than willing to understand that although they may be Americans (whether born or imigrant) that this country has people from all backgrounds and religions but it still is majority Christian country. We are so scared of standing up for ourselves that we let anyone come along and bully us all in the name of being PC. This country needs to get a backbone.

Toya

[Billy Battles]

First why does everybody keep acting like Muslims only live in the Middle East there are Muslims of all Races(a term used to make cause a divide between HUMANS). They shouldn't have to scrap Christmas, Halloween, and Jello, However if they are going to keep them they should of an alternative for people of different Religious beliefs. Most places offer food that appeals to Vegetarians, nobody who eats meat raises a fuss.

[gameshowguy2000]

There is no such thing as separation of Church and State. It is not even in the Constitution.

Uh, there IS such thing as separation of Church and State. It may not be in the Constitution, but it IS in our government textbooks.

[Jinglebelle]

Following the dictates of Muslims in American schools violates the separation of church and state, doesn't it? How long are we going to kiss foreign butt in this country?
Uh, there IS such thing as separation of Church and State. It may not be in the Constitution, but it IS in our government textbooks.

I too, have always believed there to be a seperation between Church and State, I found this at wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_State s

But Clearly it means nothing, anyway. If our government didn't 'endorse' any particular religion -- Christianity -- we wouldn't have "In god we trust" on our currency, or "one nation under god" in our pledge of allegiance.

[Billy Battles]

But Clearly it means nothing, anyway. If our government didn't 'endorse' any particular religion -- Christianity -- we wouldn't have "In god we trust" on our currency, or "one nation under god" in our pledge of allegiance.

First off it is a fact that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in the same God. What separates them are their belief in Jesus and/or Muhammad. Matter of fact Jesus is one of the most quoted People in the Koran. When they say in "In God We Trust" they are not being specific. It is God in general. I better stop now or I get on a religious tirade.

[Jinglebelle]

First off it is a fact that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in the same God. What separates them are their belief in Jesus and/or Muhammad. Matter of fact Jesus is one of the most quoted People in the Koran. When they say in "In God We Trust" they are not being specific. It is God in general. I better stop now or I get on a religious tirade.


Perhaps those religions do... but not every body believes in that same god... what about Buddhists or Pagans? What about anyone who dosen't believe in the same god that your reffering to... they don't count??

I bet not many would like it if our currency said "In Zeus we trust" Wasn't he god to some?

[Billy Battles]

Perhaps those religions do... but not every body believes in that same god... what about Buddhists or Pagans? What about anyone who dosen't believe in the same god that your reffering to... they don't count??

I bet not many would like it if our currency said "In Zeus we trust" Wasn't he god to some?

Where does it say that "in God We Trust" is talking about a specific god, the Christian god has Many names like Elohim, Yahweh...ect. Maybe they put "God" to be a general term to represent the god of each persons Religious beliefs.

[Jinglebelle]

Maybe they put "God" to be a general term to represent the god of each persons Religious beliefs.

Maybe they did... ? I don't know.


But perhaps not every persons religious beliefs revolve around the worship or belief of any god at all.

That's all I'm saying, Mr. Battles.

[Billy Battles]

Maybe they did... ? I don't know.


But perhaps not every persons religious beliefs revolve around the worship or belief of any god at all.

That's all I'm saying, Mr. Battles.


Very true the point I was trying to make is most people assumes that the "God" in "In God We Trust" is the Christian God. When it does not say that anywhere.

I was not trying to say that it represents everybody. Obviously it would not represent an Atheist. I myself am an Agnostic and do not feel that it represents my beliefs.

There are religions that do not worship a "god" like Wicca or Buddhism which is trying to become spiritual.

[Sunshine73]

We are gauranteed freedom *of* religion, not freedom *from* religion.

Besides, personally, I don't see what the fuss is all about. The fact that other religions exist and the fact that those religions might have holidays, special festivals and events that will be practiced or celebrated around me or in my presence is in no way offensive to me nor is it infringing on *my* own personal religious rights.

So there are Muslims, Jews, etc. who, because of their own personal religious convictions, choose not to celebrate holidays like Christmas. That's fine. I respect that and do not expect them to celebrate a holiday that is not in keeping with their own beliefs. I do not, however, expect to have to alter my own personal religious beliefs or celebrations because they don't happen to agree with how *I* choose to celebrate.

[Jinglebelle]

Very true the point I was trying to make is most people assumes that the "God" in "In God We Trust" is the Christian God. When it does not say that anywhere.


It may not say it anywhere... that was my point... It dosen't have to say anywhere that god refers to the christian god.
And that's why... because most people already assume thats what it means.

[Billy Battles]

But Clearly it means nothing, anyway. If our government didn't 'endorse' any particular religion -- Christianity -- we wouldn't have "In god we trust" on our currency, or "one nation under god" in our pledge of allegiance.

It may not say it anywhere... that was my point... It dosen't have to say anywhere that god refers to the christian god.
And that's why... because most people already assume thats what it means.

Just because people assume that does not mean that was the original intention.

[Jinglebelle]

Just because people assume that does not mean that was the original intention.

So then your problem would be with my statement:

If our government didn't 'endorse' any particular religion -- Christianity -- we wouldn't have "In god we trust" on our currency, or "one nation under god" in our pledge of allegiance.

Well then let me take out a couple of words:

If our government didn't 'endorse' any religion, we wouldn't have "In god we trust" on our currency, or "one nation under god" in our pledge of allegiance.

And that brings us back to seperation of church and state...

[Billy Battles]

I don't want you to think I had a problem with anything you said I was just trying to offer a different point of view on the situation.

To be honest I would lean more toward "In God We Trust" being a statement for the Christian god, however I like to step outside the "argument" and offer other ideas.

If I offended you or upset you I am truly sorry that was not my intentions.

I feel to offer alternative ideas is a good way open a discussion and let people see other point of views.

[Jinglebelle]

I don't want you to think I had a problem with anything you said I was just trying to offer a different point of view on the situation.

To be honest I would lean more toward "In God We Trust" being a statement for the Christian god, however I like to step outside the "argument" and offer other ideas.

If I offended you or upset you I am truly sorry that was not my intentions.

I feel to offer alternative ideas is a good way open a discussion and let people see other point of views.

No apologies necessary... I by no means thought you were being rude. And I hope you didn't think that of me. In fact I actually gave you rep a few posts ago, because I appreciate a spirited debate. :D

[Billy Battles]

No apologies necessary... I by no means thought you were being rude. And I hope you didn't think that of me. In fact I actually gave you rep a few posts ago, because I appreciate a spirited debate. :D


No I did not think you were being rude. I just wanted to make sure that you knew I was not trying to be an @$$

by the way thanks for the Rep

[Jinglebelle]

:D You are welcome Mr. Battles! :D

[gameshowguy2000]

I too, have always believed there to be a seperation between Church and State, I found this at wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_State s

But Clearly it means nothing, anyway. If our government didn't 'endorse' any particular religion -- Christianity -- we wouldn't have "In god we trust" on our currency, or "one nation under god" in our pledge of allegiance.

Here's the problem: If we're a Christian nation, then what good is Freedom Of Religion? That's what the Constitution guarantees us, therefore, we are NOT, I repeat, NOT a Christian nation. Otherwise, we wouldn't have Freedom Of Religion now, would we, people?

Also, people, there's Polytheism (belief in more than one God, and there just may be more than one). That exists as well as Monotheism.

[dominick]

I've tried really hard today to stay out of this. I really did.

Christianity is the prominent religion in the United States. You can't argue that, it's a solid fact. Our nation's founders had a strong sense of religion and made that evident. To say that we are not strictly a Christian country would be correct, but just because we allow our citizens the right to believe and practice what they wish doesn't mean that there is absolutely no religious presence in our government. That would be like Nazi Germany. Besides, don't you think that our lawmakers act with a certain sense of their own religious morality, whatever that may be?

Furthermore, Christians are supposed to be tolerant of other religions. With that logic, if Christianity were our national religion (not saying it is or that we even have a national religion), don't you think the practice of allowing individual worship would still exist?

I fail to see what if any relevance your polytheistic vs monotheistic statement has to do with the discussion, but you forgot to mention atheism.

[Jeff Westover]

I think folks tend to tie these issues into neat little packages that fit around what they personally believe. Truth be told, it's never that easy.

The debates that led to the foundation of this country rarely, if ever, mentioned polytheism, Christianity, separation of Church and State or what the Easter Bunny wears on Good Friday.

Those debates were centered on rights.

So to water everything down to having either the endorsement of a particular religious thought or a complete banning of the same is really not the point.

The point is that as Americans we can believe what we want to believe and the government won't push us one way or the other.

Trial after trial has proven it. If a man doesn't want his kid to say the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance he has the option of having his kid sit out and, at the same time, will enjoy months of media glory as he tried to get the government to stricken those words from the pledge. He lost, of course, because the argument wasn't really about whether the words "under God" should be stricken. The argument was whether or not he was forced to do so.

Going full circle, the same goes for the endless debates raging around the War on Christmas. Schools, thinking they have some sort of civic responsibility to be all things to all people, try to "ban" Christmas at one extreme or, at a minimum these days, become "neutral" on the issue.

Neutrality is impossible. It's our culture, it's our history, it is woven into the fabric of our country and there is no escaping it -- just as there is no escaping slavery, polygamy, Japenese relocation centers, the fate of the American Indian, the lottery, tobacco, and the designated hitter. We are what we are and, ultimately, what separates us from the rest of the world is that we CAN deal with our religious differences and not have one particular belief system dominate or dictate our governmental direction.

What a miracle these United States are and what inspired men our founders were.

They had their differences.

What would it be like, do you think, to have Jefferson and Adams here in this discussion? What about Washington or Madison? What about that free-spirit Franklin? Think there were of one mind religiously?

They were, in fact, famously different and in some cases polar opposites. But where they came together was in a "live and let live" mentality. It worked for them and it can and should work for us.

I suggest where we find these differences that get us so riled up we take a little stroll to some place like Iran or North Korea or China or places in the former Soviet Union or on the African continent where the freedoms we contend over in terms of mere speech are fought over there with guns and tyranny.

Isn't it great to live in a place where we can be morons, call each other morons...and still wish each other Merry Christmas?

[MrsH]

To lighten the conversation I must say...

I can't stand Jello...so if they took Jello out of my world...I'd be happy.

[dvdguy]

who was that gentleman that said we should move the U.N. to his country because they have so much freedom, & then shut down any television stations that didnt agree with everything he said?

[Jinglebelle]

Isn't it great to live in a place where we can be morons, call each other morons...and still wish each other Merry Christmas?

:treeguy: Yes Jeff... Yes it is!

[Jinglebelle]

To lighten the conversation I must say...

I can't stand Jello...so if they took Jello out of my world...I'd be happy.


You don't like Jello?? Even if it has fruit in it??

[dominick]

I like it as long as it doesn't have fruit in it.

[MrsH]

When I was a kid I was sick and all I could eat was jello for a while. That is why I hate jello. I'll eat it, but I won't be happy about it. Now Jello chocolate pudding is a different story.

[Jeff Westover]

Here's the problem: If we're a Christian nation, then what good is Freedom Of Religion? That's what the Constitution guarantees us, therefore, we are NOT, I repeat, NOT a Christian nation. Otherwise, we wouldn't have Freedom Of Religion now, would we, people?


I think you're confusing the conversation. These United States were most certainly founded upon Christian principles, by Christians and, at least at that time, were governed by the people who were mostly Christian in the vast majority.

But just because of the Christian dominance there is no need to assume that people claim Christianity is the belief system of America. I don't thiink I've seen anyone in this thread even suggest that.

And, to counter your point, I believe it was a perversion of Christianity that led Christians to build our Constitution around a core principle of religious freedom. The problems then were not so much Christianity versus Islam or Hinduism or Whathaveyou -- is was Christianity versus Christianity...and that fueled the belief in following the dictates of our own conscience.

Still, that being said, America is very much a Christian nation and I don't think that's changing much.

[Jinglebelle]

When I was a kid I was sick and all I could eat was jello for a while. That is why I hate jello. I'll eat it, but I won't be happy about it. Now Jello chocolate pudding is a different story.

Do you remember Jello pudding pops? I wonder if they still make them... they were soooo good!

[Jeff Westover]

Do you remember Jello pudding pops? I wonder if they still make them... they were soooo good!

Gross. Jello pudding pops are unconstitutional. You could look it up.

[Jinglebelle]

Gross. Jello pudding pops are unconstitutional. You could look it up.

:D UH! I remember really liking those back in the day...

[dvdguy]

wheres my copy of the constitution?
seemed to have misplaced it

[Jeff Westover]

I'm with Larry. I keep it in my back pocket in case I have to prove that I have the right to bare arms.

[MrsH]

Oh yes. I loved those darned things. The ones where they mixed the vanilla and the chocolate in a swirl....mmmmmmmmmmm

[dvdguy]

man i shoulve seen that coming

[MrsH]

I have the right to arm bears

[dvdguy]

speaking of comedy, anybody watch Jeff Dunham?

[Jeff Westover]

man i shoulve seen that coming

Feed her, man. Before she hurts someone.

[Jinglebelle]

Oh yes. I loved those darned things. The ones where they mixed the vanilla and the chocolate in a swirl....mmmmmmmmmmm

OH YES! those were the best!!

[dvdguy]

I have the right to arm bears

somebody help me

[dominick]

I think you're confusing the conversation. These United States were most certainly founded upon Christian principles, by Christians and, at least at that time, were governed by the people who were mostly Christian in the vast majority.

But just because of the Christian dominance there is no need to assume that people claim Christianity is the belief system of America. I don't thiink I've seen anyone in this thread even suggest that.

And, to counter your point, I believe it was a perversion of Christianity that led Christians to build our Constitution around a core principle of religious freedom. The problems then were not so much Christianity versus Islam or Hinduism or Whathaveyou -- is was Christianity versus Christianity...and that fueled the belief in following the dictates of our own conscience.

Still, that being said, America is very much a Christian nation and I don't think that's changing much.

That is the exact point I was trying to make with my less eloquently articulated post.

[Jeff Westover]

That is the exact point I was trying to make with my less eloquently articulated post.

I think you articulated your point just fine. I was merely fulfilling my role as VP of the Department of Redundancy Department.

[dvdguy]

is that part of your title?

[Jeff Westover]

I am a man of many titles. Right now, I have to go play "Dad".

[MrsH]

Feed her, man. Before she hurts someone.

Aw....I haven't been on in a while and I'm in a "posty" mood

[Jeff Westover]

Yes, it's good to catch you all here.

[dvdguy]

gonna get busier & busier

[dominick]

It's really too bad that Lisa can't join us tonight.

[MrsH]

It's really too bad that Lisa can't join us tonight.

Yeah...she's such a hoot

[Jeff Westover]

Oh yeah. She'd be all over this topic (and likely all over my position too). Somebody text her and let her know we miss her!

[dominick]

I'll do you one better and give her a call.

[Jeff Westover]

Tell her we said hello and that we miss her.

[dominick]

No answer. Left her a voice mail and told her that she was missed.

[MrsH]

Tell her I will call her this weekend to say HI.

[Jeff Westover]

If you talk to her, try to get an update on things. Find out if she's got Internet connectivity. I'm just about ready to act on our...little project.

[dominick]

Will do. I'll try her again tomorrow afternoon if she doesn't return my call before then.

[MrsH]

Will do

[Jeff Westover]

Do you have her current mailing address? If not, try to get it. Let her know I've got chocolate ready to send.

[dominick]

No, I don't. I will definitely get it for you, though. Monica might have it.

[dvdguy]

Chocolate "wink wink"?

[Jeff Westover]

Yes, convenient, don't you think?

[dvdguy]

very sneaky

[Jinglebelle]

No, I don't. I will definitely get it for you, though. Monica might have it.

Actually, I don't have her new address... sorry guys.

[MerrySouthernChristmas]

Next thing ya know, Fourth of July will be offensive to immigrants

[SnowMaiden1018]

I get what your saying about the offensive part pertaining the debate going on here--but dont you think that immigrants will also want to celebrate the fourth of july as thier own?
To think Logically about it, Independance day is about celebrating freedom. Freedom from what has held you down. Freedom that is offered to you as a reward for the hardships that this country has endured! I can only think that the fourth of july could never be offensive to anyone living in this country!

as for the Christianity argument--let me go back to the whole freedom thing. This country was built on Christian principles. The first settlers migrated here to get away from the Church of the King (for lack of a better term), to not only find freedom from heavy taxes, but freedom from a religious monarchy that was more of a dictatorship. No one in the country is forced to live under one God, it just so happens that back when the National ANthem, the Pledge of Allegiance and the Constitution were written, Christianity was the first and foremost celebrated kind of religion. I dont think that having "in God we trust" on our currency is in any way an attack on anyones choice of GOD, but a homage to people who did so much to build this country, and to give us laws and to give us that freedom.
As for immigrants--we are all immigrants. There is no historical fact relating to any one race being "created" on american soil. Yes, there are tons of speculations and such, but still to this day, no one can be sure. So with that, I take you back to my 6th grade history lesson in which we learned that AMerica used to be called a melting pot. Now today, some do find that offense. But I hoep to call attention to the fact that--no matter what you put in that pot--Black, WHite, Indian, Hindu, Asian, etc etc, we all come out as americans. And as americans we have the freedom to worship who we choose, to celebrate as we choose. WHy take christmas out of the schools? Why cant we just celebrate Ramadan, or Hannakah? Why cant we learn to accept the cultures of another instead of just getting rid of them? I dont know, maybe I am just cynical and wish for a time when things were simple...but then again--they never were...were they?

[Billy Battles]

WHy take christmas out of the schools? Why cant we just celebrate Ramadan, or Hannakah? Why cant we learn to accept the cultures of another instead of just getting rid of them? I dont know, maybe I am just cynical and wish for a time when things were simple...but then again--they never were...were they?



The problem is that instead of Schools and Government trying to find a way to celebrate other people beliefs they think it is easier to just cut the Christian ones.

I think if they took the time and effort to offer a Celebration for Other religious holidays there would be less complaining. I also believe they should offer an alternative to Jello. I am not saying to get rid of Jello, however offer something else also.

[SnowMaiden1018]

The thing with the jello is just the same as the Christmas in schools--it should be about choice! You have the choice to eat Jello, or pudding or cake, whatever--you should have the choice to celebrate whatever it is that you celebrate--millions of men and women have given their lives and thier time to give us that choice--It just seems like if there are more then 10 people who dont like something--well the answer is to get rid off it just to shut those 10 people up--well what about the 200 people that do want it??? Smoking falls into this catagory too--and since I live in the outskirts of Philadelphia where it is illegal to smoke in any bar or restaurant--it should be about choice--the law makers of this country are lazy pigs who will make a law to make a buck! But look around you--how many other things can you think of that have been banned just to shut one group up? Well what if we as "the Christmas Gang" started making a big stink to all those towns and schools and such that have gotten rid of christmas, would they re-instate becuz we are making a rucus? You bet your sweet eggnog they would!!

[Snowflake the Elf]

First off it is a fact that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in the same God. What separates them are their belief in Jesus and/or Muhammad. Matter of fact Jesus is one of the most quoted People in the Koran. When they say in "In God We Trust" they are not being specific. It is God in general. I better stop now or I get on a religious tirade.

On the contrary How 'In God We Trust" found its way to dollar bills
The history of the "In God We Trust" motto dates back to the Civil War era, a time of increased religious sentiment. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received numerous letters urging the United States to recognize the Deity on U.S. coins. The first letter came on November 13, 1861, from the Rev. M. R. Watkinson, minister of the gospel from Ridleyville, Pa.
Watkinson offered an idea to include the words "God," "liberty" and "law" on coins and said, "This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object."
A week later, Chase instructed the Director of the Mint at Philadelphia to prepare a motto. His letter read, "No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense. The trust of our people in God Jesus Christ should be declared on our national coins."
Later that year, the director of the mint recommended designs that read, "Our Country, Our God" and "God, Our Trust." Chase changed the phrase to the now common "In God We Trust," which began appearing on coins in 1864.
Almost a century later, during the height of the Cold War with the officially atheist Soviet Union, the 84th Congress passed a joint resolution declaring "In God We Trust" the national motto of the U.S. A year later, on October 1, 1957, the phrase appeared on paper currency for the first time.

[snowangel_x3]

That's ridiculous.
If it's so offending then just don't participate in the event!

I'm glad I don't live in Oak Lawn.

[Billy Battles]

The trust of our people in God Jesus Christ should be declared on our national coins."


To be honest I would lean more toward "In God We Trust" being a statement for the Christian god, however I like to step outside the "argument" and offer other ideas.

I feel to offer alternative ideas is a good way open a discussion and let people see other point of views.


I was just putting ideas out there. Also just because 1 man believed something does not mean everyone else did.

[SnowMaiden1018]

:))I was just putting ideas out there. Also just because 1 man believed something does not mean everyone else did.

But what you are failing to understand is that in those times, Christianity was THE religion of the settlers. They fought to believe the way they wanted. They knew of nothing else. You are assuming that life in the those times, was as it is today--where you can have 100 people in the room and they will all be of different faiths, races, etc. It wasnt like that.

I understand your "wanting to put ideas out there" But in order for an debate to be affective, one must LISTEN and understand where the other side is coming from.
I apologize for I do not want to seem rude, but please understand the differences of today compared to the yesteryears.

In these times today, had there been a need for a quote on the currency of the USA, I highly doubt that there would ever be an agreement, but back to my point--Christianity, was the religion. It was praticed freely, by everyone who came over on the boats to settle here. Understand it is because of the persecution they suffered in England due to thier religion, that they fled to the americas.

Once again, I am sorry if this comes off as rude, for I do not mean it to be. I am always grateful for a wonderful debate to partake in, but while I can understand your responses, I do not understand why you fail to understand what we are saying!! Its rather frustrating! You are more then welcome to your thoughts and opinions, but as for the argument of "just because one man believed it, doesnt mean everyone else did" --to be honest---THAT day? it did mean that.