Atheists Love Too?

[Thorne]

But, having appropriated a religious festival for their secular activities at Christmastime, the non-religious cannot claim that it is religion that is imposing itself on their activities, and that, I believe, is the nub of your complaints.

Appropriated? Not hardly! Reclaimed, perhaps. Or just blended in with the religious holy days in order to keep from being harassed and tormented by "good" Christians. And I, at least, don't claim that religions are imposing themselves on my activities. I only complain that religious people in governments are using taxpayer dollars to impose their religious symbols on all people, regardless of their religions.

Big business created their own Saint Valentine, and decided to celebrate him on February 14th, which by pure co-incidence only, happens to be the same day that the martyr Valentinus is reverenced by the Catholic Church?

No, big business created Valentine's cards, and heart-shaped boxes of candy, and expensive jewelry to guilt men into buying such things for their wives and/or girlfriends. To my (uncertain) knowledge there was no religious festival for the day, simply a day that the church assigned to one of its saints. I'm quite certain that the Church would not have promoted the sexuality which has become such a big part of the secular celebrations.

The nativity scenes you find in stores, on TV, pictured in advertisements etc are all secular? ... The pictures on Christmas cards such as the Magi, Mother and Child, angels, the Christchild … these too are secular? ... The quotations from Christmas Carols or the Holy Bible: also secular?

Nope. Those are religious, and they are marketed to the religious. Very few atheists buy them, and based upon demographics, very few atheists sell them. Talk to the Christian business owners.

What about the significance of holly, mistletoe and the colours red and green? Nothing to do with religion, I take it?

Well, the pagan religions, perhaps. Which megachurch do we send the royalties to? As for me, those things have no significance at all.

And the broken body of Jesus on the Cross displayed on Easter Cards must be the most secular of all

Sounds to me more like pornography.

The problem is that you are implying that it is atheists who are using these symbols, many of them stolen from the pagan faiths which the Church crushed, to extort money from the faithful. In fact, most of those selling these things are religious people themselves! And you aren't likely to find an atheist complaining about stores displaying religious articles for sale, or stores posting "Merry Christmas" signs. We are only concerned with those Christians, primarily, who insinuate their religions into government agencies in order to spend taxpayer dollars to "impose" their beliefs on everyone. If a city, or state, or federal agency would set aside an area where ALL religions could set up displays, whether they charge for that space or not, as long as government money is not being spent on those displays I have no problems. If the local Jewish leaders, or Muslims, or Pastafarians decide NOT to take advantage, no problem. From my observations, though, it is the "good" Christians who will make objections to the "multicultural" displays, and are more likely to vandalize those of other religions.

[MMI]

Appropriated? Not hardly! Reclaimed, perhaps. Or just blended in with the religious holy days in order to keep from being harassed and tormented by "good" Christians. And I, at least, don't claim that religions are imposing themselves on my activities.

You don't regard being "harassed and tormented by good Christians" as an imposition? I have wronged you!

It would be interesting to learn, however, which non-religious festivals were appropriated by religions, as you imply.

I only complain that religious people in governments are using taxpayer dollars to impose their religious symbols on all people, regardless of their religions.

My mistake. By impose I take it you mean display, or is it something more sinister?

No, big business created Valentine's cards, and heart-shaped boxes of candy, and expensive jewelry to guilt men into buying such things for their wives and/or girlfriends. To my (uncertain) knowledge there was no religious festival for the day, simply a day that the church assigned to one of its saints. I'm quite certain that the Church would not have promoted the sexuality which has become such a big part of the secular celebrations.

I think you are partly right. St Valentine was not the patron saint of lovers: he was a martyr who might have officiated at "illegal" Christian weddings and who is reputed to have restored the sight of a young girl (supposedly the daughter of his judge or of his executioner). The association of his feast day with amourousness seems to have started with Chaucer, and to have continued throughout the centuries culminating with a story put out by an American business that St Valentine himself sent a message to the girl whose sight he had restored and had signed it, from your Valentine. Thus Valentinee's Day has gradually been commercialised by business, and it is these secular entities that are forcing their Valentine's Day products on all and sundry. It is not the Church forcing its faith onto the general public (quite the opposite of the reason why St Valentine was martyred, I would add!).

Nope. Those are religious, and they are marketed to the religious. Very few atheists buy them, and based upon demographics, very few atheists sell them. Talk to the Christian business owners.

I find that hard to credit. It appears to me that atheists buy Christmas cards containing religious depictions/quotations without reservation; and I suspect no atheist business involved in selling Christmas cards would decline to stock such cards

Well, the pagan religions, perhaps...

Religions none the less

Sounds to me more like pornography.

{Chuckle} Yes, it does. And I camer across this 19th Century Valentine's Day message while reading up on Valentine's Day:

R stands for rod,
Which can give a smart crack,
And ought to be used
For a day on your back.

Wish I'd seen it sooner: I could have sent it to den.

+++++++++++++++++++

I am not merely implying that atheists use religious symbols for their own purposed, I am stating it as a fact, which I have illustrated above and in earlier postings. It is true but not relevant that Christianity appropriated pagan symbols for its own purposes: they were still religious symbols and often their original meanings were carried on under a new guise.

However, I now find you stating that atheists do not object to public display of religious symbols, but simply to the misappropriation of public funds to convert non-Christians to the "true faith". If that were true, it is unconstitutional in USA, so take action: enforce your rights. See if you can make a proper case in the courts rather than whingeing about your false impressions of Christian oppression.

As for objecting to "multicultural" displays, how can a Christian festival be anything but a Christian festival unless it is being appropriated, distorted and altered into something completely unChristian?

[Thorne]

You don't regard being "harassed and tormented by good Christians" as an imposition? I have wronged you!

Yes, you have, many times. But I forgive you.

I SAID that they weren't imposing upon ME. I didn't say it wouldn't be an imposition if they WERE harassing and tormenting me, personally.

It would be interesting to learn, however, which non-religious festivals were appropriated by religions, as you imply.

I didn't say that they were, necessarily, non-religious festivals, only that they were once festivals of OTHER religions, which were forced out of existence by the "good" Christians, usually by very violent means.

My mistake. By impose I take it you mean display, or is it something more sinister?

It can be both, actually. They display their religious tokens, which is not against the law. When they use taxpayer money to do so, however, it IS against the law, and is an imposition upon me. My taxes have to be raised to cover the wasted expense, while the churches pay nothing.

and it is these secular entities that are forcing their Valentine's Day products on all and sundry. It is not the Church forcing its faith onto the general public (quite the opposite of the reason why St Valentine was martyred, I would add!).[/QUOTE]
In what way are they FORCING these products upon us? Do they send out cute little imps to con us into spending our money? Do they send out legions of accountants to make sure we are spending our share? Where is the force, here?

I suspect no atheist business involved in selling Christmas cards would decline to stock such cards

Nope. That's not what I said. Given that the number of religious people in the US are roughly 90% of the population, it's fairly safe to extrapolate that only 10% of business owners are non-religious, and not all of those would be atheists. And they would be only a fraction of the number of atheists in the country.

I am not merely implying that atheists use religious symbols for their own purposed, I am stating it as a fact, which I have illustrated above and in earlier postings. It is true but not relevant that Christianity appropriated pagan symbols for its own purposes: they were still religious symbols and often their original meanings were carried on under a new guise.

Why is it not relevant? It's all right for Christians to steal these symbols for their own use, but it's not okay for atheists? You have to remember that religions has been around, in some form or another, for about as long as there have been humans, so just about every symbol ever devised will have had SOME religious significance SOMEWHERE!

However, I now find you stating that atheists do not object to public display of religious symbols, but simply to the misappropriation of public funds to convert non-Christians to the "true faith". If that were true, it is unconstitutional in USA, so take action: enforce your rights. See if you can make a proper case in the courts rather than whingeing about your false impressions of Christian oppression.

Ahh, there's the rub! Damned if we do, and damned if we don't! You might want to read about Jessica Ahlquist, a high school student, who did just that. If you search, you can find where the "good" Christians in her town have threatened her with rape, beatings, even death, all because she had the nerve to point out that they were breaking the law! Or how about the culture of fundamentalist Christianity in the US military that allows high ranking officers to verbally assault their subordinates who may not agree with their faith. Check out the Freedom From Religion Foundation and read about some of the horrors that have been inflicted upon atheists who "make a proper case in the courts". Then show me how we are oppressing the religious.

As for objecting to "multicultural" displays, how can a Christian festival be anything but a Christian festival unless it is being appropriated, distorted and altered into something completely unChristian?

So ONLY Christian holidays are celebrated at those times? What about Hanukkah, or Passover, or Kwanzaa, which are all celebrated around the times of Christian holidays (primarily because the Christians made sure of it!)? Why is it the CHRISTIANS who complain about store displays proclaiming "Happy Holidays" rather than Merry Christmas? They don't want to admit that other religious groups, or non-religious groups, also celebrate around the same times of the year. Everything must be about them!

100,000 years ago, give or take a few thousand years or tens, some terrified men and women sat watching the rising and setting sun and noticed that every day the sun set earlier, and further south. (Sorry, I have a Northern Hemisphere bias. Sue me.) Then, when it reached a certain point on the horizon it, would stop and turn around, rising and setting further north, setting later and later. And one particularly bright individual remembered the same thing happening the year before, and the year before that. And he figured out that, by predicting when the sun would turn around, and claiming that a god had told him of it, he could get others to give him food, rather than having to hunt for himself. And so religions were born. And festivals were developed to celebrate the "mercy" of the gods who brought back the sun, and the first priests grew fat and happy from the gullibility of their flocks.

And we're still allowing the priests to get fat and happy as they gull us with their fairy stories and holy days. I just think it's time we stopped feeding the priests and looked at the world the way it really is. And realize that, if there ARE gods out there, they certainly aren't the gods that the priests have foisted upon us, and they certainly don't intervene in the world we live in. But all the evidence we've managed to gather over these last 100,000 years leads me to believe that there probably are no gods out there at all. So no need for religious holidays.