Re: Very Merry

"Pt" <peatea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1166591819.137471.157280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Brian Running wrote:
I think it is disingenuous to argue that it's secular in nature.

So, kiss my ass! Who the hell do you think you are, calling me
disingenuous? Go to hell!


I had to look that one up.
You're right Brian.

Wow, talk about sensitive. Until you responded I assumed Brian was just
kidding.

Look, the Vatican has a huge Christmas tree. What other secular symbols do
they use? Do they have a Santa? Reindeer? Not that I can find. They have a
big old tree next to the nativity scene. If you use Google to search for
images, you'll be hard pressed to find pictures of churches with reinder,
but churches with Christmas trees pop up all over the place.

I also find it interesting that the Catholic League gets all worked up over
Christmas tree related issues (just search their website). They go so far as
to the say the proper name is Christmas Tree, not Holiday Tree.

If a Christmas Tree is secular in nature, why was the president of the
Catholic league all pissed off about a tree made from condoms? He said "they
think it's okay to launch an attack on Christians" and planned a boycott of
Levi Strauss, the sponsor. Why would a religious organization be all fussed
over a secular symbol?

My take on Brian is that he sometimes seems to take hard stands just for the
sake of doing so. I figured he knew better, which is why I used that term. I
didn't mean it as an insult - it was an attempt to say, "C'mon, you know
better than that." But, hey, if that's what he believes, fine. Obviously, I
disagree as have a significant minority of Supreme Court Justices.

No need to get all irascible. The world's big enough for differing opinions.


.