https://www.humanrights.gov.au/news/speeches/social-inclusion-and-human-rights-australia

Social inclusion is about people being able to participate in society. It is about creating conditions for equal opportunities for all. Social inclusion requires that all individuals be able to ‘secure a job; access services; connect with family, friends, work, personal interests and local community; deal with personal crisis; and have their voices heard.’ This essentially means that all people have the best opportunities to enjoy life and do well in society. It is about making sure that no one is left out

So inclusion is a great thing. It helps ALL to assimilate into Australian society

The left are often extremists in the application of "social inclusion"

They forget the word "inclusion" is not the same as "exclusion"

Excluding Christian value celebrations does not then include the Muslim community anymore than include the Buddhist community

The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day

It is a bad thing when the ultra-socialists get hold of it and begin to apply it to groups deemed to have 'accredited victim status', rather than looking at it on a case-by-case basis.  That is precisely where affirmative action in both the schools system and employment opportunities went so terribly wrong, and left - not a society of inclusions - but one of exclusions as a matter of policy.

There is a point at which social manipulation of people in mass groups should be left entirely out of it, and the needs and rights of individuals addressed as the priority.

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:08am:

So inclusion is a great thing. It helps ALL to assimilate into Australian society The left are often extremists in the application of "social inclusion" They forget the word "inclusion" is not the same as "exclusion" Excluding Christian value celebrations does not then include the Muslim community anymore than include the Buddhist community The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day

I don't see anyone campaigning to get rid of or hide Islamic festivals - we respect their rights to those - let them, and our 'governments' with their often vested interests and wacky ideas, respect our right to ours equally.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:13am:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:08am: So inclusion is a great thing. It helps ALL to assimilate into Australian society The left are often extremists in the application of "social inclusion" They forget the word "inclusion" is not the same as "exclusion" Excluding Christian value celebrations does not then include the Muslim community anymore than include the Buddhist community The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day I don't see anyone campaigning to get rid of or hide Islamic festivals - we respect their rights to those - let them, and our 'governments' with their often vested interests and wacky ideas, respect our right to ours equally.

How about Christian celebrations?

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:18am:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:13am: Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:08am: So inclusion is a great thing. It helps ALL to assimilate into Australian society The left are often extremists in the application of "social inclusion" They forget the word "inclusion" is not the same as "exclusion" Excluding Christian value celebrations does not then include the Muslim community anymore than include the Buddhist community The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day I don't see anyone campaigning to get rid of or hide Islamic festivals - we respect their rights to those - let them, and our 'governments' with their often vested interests and wacky ideas, respect our right to ours equally. How about Christian celebrations?

S'what I mean - no carol singing, no Chrissie decs etc in schools 'cause it might upset the Mussos .. we don't give a rat's how many prayers they make to Mecca or how many haj's they make or how much wailing goes on from the mosque rocket to bring the faithful to prayer....... let them offer us equal respect.

You no like Australia - take the next boat home.....

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:25am:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:18am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:13am: Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:08am: So inclusion is a great thing. It helps ALL to assimilate into Australian society The left are often extremists in the application of "social inclusion" They forget the word "inclusion" is not the same as "exclusion" Excluding Christian value celebrations does not then include the Muslim community anymore than include the Buddhist community The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day I don't see anyone campaigning to get rid of or hide Islamic festivals - we respect their rights to those - let them, and our 'governments' with their often vested interests and wacky ideas, respect our right to ours equally. How about Christian celebrations? S'what I mean - no carol singing, no Chrissie decs etc in schools 'cause it might upset the Mussos .. we don't give a rat's how many prayers they make to Mecca or how many haj's they make or how much wailing goes on from the mosque rocket to bring the faithful to prayer....... let them offer us equal respect. You no like Australia - take the next boat home.....

The resistance to Xmassacre decorations and other religious iconography isn't coming from the Muslims. That is a popular myth.

It's coming from the atheists.

Hang an atheist for  Christ...... give 'em a taste of it.....

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:31am:

The resistance to Xmassacre decorations and other religious iconography isn't coming from the Muslims. That is a popular myth. It's coming from the atheists.

So you are saying they are using Islam as a crutch?

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:47am:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:31am: The resistance to Xmassacre decorations and other religious iconography isn't coming from the Muslims. That is a popular myth. It's coming from the atheists. So you are saying they are using Islam as a crutch?

No. Where did you get that from?

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:55am:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:47am: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:31am: The resistance to Xmassacre decorations and other religious iconography isn't coming from the Muslims. That is a popular myth. It's coming from the atheists. So you are saying they are using Islam as a crutch? No. Where did you get that from?

A coach in the US was banned from praying before a game

Nativity ban at school

Kris Kringle ban at work place

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 10:24am:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:55am: Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:47am: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:31am: The resistance to Xmassacre decorations and other religious iconography isn't coming from the Muslims. That is a popular myth. It's coming from the atheists. So you are saying they are using Islam as a crutch? No. Where did you get that from? A coach in the US was banned from praying before a game

What has that got to do with atheists using Islam as a crutch Maqqa?

... allegedly.

So Maqqa, are you saying that the only way people can expect to have equal opportunities is if they are forced to celebrate Christian festivals?

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 10:26am:

So Maqqa, are you saying that the only way people can expect to have equal opportunities is if they are forced to celebrate Christian festivals?

Muslims coming from Sharia Law countries believe it's okay to harass girls - so are you saying we can't force them to obey social norms in Australia?

Asians who love eating dogs - Australians are forcing them not to eat it

This is about "social inclusion"

They don't have to celebrate it - but that does not mean they stop other people from celebrating it

http://www.kentucky.com/news/local/education/article50324915.html

Audience members recite Bible passage deleted from ‘A Charlie Brown Christmas’

Though Johnson County school officials deleted a Bible passage from a student production of A Charlie Brown Christmas despite protests, several adults in the audience at Thursday’s performance recited the lines normally spoken by the character Linus, a video shows.

The scene at W.R. Castle Elementary School followed a firestorm of controversy in Johnson County this week.

Superintendent Thomas Salyer has said that, following a complaint, he consulted with legal counsel and determined that biblical references should be removed from the play and other Christmas programs in the Eastern Kentucky school district. He said he was trying to meet the letter of the law. That decision resulted in people protesting outside the school district offices in Paintsville since Monday and a request from a national legal organization to not remove the biblical lines.

Castle Elementary principal Jeff Cochran said in an interview Thursday that as instructed by school officials, no student in the play performed the scene in which Linus recites the passage from the Bible in explaining the meaning of Christmas:

“Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes lying in the manger. And suddenly, there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host, praising God and saying, ‘Glory to God in the highest, and on Earth peace, good will toward men.’”

But people in the audience recited the lines, Cochran said. A video provided by East Kentucky Broadcasting in Pikeville shows that several people joined in.

After that, “there were a few more lines in the play, and that was the end of it,” Cochran said.

An Arizona-based legal organization called Alliance Defending Freedom is representing Joey Collins, a cast member’s parent who wanted to keep the biblical references. The organization’s legal counsel, Matt Sharp, said Thursday that school staff had instructed students to remain silent when it came time for Linus to recite the passage from the Bible.

“It sounded like the community really stepped up,” Sharp said.

In a letter to school district officials Tuesday, Sharp had said there was no violation of the “separation of church and state” by allowing children to learn about “theater and the origins of Christmas through participating in a stage version of this beloved program that contains the same religious elements as the television version.”

“Given that courts have consistently held that schools may organize and sponsor Christmas programs and performances that include religious songs and study the historical origins of Christmas, there is no basis for the district’s decision to censor the religious aspects of A Charlie Brown Christmas,” the letter said.

A spokeswoman for the ACLU Kentucky told the Herald-Leader this week that the Johnson County school officials made an appropriate decision.

Sharp on Thursday said he was not satisfied with the school district’s response: “I’m still disappointed to see the school district did not do the right thing and continued to censor this play and deprive these kids who have put a lot of work and energy into this of the opportunity to do the full play like they had practiced.”

He said he did not know if his organization, which advocates for people who want to express their faith, would take any further action.

“We’re not committed to any course of action right now. We are really just looking at all the options,” Sharp said.

Cochran, the principal, indicated he wasn’t satisfied with the audience response.

“I wish that they had let the kids do the play,” he said.

Maqqa wrote on Dec 17^th, 2015 at 9:12pm:

More and more we see secularism are more inclusive. But it only works on those who wish to assimilate Words such secularism and assimilation seems contradictory. But secularism works as it's based upon common law

Maqqa wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:08am:

The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day

So you have one thread saying that other religions should be secular

And you have this thread where you expect all people to celebrate Christian festivals.

Are you blind to the hypocrisy of this?

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 10:57am:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 17th, 2015 at 9:12pm: More and more we see secularism are more inclusive. But it only works on those who wish to assimilate Words such secularism and assimilation seems contradictory. But secularism works as it's based upon common law Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:08am: The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day So you have one thread saying that other religions should be secular And you have this thread where you expect all people to celebrate Christian festivals. Are you blind to the hypocrisy of this?

Secularism is about the separation between government and religion i.e. laws that promotes equality for everyone

Social inclusion is about participating in that equality

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 9:31am:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:25am: Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:18am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:13am: Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:08am: So inclusion is a great thing. It helps ALL to assimilate into Australian society The left are often extremists in the application of "social inclusion" They forget the word "inclusion" is not the same as "exclusion" Excluding Christian value celebrations does not then include the Muslim community anymore than include the Buddhist community The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day I don't see anyone campaigning to get rid of or hide Islamic festivals - we respect their rights to those - let them, and our 'governments' with their often vested interests and wacky ideas, respect our right to ours equally. How about Christian celebrations? S'what I mean - no carol singing, no Chrissie decs etc in schools 'cause it might upset the Mussos .. we don't give a rat's how many prayers they make to Mecca or how many haj's they make or how much wailing goes on from the mosque rocket to bring the faithful to prayer....... let them offer us equal respect. You no like Australia - take the next boat home..... The resistance to Xmassacre decorations and other religious iconography isn't coming from the Muslims. That is a popular myth. It's coming from the atheists.

Why is it that you get everything wrong?  And you really do.  It is as though your brain is wired so that nothing works properly. 1+1=banana

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 2:28pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:31am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:25am: Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:18am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:13am: Maqqa wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 9:08am: So inclusion is a great thing. It helps ALL to assimilate into Australian society The left are often extremists in the application of "social inclusion" They forget the word "inclusion" is not the same as "exclusion" Excluding Christian value celebrations does not then include the Muslim community anymore than include the Buddhist community The large majority of non-christians have been operating fine with the celebration of Xmas, Easter and St Patricks Day I don't see anyone campaigning to get rid of or hide Islamic festivals - we respect their rights to those - let them, and our 'governments' with their often vested interests and wacky ideas, respect our right to ours equally. How about Christian celebrations? S'what I mean - no carol singing, no Chrissie decs etc in schools 'cause it might upset the Mussos .. we don't give a rat's how many prayers they make to Mecca or how many haj's they make or how much wailing goes on from the mosque rocket to bring the faithful to prayer....... let them offer us equal respect. You no like Australia - take the next boat home..... The resistance to Xmassacre decorations and other religious iconography isn't coming from the Muslims. That is a popular myth. It's coming from the atheists. Why is it that you get everything wrong?  And you really do.  It is as though your brain is wired so that nothing works properly. 1+1=banana

No Maria. You're wrong. Profoundly so. Do you really think less than 2% of the population is causing this fuss?

It's not Muslims, it's atheists behind the secularisation of everything.

Get your facts straight ... for a change. Abuse doesn't make you look any more correct.

A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'.

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 2:44pm:

A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'.

A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls.

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 3:00pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls.

Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful?

Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again.

Don’t include them. Ban them.

... it gives them the right to keep silent while being insulted by racists and bigots.

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 3:05pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again.

In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards.

Sun Tzu wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 3:07pm:

... it gives them the right to keep silent while being insulted by racists and bigots.

Exactly. No one has the right to not be offended - except the racists and bigots.

As for moi, I have the right to be a dirty Paki Bastard.

Calling moi a dirty PB isn't racist. Pakistan is not a race, you know.

It's a state of mind.

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 3:31pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards.

When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious.

Karnal wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 4:49pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious.

I'm sure you are.

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 5:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are.

Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic.

We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival.

The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either.

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

Karnal wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 5:29pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol.

Karnal wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 5:29pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

I would be if I were the only person on the planet who doesnt already know it or the only person who thinks that matters.

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol.

You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter.

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol.

But of course. Santa Claus, elves, male fertility symbols. We all know Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity.

It wasn't a big deal until the Victorian era. Christians celebrated Easter - a pagan Spring festival. Easter ended the period of Lent.

These festivals - Winter Solstice (Christmas), Summer Solstice (Feast Day, or Midsummer), Beltane (Easter) and Halloween (All Hallows Eve), were all pagan. They were celebrated in every pre-Christian culture the world over. All Christianity did was incorporate them.

Maria knows I'm curious. I'm sure she's curious too.

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 6:28pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter.

You''re wrong again Maria. Don't you get tired of it? Try a quick google. That will sort you out.

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 6:31pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter. You''re wrong again Maria. Don't you get tired of it? Try a quick google. That will sort you out.

Did you know, Mothra, that 'google' is not a substitute for an education nor an alternative to actual research? As someone who has plenty of the former and performed a lot of the latter, your cute equivalence is amusing. It would also give you an epic fail in university where actual proven facts tend to be the order of the day (except in Gender Studies).

Karnal wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 6:29pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. But of course. Santa Claus, elves, male fertility symbols. We all know Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity. It wasn't a big deal until the Victorian era. Christians celebrated Easter - a pagan Spring festival. Easter ended the period of Lent. These festivals - Winter Solstice (Christmas), Summer Solstice (Feast Day, or Midsummer), Beltane (Easter) and Halloween (All Hallows Eve), were all pagan. They were celebrated in every pre-Christian culture the world over. All Christianity did was incorporate them. Maria knows I'm curious. I'm sure she's curious too.

All true but Eater was not Beltane, that's May Day. Easter is the Spring Equinox (Autumnal Equinox for us down here), sacred to the fertility Goddess Eostre,, whose symbol was the hare.

Around that time of year, hares would be found nesting on birds nests, for some unfathomable reason, giving rise to the meaning of eggs as symbols of new like.

Christians pinched the lot. The hare became the Easter Bunny and eggs became chocolate.

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 6:37pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:31pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter. You''re wrong again Maria. Don't you get tired of it? Try a quick google. That will sort you out. Did you know, Mothra, that 'google' is not a substitute for an education nor an alternative to actual research? As someone who has plenty of the former and performed a lot of the latter, your cute equivalence is amusing. It would also give you an epic fail in university where actual proven facts tend to be the order of the day (except in Gender Studies).

Actual research Maria? I spent 15 years as a practicing pagan.

What is it you would like to know?

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 6:37pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:31pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter. You''re wrong again Maria. Don't you get tired of it? Try a quick google. That will sort you out. Did you know, Mothra, that 'google' is not a substitute for an education nor an alternative to actual research? As someone who has plenty of the former and performed a lot of the latter, your cute equivalence is amusing. It would also give you an epic fail in university where actual proven facts tend to be the order of the day (except in Gender Studies).

You never went to uni, dear. The professors were all IDIOTS, remember?  Still, you'll always have year 9 maths. Integral calculus, Maxwell's law, the lot.

That should see you through countless hours of debate on comparative religion, no?

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 6:40pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:37pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:31pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter. You''re wrong again Maria. Don't you get tired of it? Try a quick google. That will sort you out. Did you know, Mothra, that 'google' is not a substitute for an education nor an alternative to actual research? As someone who has plenty of the former and performed a lot of the latter, your cute equivalence is amusing. It would also give you an epic fail in university where actual proven facts tend to be the order of the day (except in Gender Studies). Actual research Maria? I spent 15 years as a practicing pagan. What is it you would like to know?

I don't think Maria wants to know anything, Mother. She just wants to say what she knows.

That's why most of her posts are about IDIOTS.

Karnal wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:40pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:37pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:31pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter. You''re wrong again Maria. Don't you get tired of it? Try a quick google. That will sort you out. Did you know, Mothra, that 'google' is not a substitute for an education nor an alternative to actual research? As someone who has plenty of the former and performed a lot of the latter, your cute equivalence is amusing. It would also give you an epic fail in university where actual proven facts tend to be the order of the day (except in Gender Studies). Actual research Maria? I spent 15 years as a practicing pagan. What is it you would like to know? I don't think Maria wants to know anything, Mother. She just wants to say what she knows. That's why most of her posts are about IDIOTS.

Unfortunately, despite her grandiosity, all she really knows is how to abuse people in lieu of actual argument.

mothra wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 7:20pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 7:08pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:40pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:37pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:31pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 6:28pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:38pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:29pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 5:07pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 4:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:31pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:05pm: mariacostel wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 3:00pm: mothra wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 2:44pm: A fair few Christians are opposed to Christmas too. They say, among other things, that it is a 'pagan ritual'. A good handful or two. Maybe even three handfuls. Well there is the Jehovah's Witnesses for a start. Are they just a handful? Anyway, if you type 'Christians against Christmas' into google, you'll see for yourself that you are wrong. Again. In relative terms, yes.  And most would not call JWs 'christian' by most conventional (or biblical) standards. When was Jesus born, dear? I'm curious. I'm sure you are. Good answer, dear. Most enigmatic. We know that Jesus was not born on 25th December. This is the date of the Winter Solstice, a pagan festival. The Queen wasn't born on the second Monday in June either. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? And the Christmas tree is a male fertility symbol. You cant even get that right. It was an ancient ritual related to protecting the 'life force' of trees during winter. You''re wrong again Maria. Don't you get tired of it? Try a quick google. That will sort you out. Did you know, Mothra, that 'google' is not a substitute for an education nor an alternative to actual research? As someone who has plenty of the former and performed a lot of the latter, your cute equivalence is amusing. It would also give you an epic fail in university where actual proven facts tend to be the order of the day (except in Gender Studies). Actual research Maria? I spent 15 years as a practicing pagan. What is it you would like to know? I don't think Maria wants to know anything, Mother. She just wants to say what she knows. That's why most of her posts are about IDIOTS. Unfortunately, despite her grandiosity, all she really knows is how to abuse people in lieu of actual argument.

I think we should include her. Mother. Maria, I think, just wants to be loved.

Join the gang, Maria. Become an IDIOT.

Separation of church and state, FTW. Because, without it, you have no logical argument against Sharia law, unless you plan to outbreed them.

boxy wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

Separation of church and state, FTW. Because, without it, you have no logical argument against Sharia law, unless you plan to outbreed them.

Breed them.

boxy wrote on Dec 19^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

Separation of church and state, FTW. Because, without it, you have no logical argument against Sharia law, unless you plan to outbreed them.

It's not separation for the sake of separation

Lets assume Christianity and Islam is about the same age

Christian church influence is evident through history

After the crusades - some 920 years ago - Christians  discovered secularism is the way of the future and started on this path. It was slow at first and we still have remnants of it today

Sharia Law has not changed. The Mosque (church) controls the government.

These Sharia laws dates back thousands of years.

As I said before - secularism is about a common set of laws to provide equity amongst inhabitants.

Religious laws will dictate how much they participate within that equity

Sharia Law is incompatible with secularism

Maqqa wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 12:58am:

boxy wrote on Dec 19th, 2015 at 8:49pm: Separation of church and state, FTW. Because, without it, you have no logical argument against Sharia law, unless you plan to outbreed them. It's not separation for the sake of separation Lets assume Christianity and Islam is about the same age Christian church influence is evident through history After the crusades - some 920 years ago - Christians  discovered secularism is the way of the future and started on this path. It was slow at first and we still have remnants of it today Sharia Law has not changed. The Mosque (church) controls the government. These Sharia laws dates back thousands of years. As I said before - secularism is about a common set of laws to provide equity amongst inhabitants. Religious laws will dictate how much they participate within that equity Sharia Law is incompatible with secularism

Maqqa, i get where you are coming from and in essence (if what you said was true, and i believe you believe it to be) i agree with you .... the ideal model is separation of church and state ... but you've got the pathways all wrong.

Firstly, secularism didn't arise from Christianity. It arose despite Christianity. And it didn't just arise in Christian dominated parts of the world. It arose in many, Muslim countries included. What you need to remember is that Christianity disgraced itself so effectively, it gave rise to a counter-culture. To many counter-cultures in fact. Most were horribly persecuted, some still are, but that's how it goes, what?

Secondly, what i don't know about Sharia Law is considerably more than i do but i am certain i know more than you. Sharia Law isn't some blanket thing. It is actually applied differently across the board and not all applications are as brutal as say, the Saudis. In many instances it is a perfectly reasonable application of law, fair and humane. I want to clarify that any application of Sharia Law that involves the harming of another human being or diminishing the rights of women is categorically rejected by me.

But let us not forget that Christianity too has it's proponents that harm other people and diminish the rights of women. Women are not equal to men in Christianity.

In short Maqqa, you are romanticising Christianity and demonising Islam. You are incorrect on both counts.

I reiterate, i idealise a separation of church and state, whatever the church may be, and on that we agree.

mothra wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 2:07am:

Maqqa, i get where you are coming from and in essence (if what you said was true, and i believe you believe it to be) i agree with you .... the ideal model is separation of church and state ... but you've got the pathways all wrong. Thank you. But I think you misunderstood slightly Firstly, secularism didn't arise from Christianity. It arose despite Christianity. And it didn't just arise in Christian dominated parts of the world. It arose in many, Muslim countries included. What you need to remember is that Christianity disgraced itself so effectively, it gave rise to a counter-culture. To many counter-cultures in fact. Most were horribly persecuted, some still are, but that's how it goes, what? You'll note I said the secularism for the Christians started after the crusades. However before the Christians the Jews and other religious institutions have meddled in government in one form or another. Greeks, Romans, Chinese etc. Secondly, what i don't know about Sharia Law is considerably more than i do but i am certain i know more than you. Sharia Law isn't some blanket thing. It is actually applied differently across the board and not all applications are as brutal as say, the Saudis. In many instances it is a perfectly reasonable application of law, fair and humane. I want to clarify that any application of Sharia Law that involves the harming of another human being or diminishing the rights of women is categorically rejected by me. You'll also note in my post I didn't refer to any particular application of Sharia Law and I didn't refer to violence against women in this instance. However Sharia Law is a mix of religious and common law. It is the religious law portion which calls for the rejection of other religion. It is also the religious law portion that dictates and dominates the common law portion as well But let us not forget that Christianity too has it's proponents that harm other people and diminish the rights of women. Women are not equal to men in Christianity. As I have mentioned there are remnants of Christianity in our laws until this very day In short Maqqa, you are romanticising Christianity and demonising Islam. You are incorrect on both counts. In this thread I am simply saying that Islamic Laws have not evolved even after 920 years. It is still based on Q'ran, Sunnah, Haddith I reiterate, i idealise a separation of church and state, whatever the church may be, and on that we agree. Agreed. And this is where it peeves me to no end the moderate Muslim community has not strongly gone on the offensive. Saudi, UAE and other rich states that has Sharia law are only successful at it because their wealth. If we ask the women in those Sharia Law state "If you can live under another set of Laws where you have the same rights as men and Allah would think no less of you?" I think they would