Skip to main content

Freedom of/from Religion

When it comes to people crying out that they're having their rights with regard to religion stripped from them in this country, I find they're typically of the Christian faith. This country is predominantly Christian and has been for as long as I can remember (further back than that, as I'm only 30). Without prayer in public schools, The Ten Commandments displayed on government buildings, creationism taught in school, people uttering the words happy holidays in December, the separation of church and state, etc., some like to clamor that their rights are being taken from them - that Christians are the ones being persecuted in this country.

I find this almost comical for how ridiculous it is, yet also very common in like scenarios. When a person or group of people possess more rights than others, when said others obtain equal rights, it may feel to the first group of people that their rights have become fewer. That's not the case. It's just the fact that the others have more rights than they did previously. When women were given the right to vote, I'm sure there were some men whom felt as if their rights were becoming less, because they were so used to possessing more rights than women. They were the dominant gender, the one whom brought the money home, put food on the table, was in control so to speak. When women were given the right to vote along with other rights, that power and control men had felt had decreased substantially to the point where many likely felt that their freedoms were being stripped, but that wasn't the case.

I think the same philosophy can be integrated with religion. For how many years have Christians been the dominant force in this country as far as religions go? As far as image? Outreach? Coverage? Advertising? Etc.? If, for example, we're talking about the phrase "happy holidays," again, that isn't lessening the importance of Christmas. It's just heightening and just including the importance of other holidays. The same goes with "the holiday tree" or "holiday lights". Christians can celebrate Christmas in as extreme a manner as they'd like (well, so long as no laws are broken, I suppose). It's not like a name change on a traditional symbol of Christmas by a public group can alter the significance any for an individual family. Their rights haven't been infringed upon at all. What Christians want, I believe, is to be seen as THE religion in this country with all the others, while being able to freely celebrate what they wish, aren't acknowledged. Projecting an image of equality unto the public irritates many Christians it seems like and makes them feel as if they're rights are being taken from them, when that's not the case. Why we can't just celebrate the holiday(s) with friends and family as we so choose and not care what certain businesses say or do about it/them is beyond me.

What I really find amusing about all of this War-On-Christmas talk is the fact Christmas was originally formed to counter the Pagan's Winter Solstice. It's not Jesus' actual birthday and the holiday has become nothing but a capitalistic paradise, what Jesus would surely have wanted.

But, please, never fear Christians. You are the majority and won't be having your freedoms stripped from you anytime soon. On that note, Happy Holidays to you all!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...