We should continue to say Happy Holidays in public events, not Merry Christmas

"For someone who seems very concerned about establishing a precedent that caters to people who are overly sensitive and too easily offended, you seem very sensitive and easy to offend. " I'm establishing the difference between someone's right to offend somebody, and telling someone what they are allowed and not allowed to say in public. I'm not offended when you say Happy Holiday, that's your right to say. I'm offended when you make me have to because you're overly-sensitive. There is a difference between the right to say what you want in public, and being told what you can not say. The latter has many great and logical reasons to be offensive in and of itself. "Does saying "Happy Holidays" really offend you? " I don't care if people say it. That doesn't offend me. Being told I have to say it because you're sensitive does offend me. You're idea is that people can only say Happy Holidays in public, while mine is saying you can say what you want in public. --------------------------------------------------------------- "But if you don't know their preference, then don't be presumptuous and assume that their preference is yours. " I don't assume someone celebrates my holiday. I just say Merry Christmas anyways, because to me it is still Christmas (not Hanukkah or Yale), even if they aren't Christian. While it's not Christmas to them, it is to me. They do not have to say Merry Christmas if they do not celebrate it, they can even say Happy Newtonmas if they want to, and I will freely continue to celebrate my own holiday, while they celebrate theirs. --------------------------------------------------------------- "You repeatedly reference the First Amendment and Freedom of Expression, but that is on the individual side. " No. You think the First Amendment is the right to only speak in private, and in fear of offending someone, but it's not. It's the public right to speak freely in public and around people who may disagree with you. Anything other is not Freedom of Speech. Trust me, I have more on this at the bottom of the page. It is not Freedom of Speech if it's limited to your house, or where other's agree with you. It's only true Freedom to speak if you're allowed to display your religion and beliefs even if no one around you agrees with them. --------------------------------------------------------------- "This is not only in the Bill Of Rights itself, but it has been interpreted and expressly ruled on by the Supreme Court In Everson v. Board of Education (1947) when the Court drew on Founding Father Thomas Jefferson's correspondence to call for a specific "wall of separation between church and State. " We are not talking about Church and State. We are talking about freedom of speech in public locations. You're switching from "public places" to "Government. " The Constitution protects the Freedom of Religion, something that can only be accomplished if Religion can speak freely in public (not to confused the Public with the State,) especially if the people speaking are equal tax payers. You can not protect Freedom of Speech unless the Government and the People allow it to be spoken freely, even in public. --------------------------------------------------------------- "Take care of yourself and whatever your individual beliefs, enjoy them to the fullest. In conclusion I wish you "Happy Holidays" whatever they may be. " Indeed, I shall take care. And notice I am not getting mad that you said Happy Holidays. The phrase does not offend me. Being told what I can and cannot say does offend me though. But I feel we are not done let, even though this is Round 5. You never addressed the topic of what this decision leads to. "We are having a discussion on whether or not it is offensive to say Merry Christmas, and whether or not we should be allowed to say Merry Christmas in public. If it is decided that saying Marry Christmas or Happy Hanukkah at public events is not allowed, than how long before the overly-sensitive decide no religion should be expressed in public at all. After we conclude that it is inappropriate to say Merry Christmas in public, it wouldn't take long for people to begin discussing whether or not it's appropriate to say anything religious at all in public. Although the discussion already loosely exists, you would fuel it by concluding on a discussion that is loosely the exact same" My prior argument. .. You never discussed this, even though it made up a good portion of my argument. It's true though. When you say "Merry Christmas" is inappropriate in public, you set the standard for anything religious to be considered "inappropriate" and excluded from the public. This is for a simple reason. .. If saying "Merry Christmas" is too inappropriate, than certainly saying "Praise Allah" or "Praise the Lord! " is even more inappropriate. --------------------------------------------------------------- What you want isn't 'inclusive' at all. In theory, your idea would lead to people getting kicked out of the public square for saying "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Hanukkah. " That's not inclusive. What happens if we decide Holiday greetings like those are inappropriate? What happens if afterwards, someone starts the discussion about anything Religious being inappropriate? You do not include everyone by forcing them to say only what you want to hear. Does getting kicked out of a city event (or even fined) for saying "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Hanukkah" sound inclusive? You simply begin including only people who agree with you. Do you see the hypocrisy? The only true way to include everyone is to let them come as they are, and with their own preference, be it Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, or Happy Newtonmas. Only then do you include all people. --------------------------------------------------------------- I have been saying this, and I will say it again. "Freedom of speech is not the 'Freedom to speak as long as everyone approves. '" "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. " 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. I shall take that apart for you. .. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" They will not make a law prohibiting the free exercise of religion, be it in Church, the Home, or in Public. They will not say you have to say "Merry Christmas" and they will not say you are not allowed to say "Merry Christmas". "or abridging the freedom of speech" They will not enforce a law that abridges your Freedom of Speech. This means it will not be waived, even for the easily-offended. . http://www.usconstitution.net... --------------------------------------------------------------- With this, I conclude by saying that the Freedom for one to speak of his own religious holiday in public shall not be prohibited, and his right to say "Merry Christmas" may not be abridged for the easily-offended, unless he himself chooses to, but he may only choose for himself and not for others. We must understand that by making one form of religious speech forbidden in public, we open the gate for all forms of religious speech to be forbidden. It doesn't have to start with a big form of religious speech either. Once you determine one form of Religious or Personal speech is inappropriate, you've determined they are all inappropriate. The only way to include all people is to let them come as who they are, celebrating their own religious holiday. To ban "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Hanukkah" is excluding them.