Rhode Island’s ‘holiday’ tree upsets lawmaker; governor says it respects religious liberty

[rug]

By Associated Press, Updated: Tuesday, November 29, 1:47 PM

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Rhode Island’s governor is defending his decision to call the 17-foot blue spruce recently erected in the Statehouse a “holiday” tree rather than a “Christmas” tree.

Gov. Lincoln Chafee says the term “holiday” tree is in keeping with Rhode Island’s founding as a haven for religious tolerance where government and religion were kept separate.

In a statement issued Tuesday, the independent governor encouraged individuals upset with his decision to focus their energy on volunteering, such as feeding the poor.

In January, lawmakers passed a resolution declaring the annual Statehouse tree to be a “Christmas tree.” Republican Rep. Doreen Costa, the resolution’s sponsor, says Chafee is disrespecting the Legislature and takes political correctness too far.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/rhode-islands-holiday-tree-upsets-lawmaker-governor-says-it-respects-religious-liberty/2011/11/29/gIQAvfcH9N_story.html

[MineralMan]

1. I have a "Holiday" tree in my living room.

As an atheist, I put nothing of a religious nature on that tree. Nothing. It's a tree to celebrate the winter solstice and all the celebrations that occur around that time. I celebrate none of the religious holidays, including the pagan ones that were the origin of the tree. But, the solstice comes, despite religious beliefs, and is a physical event that anyone may celebrate. It signals the end of the shortening of the daylight hours in the northern hemisphere. For people living in northern climes, as I do, that's something definitely worth celebrating.

That it coincides with religious holidays is of some interest. It seem that religious people also think the winter solstice has importance - enough so that they've pinned the birth of one mangod to that date, despite all the evidence to the contrary. They're sort of usurping the real reason for the celebration, it seems. They've even taken a common pagan symbolism to heart in that celebration. How interesting, it seems to me.

[Goblinmonger]

2. That people get their panties in a knot about the word "holiday"

is clearly too ironic for them to even grasp.

[dtexdem]

3. What, Jesus Island only has a holiday tree?

;-)

[NMMNG]

4. Christmas isn't a holiday?

In January, lawmakers passed a resolution declaring the annual Statehouse tree to be a “Christmas tree.”

Good to know that in these rough economic times lawmakers are focusing on truly important matters.

[Nihil]

5. Good for the governor!

> Gov. Lincoln Chafee says the term “holiday” tree is in keeping with Rhode Island’s
> founding as a haven for religious tolerance where government and religion were
> kept separate.
> ...
> The colony’s hands-off policy toward religion quickly attracted sects that had been
> persecuted elsewhere. Rhode Island boasts both the nation’s first Baptist church and
> the oldest surviving Jewish synagogue.

Now *that* is a tradition to be proud of maintaining: tolerance of all (or none)
rather than favouring one or two.


> In a statement issued Tuesday, the independent governor encouraged individuals
> upset with his decision to focus their energy on volunteering, such as feeding
> the poor.

Subtle!

:toast:

[trotsky]

6. Where in the bible does it tell Christians to have a Christmas tree?

Oh yeah, there is this verse...

Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen....For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and hammers, that it move not."

[jeepnstein]

7. Context...

That particular passage deals with idolatry. Of course you could argue quite convincingly, and I wouldn't disagree, that there are some who make their "Christmas Tree" something far more than what it really is. At least we don't have some denomination out there praying to the tree yet.

Jeremiah 10
God and Idols
1 Hear what the LORD says to you, people of Israel. 2 This is what the LORD says:

“Do not learn the ways of the nations
or be terrified by signs in the heavens,
though the nations are terrified by them.
3 For the practices of the peoples are worthless;
they cut a tree out of the forest,
and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel.
4 They adorn it with silver and gold;
they fasten it with hammer and nails
so it will not totter.
5 Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field,
their idols cannot speak;
they must be carried
because they cannot walk.
Do not fear them;
they can do no harm
nor can they do any good.”

And I personally think that politicians who want public money spent on religious symbols on public property are crossing a line. It's one thing to put up a tree for a bit of decoration, it's entirely another to use that tree as a bludgeon in the culture war.

[trotsky]

8. Thanks for your personal preferred interpretation. n/t

[jeepnstein]

9. As opposed to yours out of context?

The passage you chopped apart had nothing to do with Christmas trees, unless someone is worshiping the thing.

[trotsky]

10. So you claim with your personal preferred interpretation.

Again, thanks!

[jeepnstein]

11. I quoted the entire text...

before and after the part you snipped out. It's the same approach I use when discussing matters of scripture with another believer. Context matters if one is trying to arrive at an understanding of what a document actually says as opposed to what one wants it to say.

If you don't like the fact that the entire text does not support your conclusion then that's not my problem. It clearly did not say what you were implying.

[trotsky]

12. I'm not disagreeing with you that you quoted a larger block of text.

I'm just thanking you for presenting your personal interpretation of the text.

But wait... are you telling me that you and you alone can interpret the bible perfectly and accurately?

[jeepnstein]

13. No.

But I am telling you that your selective use of text is in error. You are wrong on that one and you know it.

[trotsky]

14. That is again your preferred personal interpretation.

If you are so sure your interpretation is correct, go set the Jehovah's Witnesses straight. When you finish with that, there are a lot more bible verses I'd like you to correctly interpret and then take to other Christians around the world to show them their error.

[jeepnstein]

15. It is what the text clearly states.

Written language is a beautifully precise thing despite the best efforts of many to make it not so. In this case the text is quite clear. One would have to be deliberately obtuse to take any other meaning from it other than what is spelled out in black and white. That's not always the case in scripture but it certainly is in this one.

And yes, I do quite often engage brothers and sisters in discussion over the meanings and context of scripture. Some times it's to correct another, some times it is to seek correction. It's a thing that we must study if we hope to apply it in our lives. Simply taking someone's word for it is not sufficient.

[trotsky]

16. That sounds exactly like what Fred Phelps or Pat Robertson say.

They are just as supremely confident that they are correct (and that you are wrong).

Tell you what, when you all agree on what these "quite clear" words say and present a unified front, then you can lecture me about how another interpretation. Is definitely wrong.

[jeepnstein]

17. I'm not discussing this with Robertson or Phelps.

Either you can read or you cannot. If a person reads something and then make a completely absurd claim as to what it says, then that's on them. I don't care if it's a religious type or an atheist. Your statement about the Christmas trees was silly, and I firmly believe you intended it to be so. There's nothing wrong with that. But If I'm going to call BS on a Robertson or Phelps then I have to do it on Trotsky as well.

This has been a fun exchange but I think I'm going to start looking for a different shiny bait to chase for a while. If we don't lock horns again any time soon, have a Merry Xmas!

[Goblinmonger]

18. So Jehovah's Witnesses can't read?

I know for a fact if I made a claim like that about some Christians in here, my post would be deleted and people would jump all over me.

But you get to say that about a Christian sect that disagrees with your interpretation.

So much for tolerance.

[jeepnstein]

20. I never said that you coulnd't read.

As a matter of fact I suspect it's quite the opposite.

It is true that some denominations take some real pains to make the scripture fit their required world view. A prime example is that travesty taking place at a little church in Pike County, Kentucky right now. Locally this is a huge deal and I fully expect other congregations to come down on them like a loving ton of bricks.

As a adherent to the principles of the Restoration Movement I can't just come out and start flaming someone in a denomination for their practices. Much like I am doing with you I would point out scripture in it's full context and invite discussion of what it says. It's not a matter of having to be right or them wrong so much as we need to actually spend time studying what we've been given and striving to stay true to it. There's a lot of room in the New Testament for churches to evolve differently as long as we stay in agreement on fundamentals. How can we reach agreement on those fundamentals unless we are willing to study together? Some folks react badly to having to question their own world view, some see it as a chance to grow.

[Goblinmonger]

21. Do you honestly not see the arrogance of your post?

"take some real pains to make the scripture fit their required world view."
But YOU, YOU know what it really means and aren't making it fit your world view.

"It's not a matter of having to be right or them wrong..."
That's not the attitude you took earlier with the "you took it out of context" comments not to mention the "either you can read or you can't."

[jeepnstein]

25. So what does this text mean then?

I read it as an admonition to the people of Israel to not pay heed to idols. It's not exactly one of the more confusing passages of the Old Testament. What's your interpretation? I'd really like to know. I'm quite willing to stand behind my assertion that this passage is correct.

Jeremiah 10

God and Idols

1 Hear what the LORD says to you, people of Israel. 2 This is what the LORD says:

“Do not learn the ways of the nations
or be terrified by signs in the heavens,
though the nations are terrified by them.
3 For the practices of the peoples are worthless;
they cut a tree out of the forest,
and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel.
4 They adorn it with silver and gold;
they fasten it with hammer and nails
so it will not totter.
5 Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field,
their idols cannot speak;
they must be carried
because they cannot walk.
Do not fear them;
they can do no harm
nor can they do any good.”

[cleanhippie]

26. Friend, you are missing the point.

It is not about what the passage ACTUALLY means, its that the passage can mean whatever the reader WANTS it to mean. This is true for EVERY passage in the bible.

Who gets to decide what means what?

[Goblinmonger]

27. Perhaps I suffer from knowing trotsky too well.

He has indicated below his point in posting what he did.

I have no thoughts about that passage. Really don't even care, if I'm being honest. The point is that every time a progressive Christian says that the Bible means X, there is a RW Christian saying it means Y and neither one has the ability to claim they are right, though both will likely claim that.

[Nihil]

29. I suspect it means something different even to you ...

... if you were to consider that the craftsman in verse 3 cut
it into the shape of a cross ...

3 For the practices of the peoples are worthless;
they cut a tree out of the forest,
and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel.
4 They adorn it with silver and gold;
they fasten it with hammer and nails
so it will not totter.
5 Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field,
their idols cannot speak;
they must be carried
because they cannot walk.
Do not fear them;
they can do no harm
nor can they do any good.”

Oops? :shrug:

[cleanhippie]

22. "some denominations take some real pains to make the scripture fit their required world view."

And what make YOU so sure that YOU are not doing the SAME. EXACT. THING?


Are you really so obtuse that you do not see the point being made here?

[jeepnstein]

24. I depend on people...

who don't necessarily agree with me on anything to keep me honest. No, I'm not sure I'm doing the same thing. And it worries me greatly at times.

[trotsky]

23. My initial post may have been tongue-in-cheek but you are avoiding the issue here.

You steadfastly claim you have the 100% true and correct interpretation of a bible passage. I merely noted that this is exactly what other Christians - all of whom certainly disagree with you on at least one bible verse - also believe. Until and unless you all can convince each other whose interpretation is REALLY correct (or even come to a reasonable consensus!), you don't really have a lot of authority to challenge even a sarcastic interpretation.

[Major Nikon]

19. If Christians had any sense they would be all for calling it a holiday tree

If you call it a holiday tree, no it's not longer a religious symbol and would be considered secular. If you call it a Christmas tree, now you've gone down the path of putting up religious symbols in the town square and if I want to put up a 15 foot tall pentagram right next to your Christmas tree, there's not a helluva lot you can do about it other than piss and moan like they are now.

[Odin2005]

28. The Xmas tree is a Germanic pagan symbol.