dangin

Just work to get someone else elected. 2004, will you never arrive?

Jewel

Here here!

Mageth

This Easter season, join me in praying for peace, wisdom, and resolve.

I guess, for Bush, prayer works about 33% of the time.

Melkor

That is exactly the phrase I used in an argument I was having with someone on a different forum regarding John Ashcroft holding his morning prayer meetings in the Justice building.

Them: 'How is the Attorney General holding voluntary prayer meetings oppressive?'

Me: 'Oppressive? Not particularly. Offensive & innapropriate? Yes.'

Nikolai

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

GaryP

The message doesn't bother me too much because he qualifies the statement by adding "For Christians".

He really set me off yesterday (Easter) when I saw am impromtu statement right before or after the church service he attended.

He was standing with Laura and 2 POW helicopter pilots (I think).

He said (paraphrasing) All Americans should be proud of the great country we live in, these fine servicemen laying their lives on the line, and we should give all glory to the Lord.

He, the head of the greatest secular nation ever, is telling "All Americans" what and to whom we should give credit to!

That one raised my blood pressure!

themistocles

Well, we all agree it's not oppressive, and that's no fun, so let's make this controversial: why offensive and inappropriate?

Perhaps it's easy to make the case it's offensive in that it's a matter of perception. I'm sure most people were not offended, this is a democracy, he's echoing what most people either agree to or are apathetic to. Other than personal taste--which with there's no real counter-argument for (although it begs a degree of irrelevence)--what is offensive about the message?

Inappropriate? Nothing different from past presidents, it would be setting a precedent not to acknowledge a holy day. The message doesn't seem to say "you must" or "you will" or make much in presupposing anything that there isn't an understood current that he is addressing a specific topic, not making broad, sweeping statements. Hey, I'm as atheist as the next guy, but simply acknowledging religion as inappropriate--a religion not only widely observed, but which also happens to be the religion of the president himself (which means: no surprises!)--? I don't know. Seems a bit a big ado about nothing. It's a tizzy.

Jewel

I find it offensive when the president uses every opportunity to preach his religion (what do we pay him for, anyway??). Every time I've stopped to listen to one of his speeches (and I haven't listened to every one) and often when I've heard him talk off the cuff he's more than just mentioned religion. With most presidential speeches I've listened to in my lifetime I've always heard "God bless you all and God bless America" or some such at the end of the speech. I've never gotten terribly offended by that. I find it silly, but most probably do it because they feel it is expected of them. GW, seems to feel the need to take it further. If he had posted his Easter message on his personal web site rather than the whitehouse.gov web site I wouldn't be offended by it. And he didn't merely acknowledge the holiday, we got a whole Bible lesson.

As for inappropriate; putting blatantly Christian (or any other religion for that matter) messages such as the one quoted in the OP on a government web site sets a bad precedent, in my opinion. It gives the aire of athority. If it's ok for the president to do that, then why is it wrong to post the 10 commandments in the courthouses or a cross with the message "Christ died for our sins" on the lawn of the town hall? After all, they are just displaying the opinion of the majority. Seems like a slippery slope to me.

themistocles

Interesting point, Jewel.

I guess a wierd gedanken would be, what if a presidential candidate who was known to be atheist won (well assume he's a master personality, slick politician, amiable personality, whatever qualities that would win over the voting public)?

Would it be inappropriate for that president to pay tribute to the almighty reality that is politics and give a tip of the hat to the various religions of voters and make an address, which only really boils down to a tip of the hat to voters? "Proof that my atheism doesn't mean I'm ill-willed" sort of posturing?

Jewel

I suppose it would depend on how this hypothetical atheist (oh don't I wish) president acknowledged said holidays.

Said president could say something to the effect of "To those American's celebrating [insert holiday here], I hope you have a safe and happy holiday". That's pretty generic. It acknowledges the holiday without getting preachy. She or he could do that for pretty much any holiday for pretty much any religion without coming off as being hypocritical about it.

I've never minded the 'Happy Holidays' messages even though I don't celebrate most of the holidays. Most holiday's as practiced these days are actually more commercial than anything. But leave out the pandering. Religious people don't need to be told to be religious or how. And the rest of us don't either.