[topic regretted] (was Jews against anti-Christian ...)

[Whistler]

If somebody wrote that today, they'd be called a terrorist in the making.

[Frelga]

Christmas and Hanukkah are in NO WAY equal. Christmas is one of the most important days in the Christian year. Hanukkah is a relatively minor holiday in the Jewish faith that happens to fall around the same time as Christmas.

And not even every year.

Somewhere along the line somebody thought that Jewish people should have "equal time" and so they concocted a bunch of Hanukkah songs using old melodies and stuck them into the series books that are still used in music classes today.

JS, this is not about giving Jewish people equal time. Quite simply, Hanukkah is the only other holiday around this time of the year for which people are buying presents. So their money need to be enticed into the stores.

Jews mourn commercialization of Hanukah as much if not more than Christians mourn commercialization of Christmas.

And all of a sudden, we had people thinking that "Hanukkah was the Jewish Christmas." (I still hear people say that.)

So did I, and the statement is incongruous even on the surface. Hello? If Jews celebrated Christmas, they would be, you know, Christians. When one stops to think about what Hanukah is really about, the phrase "Jewish Christmas" becomes just mind-bogglingly ridiculous.

If you want to give all religions "equal time" then you should really be teaching and singing about Yom Kippur and Rosh HaShannah in late September and October.

Good point. I meant to say a bit more about this in Chanukkah thread.

But look at it this way, JS. If you have a Jewish - or any non-Christian - child he automatically becomes out of sync with much of what is going on at school. School breaks are scheduled around Christian holidays, and my son has to miss school if he is to celebrate Yom Kippur, Passover or Rosh Ha Shanah. And I have to take time off twice - to cover for his breaks and for our own celebration, and I use up my vacation days for that, although our office is closed for Christmas, and DH's office is closed for Good Friday as well. And many schools schedule sports and other events on Saturday - the Shabbat - because the majority of families are of course Christian and they want to attend church on Sundays.

And then the entire December, and half the November is all about Christmas, commercialized or not. In recent years, a nod is given to Hanukah and Kwanzaa, but most years by the time Christmas rolls around Hanukah has already been and gone.

Really, does singing two songs about dreidels add up to equal time?

[Ethel]

Frelga -

I don't think I have any more to contribute in this thread (if I ever did) but I wanted to let you know I read your post with interest and sympathy.

[Sister Magpie]

It is ludicrous to think that singing an equal amount of songs from each holiday is somehow "balancing things out." It is even more ludicrous to sing Hanukkah songs and not sing Christmas songs at all, for fear of offending someone.

Exactly. Balanced does not mean everything but the holiday those guys over there are celebrating. I assume they probably think that they're doing Christmas with Grandma Got Runover By A Reindeer, but frankly, that idea is a little offensive. It seems to treat all the other holidays with reverence and then just make a joke out of Christmas.

Anthy, what happened at your office sounds like clear discrimination! And that in itself wouldn't even bad if it wasn't for the added insult to injury of someone suggesting you need sensitivity training for expecting equal treatment. They seemed to have admitted that they're just worried about a bigger stink from the Hopi side, so how dare they suggest they're acting out of some sort of fairness there?

At my office I think they used to get Good Friday off automatically. We don't know, but I think it's one of several alternate holidays one can take off. Christian holidays are considered very legitimate reasons to take off.

ETA: I keep thinking about this and I think what bothers me about the whole thing--not just the situation with Anthy but the whole issue of the thread--is that it keeps concentrating on the specific religion. So you have people looking out for whether Christianity is protected or Judism is protected or the Hopi Spirituality is protected, and you wind up with nonsense where you get one rule for one and another rule for another, and looking for balance.

As long as people are fighting for something for only one group there's always going to be another problem, or a backlash, or one group comparing suffering with another. Religious rights are supposed to be the same for all.

-m

[anthriel]

Frelga: I hadn't thought about what your frustration levels with this must be. I understand!

Your post did lead my wandering thoughts to places like Israel, though, where the predominant religion is NOT Christianity. I don't suppose they have state holidays for Christmas in, say, Saudi Arabia. I'm certain that Christians live there (I worked with a man who had been a Christian in Iran; WOW did he have some heartbreaking stories about what he suffered for his faith), but... I doubt they have days off scheduled for Christian worship in the House of Saud.


Just sayin.

Now, of course, America is different in that we are a melting pot, and we openly celebrate that fact. We also have the governmental idea of not having government interfere in a person's religion, and vice versa. Perhaps giving the secular holidays an official "off" and then guaranteeing a certain number of "religious" holidays off to be used where the individual would choose the date would be fairer.

'Course, that wouldn't help the Hopi women all that much, because they probably had 40-50 "religious" days a year, and I doubt the government would allow that many to be guaranteed. I always had my doubts about how many of those days were truly religious, btw. No proof was ever asked for, or offered.

<thinks dark thoughts, briefly>

Another way that America is different is that we feel that the only religion we can safely "gang up on" IS the predominant one. We have such a innate fear of ganging up on the little guy (although I'm certain it still happens) that the only truly acceptable religion to be prejudiced against (even though one would think that it is never okay to pick on someone's religion) is the BIG guy.

Does anyone here really think that if there WERE a state holiday in Saudi Arabia for a Muslim religious day, and the school children were to sing celebratory songs, that the in schedule of songs would not be a single song about the MUSLIM holiday, but would include two songs about Christianity and several of the "Grandma's Burka got Stomped by a Camel" ilk?

America is WEIRD.

[Sister Magpie]

'Course, that wouldn't help the Hopi women all that much, because they probably had 40-50 "religious" days a year, and I doubt the government would allow that many to be guaranteed. I always had my doubts about how many of those days were truly religious, btw. No proof was ever asked for, or offered.

I was going t ask about that, and had a feeling this was the case. People are the same all over, and I have no trouble believing there are plenty of people who would take advantage of this sort of thing.

-m

[Voronwë the Faithful]

ETA: I keep thinking about this and I think what bothers me about the whole thing--not just the situation with Anthy but the whole issue of the thread--is that it keeps concentrating on the specific religion. So you have people looking out for whether Christianity is protected or Judism is protected or the Hopi Spirituality is protected, and you wind up with nonsense where you get one rule for one and another rule for another, and looking for balance.

But Maggie, I think that's whole point of this thread (if I can try to speak for Jn just a little bit). Think about the title that Jn choose "Jews against anti-Christian defamation". Do you think that she was meaning to imply that Jews should tolerate anti-Semitism and only opposed discrimination against Christians? Of course not. Her point (if I may be so bold to say) is precisely that members of one group need to be prepared to oppose discrimination against other groups, including the so-called dominant group, because discrimination takes many different forms, both overt and subtle.

[Sister Magpie]

ETA: I keep thinking about this and I think what bothers me about the whole thing--not just the situation with Anthy but the whole issue of the thread--is that it keeps concentrating on the specific religion. So you have people looking out for whether Christianity is protected or Judism is protected or the Hopi Spirituality is protected, and you wind up with nonsense where you get one rule for one and another rule for another, and looking for balance.

But Maggie, I think that's whole point of this thread (if I can try to speak for Jn just a little bit). Think about the title that Jn choose "Jews against anti-Christian defamation". Do you think that she was meaning to imply that Jews should tolerate anti-Semitism and only opposed discrimination against Christians? Of course not. Her point (if I may be so bold to say) is precisely that members of one group need to be prepared to oppose discrimination against other groups, including the so-called dominant group, because discrimination takes many different forms, both overt and subtle.

Okay I admit I forgot about the title of the thread. I was referring to what to me was what the discussion was about, which is the War on Christmas rather than one group standing up for another. The point of starting the thread isn't always the same as where the thread goes.

-m

[Voronwë the Faithful]

To me (and this is of course just me) opposing discrimination based on any religion is opposing discrimination based on all religions. I don't see why opposing discrimination against Christians would lead to the conclusion that you are in favor of discrimination against Jews, or Hopis, or athiests, for that matter.

I have represented a Jewish person in a religious discrimination case. I have also represented Christians in religious discrimination cases. To me they are equally wrong.

[Frelga]

First things first - Anthy-pet, I'm so delighted to see you posting here!

Frelga: I hadn't thought about what your frustration levels with this must be. I understand!

Very low, I assure you. It's part and parcel of being a minority, something I've dealt with all my life, by choice or not.

My Orthodox Christian friends have a similar situation, as their Christian celebrations rarely coincide with Catholic/Protestant dates (Christmas is January 6).

Now, when the local high school scheduled school photos for Yom Kippur, thereby ensuring that no Jewish kid would be in the class pictures, and then got all snarky to their parents - yes, that was frustrating.

Voronwë, I agree with every word of your last post. Any chance of hearing more about those cases you took on?

[yovargas]

What happened to Anthy was blatantly wrong and looks clearly illegal to me. However, reading through the last couple pages of this thread, it dawned on me why the notion that there is an "anti-Christian" problem was bothering me. We have all heard of actions and policies that are anti-Jewish, anti-black, anti-female, anti-gay, ect. All these are things that are done because of a prejudice or fear or hatred towards that group: women being considered "lesser" then men, Jews being considered greedy, blacks being considered violent or criminal, gays being considered perverts, ect. In this sense, can what happened to Anthy be considered anti-Christian? No - the actions were not done out of some prejudice or fear of Christians or Christianity. They were done out of some ignorant gutless fear of some law that gets misunderstood and abused all over the place. Note that no government force was actually saying that Anthy couldn't have her Christian holiday off. It was some foolish company person, who likely hears things like the horror stories of the ACLU "persecuting" Christians - horror stories which I've seen the religious right constantly exaggerate, twist, or even outright fake - and is now afraid of the legal repercussions the Hopis might be able to bring against them. The stories Whistler sites sound the same - these people aren't afraid of Christians, they're afraid of lawyers. And why are they afraid of lawyers? Because people like Bill O'Reilly have convinced them that the ACLU and liberals are waging some war against Christianity, a war that doesn't exist.

[Whistler]

Well, I feel better now!

[JewelSong]

In this sense, can what happened to Anthy be considered anti-Christian? No - the actions were not done out of some prejudice or fear of Christians or Christianity. They were done out of some ignorant gutless fear of some law that gets misunderstood and abused all over the place. Note that no government force was actually saying that Anthy couldn't have her Christian holiday off... The stories Whistler sites sound the same - these people aren't afraid of Christians, they're afraid of lawyers.

But, yov, what difference does it make why the employers wouldn't let her have the day off? Or why the organizers of the "Holiday Festival" kicked the girls out for wearing t-shirt with the name "Jesus" on it? The result is that, because of their Christianity, they were denied something that was really a right.

And the fact is: other faiths were not denied the same thing.

I understand the semantics of what you are saying...and maybe the phrase "war on Christianity" is a misnomer. But ultimately, in the examples given, people who profess Christian beliefs are being discriminated against. It's not like NOBODY could wear a t-shirt expressing a religious belief, or NOBODY got a religious holiday off. ONLY Christians were denied.

To me, that's discrimination. If we want to respect ALL religions, that mean that we should include (duh!) Christianity. And if there is a blatant exclusion of one faith, as there was in the examples above, then that is something that needs to be addressed.

ETA: Frelga wrote:

Now, when the local high school scheduled school photos for Yom Kippur, thereby ensuring that no Jewish kid would be in the class pictures, and then got all snarky to their parents - yes, that was frustrating.

And stupid. How ignorant can you be?

[yovargas]

Oh, I'm not saying it's right (I said it was quite wrong), I'm saying that it's not anti-Christian because it's not being done to oppose Christianity. I would bet it would matter quite a bit to Anthy if the reason she was denied her holiday was because they hated Christians! And I'm saying that spreading the notion that the evil liberal lawyers are out to get those darn Christians is causing a lot of people to treat Christians unfairly out of fear of those lawyers - it's a self-fulfulling prophecy! And since I'm not convinced that these Christian-hating lawyers actually exist to any meaningful degree, then I'm saying the folks spreading that notion are the ones doing the harm, not this country's liberals.

[Frelga]

I understand the semantics of what you are saying...and maybe the phrase "war on Christianity" is a misnomer. But ultimately, in the examples given, people who profess Christian beliefs are being discriminated against. It's not like NOBODY could wear a t-shirt expressing a religious belief, or NOBODY got a religious holiday off. ONLY Christians were denied.]

As to that, again in the local school system a boy was prevented from wearing a shirt with the Star of David on it, although no one ever objected to children wearing crosses (not that I think anyone SHOULD have objected)

And stupid. How ignorant can you be?

Infinitely so, I'm afraid.

[JewelSong]

And stupid. How ignorant can you be?

Infinitely so, I'm afraid.

It never ceases to amaze me.

[Jnyusa]

[removed]

[JewelSong]

they would mandate a certain number of discretionary days each year for religious observance, the same way that most states mandate at least one week's vacation time each year.

That is how most public schools do it now. In addition to sick days and personal days, you are allotted X number of days for religious observances not covered by the regular school calendar.

The district where I work now has Yom Kippur and Rosh HaShannah off, because there is a large Jewish population and if they were scheduled as regular school days, half the school would be out.

We also have the week in between Christmas and New Years off, because...well, it's pretty entrenched into the societyal calendar and who the hell wants to work during that week, anyway.

But I have been in districts that do not have any of the Jewish Holidays (or Good Friday) built into the calendar, and then those employees who need the day may take it. Ditto for any other religious high holy days.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Yov, I hardly know how to respond to what you are saying, other then to say that no, I don't believe that it is "the anti-Christian" lawyers that are to blame. The cases that I have been involved in certainly did involve situations where people were discriminated because they were Christian. One involved a situation where a person was terminated from her job because she was listening to a Christian music station at work. Other people in the same position listened to other radio stations and were not discliplined.

[Ethel]

Yes, I think your points are well taken, Jn. But Anthy's situation keeps bugging me. It just seems like extremely poor management practice. I'm a manager myself. Every employee of my company signs off on an employee handbook that covers pretty completely things like holidays, vacation days, sick days, and so forth. It spells out that employees are entitled to use all their vacation days, but they must be taken only with the manager's approval. I'm not sure exactly what Anthy does, but I have the impression she's some type of lab technician. It's probably important to keep that position covered. This is true in my department, IT, as well. I simply could not manage my department as needed if my employees could take time off whenever they wanted to.

Summer vacations aren't difficult. Basically, whoever claims a particular week first, gets it. But everyone wants time off around Thanksgiving and Christmas (I almost typed "the holidays" ), and everyone can't have it. So early in the fall we sit down and hash it out. Seniority doesn't count for much as my employees are all pretty senior. But we take into account personal plans (whether family members will be traveling great distances to get together, for instance), who got what last year, etc. No one gets every vacation day they want, but people usually get the ones they want most. People who will be in town with no special plans are expected to be generous about offering to work, and usually are. I do my share of coverage.

I have been working for more than 30 years, in a number of different industries: insurance, health care, education, high tech and banking. I have never known of a situation where a privileged class of employees was permitted to take whichever days they want off, and without prior notice at that. It's no way to run a business.

In short, I'm feeling quite cross with your management, my dear Anthy. Why are they letting themselves be bullied with threats of lawsuits when all employees should have agreed, in writing, to the terms of employment up front? The word "cowardice" comes to mind.

But a dispute or even a lawsuit isn't the worst thing that can happen. Press stories to the contrary notwithstanding, unreasonable lawsuits don't go far. (I imagine Voronwë would agree - wouldn't you?) The worst thing that can happen, it seems to me, is to allow one group of employees to bully another group because of the fear of lawsuits.

In my first job as a manager, in the first year, I had to fire someone for cause. (Remind me to tell you the story some time; it's amazing.) He applied for unemployment; we declined to pay it; he disputed it. There was a hearing about it. The judge listened to the employee's story and to mine, then ruled against the employee. I remember being terrified beforehand, but in fact everything worked just the way it should have done. I honestly believe that's the way things usually work.

Grrr. Could I send them some material on management best practices?