Jews Strive To Restore Christmas Trees At Seattle Airport

Arturo Magidin wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

Arturo Magidin wrote:

So you wouldn't mind an 8' swastika, a symbol used in various current
and recognised religions, either then?

The nazi swastika is different from the symbol in eastern religions;
the fold goes the other way.

Who said anything about the nazi swastika?

Fair enough. As I understand it, "swastika" refers to the nazi
symbol; the hindu symbol is called "shubthika" (good symbol).

Semantics. Do you think an 8' swastika-like symbol should be displayed
at a US airport on hindu/budhist festivals ? Or a crescent moon and
star on muslim ones (just as many muslims as jews in the US!)?



Many of those that know a Menorah is the official emblem of the Israeli
government would see it as a symbol of another invasion of territory.

The Hanukyah (Hanukah-menorah) is different from the Menorah in the
national emblem. Much like the star of David is different from the wiccan 5
pointed star.

The Menorah in the national emblem is a seven-branched
candelabrum. The Hanukyah, by contrast, is a nine-branched
candelabrum.

A minor detail.

Hardly a minor detail. Just like only the official emblem of the
american government must be a bald eagle, not just any kind of eagle,

They vary greatly too, "A" bald eagle is used, not the same "one".

so the national emblem of Israel must be a seven branched
candelabrum; a Hanukyah -must- be a nine branched candelabrum. Quite
simply, they are not the same thing. Just like the wiccan star and the
Star of David are not the same thing.

It's a *jewish, menorah* candelabre.


If you want to object to a Hanukyah display on some other grounds, go
ahead; we

Who's "we"?

can deal with those.

??? What do you want to make a deal about?

But claiming that it is "the official
emblem of the israeli government" is, quite simply, false.

A menorah candelabre IS the official Israeli state emblem, are you
saying it isn't?

Do you know any other countries who use a religious symbol used in
festivals as the national emblem?






--
================================================== ====================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about
what I accept as reality."
--- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes" by Bill Watterson)
================================================== ====================

Arturo Magidin
magidin-at-member-ams-org

Arturo Magidin wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

Arturo Magidin wrote:
wrote:
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:02:49 -0800, Laura Sanchez wrote:

Too bad Christianity doesn't return the favor.


Excuse me? It's Christians that are the only ones defending Israel and
denouncing anti-Semitism.

By refusing to add a menorah to the airport display?

It's not just some kind of festive decoration.
The menorah is the NATIONAL EMBLEM OF THE "STATE" OF ISRAEL Like the
eagle is to the US!:

http://www.science.co.il/Israel-Emblem.asp

You are confused.

The Menorah, the symbol that appears in the official seal of the state
of Israel, is a seven-arm candelabra; the Hanukiyah, the "Hanuka
menorah" has a different number of arms. They are different emblems,
just like the Star of David is different from the Wiccan five-pointed
star.

A minor detail, just like people will first think "nazi" when they see
a swastika, no matter which way round it is.

If that is your "argument" with regards to this, then you have just
shot yourself in the foot.

Not at all.


The vast majority of americans identify the candelabrum (7- or
9-branched) with Hanukah, not with the state of Israel. They call both
"menorah" (the former correclty, the latter incorrectly), and usually
misidentify a 7 branched candelabrum as a Hanukyah and think
"Hanukah". Few are aware of the difference, and the overwhelming
association is that of the holiday, not the political association
(exactly the opposite of the shubhtika, where most people will
misidentify it as political rather than religious). In any case, you
claimed that the 9-branch candelabrum -is- the "national emblem of
the "State" of Israel". And that is, quite simply, false. Explain it
away all you want now, you were still wrong.

Liar.
I never specified the amount of bloody candles of any menorah, so I am
not wrong about any number.
It's a menorah wether it's got seven or nine candles.
A menorah is both the Israeli state symbol and the festive one, and I
can think of quite a few people who would find it offensive,
particularly at an international airport.




--
================================================== ====================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about
what I accept as reality."
--- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes" by Bill Watterson)
================================================== ====================

Arturo Magidin
magidin-at-member-ams-org

On 14-Dec-2006, "Mark K. Bilbo" wrote:

On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 08:38:26 -0800, markzoom wrote:


Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:02:49 -0800, Laura Sanchez wrote:

Too bad Christianity doesn't return the favor.


Excuse me? It's Christians that are the only ones defending Israel
and
denouncing anti-Semitism.

By refusing to add a menorah to the airport display?

It's not just some kind of festive decoration.
The menorah is the NATIONAL EMBLEM OF THE "STATE" OF ISRAEL

NO, IT IS NOT.
The chanukiah "menorah" used at Chanukah has eight branches and one in
the middle; the Israeli Menorah has six and one in the middle. It is
distinctly
different and for a reason that bigots like markzoom will never grasp - and
on
purpose.

Like the
eagle is to the US!:

http://www.science.co.il/Israel-Emblem.asp

I would find it highly offensive to have an 8 foot foreign state
emblem displayed by legal imposition in my country.

Which is, of course, why no one is suggesting it.

But hey, maybe
yanks should know who their real masters are.

That's stupid.

Yes, he is.

Doesn't matter what it means in Israel, this isn't Israel.
Here, many regard it as a religious symbol. If we're going to let one
religious symbol be displayed on public property at public expense, we
should let all of them be displayed.

Exactly.

Susan

On 14-Dec-2006, wrote:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:02:49 -0800, Laura Sanchez wrote:

Too bad Christianity doesn't return the favor.


Excuse me? It's Christians that are the only ones defending Israel
and
denouncing anti-Semitism.

By refusing to add a menorah to the airport display?

If there's a choice between displaying all religions and displaying
none - and that was ultimately the choice - then the better option is
to display none.

Which is fine, just so long as you don;t BLAME the people who only asked for
equal time.

Christmas trees are nonreligious

Except for their NAME, and that they only come out AT XMAS.

Susan

On 14-Dec-2006, wrote:

However, if it is tragically and incorrectly decided in the courts that
to display Christmas trees is to endorse Christianity, then Christmas
trees should be removed rather than overtly religious displays such as
menorahs,

Menorahs have been deemed secular by the courts who have
also deemed the trees as secular, too, even tho' neither is.

Susan

nativity scenes, and the like, added.

On 14-Dec-2006, "Robibnikoff" wrote:

"Laura Sanchez" wrote in message
ups.com...
Too bad Christianity doesn't return the favor.


Excuse me? It's Christians that are the only ones defending Israel and
denouncing anti-Semitism.

Excuse me? Christians used to burn Jews at the stake.

I' m betting that Laura is relying solely on a specialized definition
of Xian - as in, no true Xian would ever do that....

Susan

On 14-Dec-2006, wrote:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

I notice nobody asking why it is tax money has to be spent on ornaments
rather than silly things like, you know, fixing potholes or even
something
really absurd like airport security...

That attitude could help explain why socialist countries have such a
reputation for being ugly, spirit-killing places.

Yeah, 'cuz they don't even bother to fill in the potholes, either.

Susan

On 14-Dec-2006, "Sancho Panza" wrote:

"Tchiowa" wrote in message
ups.com...

wrote:
On 13-Dec-2006, " wrote:

James A. Donald wrote:
But you guys are trying to suppress even the secular
aspects of Christmas - you were suing against the
display of Christmas trees

Who was suing against what display of Xmas trees? The ones in
SEATAC?\

Even if anyone was - which no one is doing - the proof
that the trees and all the other attendent crap really is NOT
secular is that it is ONLY brought out AT XMAStime.

???? Did you think that Christmas trees should be brought out on the
4th of July?

Thanks for admitting that they are, indeed, religious symbols of one
religion only.

There is an undoubtedly religious side to Christmas. Trees are not part
of that. Trees are part of the secular side.

Of the religious holiday, yes.
Thanks for admitting it again.

The Rabbi complained about
trees.

The rabbi didn't complain about the trees. He made a request for his own
display. Quite a difference there.

Not that he'll ever admit to it - that would get in the way of his hatred
and lies.

Susan

On 14-Dec-2006, James A. Donald wrote:

James A. Donald:
But Xmastime is the time of the return of the sun -
it follows the shortest day of the year. Nothing
directly to do, except symbolically, with the birth
of that notorious Jewish heretic that you seem to be
so remarkably upset by.

Mike Hunt
That is the point. It is symbolically linked to the
birth of Christ, hence the name of the holiday.

But then, your basic grievance, or flavia's basic
grievance, is having a holiday on christmas,

You know you've lost more than the argument when
you have to tell such major whoppers like this.
Even if you don't admit it - WE know it.

Susan

hence the
impossibility of appeasing the lawsuit mongers by any
lesser measure.

wrote:
On 14-Dec-2006, wrote:

However, if it is tragically and incorrectly decided in the courts that
to display Christmas trees is to endorse Christianity, then Christmas
trees should be removed rather than overtly religious displays such as
menorahs,

Menorahs have been deemed secular by the courts who have
also deemed the trees as secular, too, even tho' neither is.

Excellent. Then it should be perfectly fine to display just menorahs,
just Christmas trees, or both, or neither, without any implications or
any basis for lawsuits.

Thus there is no basis for complaint that Christmas trees and not
menorahs were displayed. To complain about such a think is like
complaining that banana trees and not orange trees were displayed.