• Front page
• Receive this content on your RSS reader

This Speakout has not been edited

By Dave Petteys Roxborough Park

A couple of years ago Target banned "Merry Christmas" and substituted " Happy Holidays", being politically correct, not wanting to offend the "non-Christians". They even banned the Salvation Army from placing their traditional bell ringers to collect charity for the poor, [after all, that's the government's job, not that of faith-based organizations, right]?

In today's Investor's Business Daily, (3/20/07, page A-2) there was a note that Target "has reassigned Muslim cashiers at some Minn. Stores after they objected handling sales of pork such as bacon." So we have a situation where Target doesn't mind offending Christians, but bends over backwards NOT to offend Muslims!

We also remember recent articles concerning Muslim cab drivers at the Minneapolis airport who refuse to transport alcohol and dogs. In the secular view, continual accommodation and tolerance to any "legitimate grievance" is the order of the day. Soon, they may refuse to transport women not in burkas and not accompanied by their husbands, instituting Taliban style Islam right here in the good old US of A.

Kowtowing to this humiliation stems from the "progressive" notion that our society and culture are no better than any other. Our precious gift of liberty and prosperity is taken absolutely for granted and not appreciated, certainly NOT worth fighting and dying for! After all, multiculturalism, civil rights and tolerance of absolutely everything are the prime virtues!

What the secularist apologists refuse to see is that the continual demands by the Islamics will not cease until they have carved out little Islamic Republics all across America, with complete independence from American jurisdiction and the institution of Shari'a Law.

The "Progressive" apologists will argue "we gave sovereignty to Native American tribes, why not Islamics?"

Some secularist apologists say "if they want Shari'a Law, let them have it!" But what secularists refuse to grasp is instituting Shari'a Law requires non-believers to live in a Dhimmi status (second class subordination to Islamics). I would wager to say the secularist apologists aren't anticipating paying the 10% zigat (tax) to the local mosque complete with the monthly slap in the face (to remind them of their inferior status).

Nor do they realize this constitutes a surrender of the Rule of Law to the whims of the local Imam and his black clad Hamas style militia. Where will the secular "prime virtues" be then? I wonder if the secularists realize they are trying to commit suicide?

READER COMMENTS

Keep a watchful eye and don't take our freedoms for granted. Muslims won't sell pork? Then let them sell nothing. Muslims won't carry a passenger who is toting alcohol or a dog. Then restrict them to carrying Muslims only. If Muslims don't like America and her Christianity let them go back to their Muslim countries and remain there.
Muslims want to change this country to suit their religious agendas. Americans better wake up and quit ignoring all the signs of an Islamic directive to rule this country and all of the world....read the Qur'an, that book tells it all. They are using our laws and generosity against us, plain and simple.

Michael, I did 8:33 on saying happy, merry or whatever only one one day and happy holidays from pre-holloween to new years day. I don`t know why may names keeps getting dropped.

Target is a private enterprise and has the right to call the holidays whatever it likes...just like Chick Fil'A has the right to be closed on Sundays if it wants to.

Let me see if I get this straight - just because Target doesn't require its Muslim employees to handle food items they consider to be against their religion, this means that we're now establishing "sharia law" in our country? I'll hand it to Mr. Petteys - if he ever ends up out of a job, there's a bright future for him in stand up comedy....

Offend me,Whip me, beat me, make me feel cheap, used and abused! Just keep up the diatribes--they're really quite amusing!

So, is 8:33 and 8:12 and Sharon B all from you Sharon? I'll tell you one thing- you get a whole lot more responses if you be sure to sign your posts. For starters, people take you more seriously. For another, people start to get an idea who you are and what you think. Finally, they can responde directly to you, and hold your feet to the fire if you argue back with just nonsense- and that makes them more likley to invest the time.
I already do almost all my shopping on-line, but not because the clerks bother me- it's the customers (and their kids) that drive me nuts.

Michael. Good idea, compromise it is. It is never right to insult someone because of their religious believes or practices, but if I say happy winter solstice on the 21st I can`t be responsible for someones hurt feelings. What they want to hear and what happens may vary. Actually I am dead set against canned, forced greetings and faked cheer expected from business employees. I would much rather have people say something like thank you for shopping here, or hope you can find your car in the parking lot. One more have a nice day and I may start shopping on line. Glad you answered me about the posting order they have. Also, it is nice to get a reply, people obviously spend a lot of time on their letters and must love getting some feedback

8:33
How about a compromise? You say "happy whatever" to support your holiday and good wished to fellow humanity, and I will say "Merry Christmas," and the city government and store management doesn't get to tell me what to say on that topic regardless of who I work for. Plus, a Christmas display CAN have a baby Jesus even on town property, and if someone wants to build a display to celebrate Winter Solstace on town prorperty, that's okay too. (get ready to hear Merry Chirstmas from about 85% of people, though). Fair enough?

Sharon- They do that from time to time to expose the dope-smokers, since anyone who doesn't notice direction of the flow of the argument sounds really silly ; ) (yes, I AM just kidding).

Am I the only one who notices our posts are out of order? The answer comes before the question. Reply before the letter

How about a compromise? Mid October we start saying happy holidays , with happy Thanksgiving, winter solstice etc: till after new Years day. On Christmas day we say Merry Christmas , thereby giving each day its due but only on that one day. No fair saying Happy Winter Solstice a day early or late. Stores can put up happy, merry , wonderful or what ever they want because that is generic friendliness that means nothing and has no feeling behind it. Empty form with no filling. Wouldn`t Christians rather have one day of heartfelt " Merry Christmas" than a bunch of self serving forced greetings from merchants? Well?

Daves comments are 100% accurate as far as what the Islamists want. ALL Infidels can either die, submit to a 2nd class citizenship, basically slavery, or convert to Islam.
To dmz, if we were not taxed so heavily, more people would be willing and ABLE to donate to churches and others who help the poor.
Mike Trimble makes a very logical case for that point. But one major problem of today is being forced to be 'politically correct'. Frick that crap. Celebrating diversity and multiculturalism is nothing more than Socialism dressed up and called something else. Our society has been covertly steered towards a point of critical mass where if we don't take back our Constitutional Republic soon, we won't have a chance. The mainstream media have made it abundantly clear in the last 35 years that Christian moralitly is despised and should be eliminated, and that any and all forms of deviant behavior are perfectly acceptable and should be considered the norm. If you don't think this is an accurate opinion, then take a moment to read this: http://www.newswithviews.com/Spingola/deanna69.htm
and see if you have observed any of these points in your own life in the past 35 years or so. Then, if you care about your childrens futures, do something to defend the Constitution and your nation. Otherwise, put your head back in the sand and hand over the Vaseline to those who oppose what this nation was founded upon.

Dmz-
Interesting comment, but factually incorrect. Christian charities did much more before government started creating social programs, and Western Civilization (which is the product, like it or not, of Christian influence) is more humane in the areas you mention than any society that has ever existed- and more so when you consider things like the end of slavery, which is also directly tied to Christianity in this country and in England. Even today, when taxes go down, charitable giving goes up- both in Christian charities and in secular charities- but in terms of charitable giving, not only do Christians tend to give more than non-Christians, but conservatives also tend to give more- and most of those evangelical types are conservatives, aren't they? Which brings up another point: 100 years ago, virtually all charities were Christian charities (let me stress that: v-i-r-t-u-a-l-l-y. I don't want to hear about it when you come up with one or two that were secular, even 100 years ago.)Of course, that's because nearly everybody was, at least nominally, Christian here. What you see now, among other things, is government at various levels actually limiting what charities can and cannot do, or mandating things that conflict with the foundational beliefs of the organizations that run the charities, causing the charities to back off on services, as in the case of Catholic Charities adoption services in, I believe Massachusetts, if memory serves. Check it out, bud, I think you will change your mind on some of this stuff- if you are open minded about it. There's a pretty good argument to be made that the church did a better job of social programs than LBJ's "Great Society" has ever managed to do- partly because charities never institutionalized helplessness like government can be prone to do.

Christians opened themselves up for ridicule when they allowed demogogues like Falwell and Robertson and Dobson to represent them, and Jesus became a Republican. Christians are "offended" that many have observed how in recent years they have turned away from their own values--generosity, humility, kindness--and replaced them with greed, entitlement, and a seemingly bottomless yearning for political power. They proudly take credit for being the dominent cultural force in this country, yet claim to be helpless victims of oppression (taking a cue from the various "rights" and "liberation" movements of previous decades and having observed how much other socio-political groups have gained from it--and feeling that because of this, something has been taken away from them). They're also influenced by the KKK and other "supremacy" a/k/a hate groups who argue "If you don't acknowledge our rights to our beliefs, you're just as bigoted and intolerant as you accuse us of being."

Nowhere is this more obvious than their obsession with homosexuality. They like to claim homosexuals make up less than 1% of the human population, yet at least 80% of their public agenda is their condemnation of homosexuality, gleefully--and incessantly--citing one or two abstruse references they've found in the Bible, conveniently ignoring everything else the Bible more clearly condemns. Anyone who points out this unfairness is, of course, immediately branded hostile to Christianity.

The "war on Christmas" business is simply an embarrassment, not worthy of adult debate, unless Christians can cite actual occurrences of people being dragged out of church and forced at gun point into the malls every December. In truth, the pagans didn't take December 25 away from the Christians, it was the other way around. To be sure, for many years Christians had a lock on December; but then non-Christians, tired of being disenfranchised, finally stood up and said, "Wait a minute. This is our world, too. We have a holiday in December that's important to us as well. And the public forum belongs to us just as much as it does to the Christians." Unfortunately, Christians don't seem to want to share, considering the general "Happy Holidays" a slur on their--dare I say it?--supremacy. Nothing's been taken away from them (they're free to celebrate holidays however they want, just not free to demand that everyone else either play their way or defer to them) except their Number 1 spot on the socio-political food chain which they've held onto for too long and are not being very gracious about relinquishing. "This is a Christian country!" they insist, which is as offensive and inaccurate as saying it's a "white" country.

Jesus was once asked is seven were enough times to forgive someone who has wronged you. Jesus said, "I say seventy times seven times." If you're any good at arithmetic, that comes to 490. Apparently, Christians today seem to feel they've come to #491. No More Mr. Nice Guy.

Great commentary Dave, and as for you dmz, your doctor said there would be problems if you quit taking your Prozac.

If you don't like Target's policies...DON"T SHOP THERE!! It's called a boycott, and, the reason Government stepped in to help the poor, is because faith-based institutions ( read orphanages and poorhouses) failed to help, I can only surmise because all those "good Christians" were too cheap to practice what they preached. and still are... talk is cheap, and so are "conservatives"....I guess they want to "conserve" their wealth for themselves. They sure whine when the taxman comes-a -knockin'...

Our constitutional laws outweigh Islamic laws any day.

While this article makes some valid points early on (i.e., I believe, if you don't want to give rides to people carrying alcohol, or ring up pork products, quit your damn job), the last few paragrpahs are classic straw man arguing. "Progressive apologists?" "Secularist Apologists?" (oww, too many -ists!). Exactly who are these people to whom you refer? I haven't heard anyone say these things. You even put their supposed statements in quotation marks, meaning it's a direct quote. Well, from whom?
I've never met anyone who has said "if they want Shari'a Law, let them have it!" But if they do exist somewhere, you have very bravely and effectively refuted their argument. That strawman is speechless!

"OK to offend Christians, but not Muslims"
Yes, well, Christians only throw bombs in Ireland. It's much SAFER to offend Christians.

After reading the article about Linda Damms' three dogs I can only surmise that they were treated much better than the daughter she and her long-gone husband brought into the world. This has become typical with parents wanting to accessorize with children and dogs, the lucky dogs have it better.

POST A COMMENT

• Why so much turnover in mayor's office?
• Hearing on the Ruby Hill towers
• Let freedom ring
• Promoting socialized medicine
• Immigration Laws or Lack Thereof
• Atheist Diversionary Tactics
• The "Melting Pot" is unique to America
• Many mighty hearts covering the world