Christmas is a European pagan tradition, really we base our holidays around seasons of which due to the importance of them also feature many religious events.
On the other hand its turned into a decedant festival of feasting and alcohol so the pagans kind of won on that one. Which is also the reason for celebrating it for all the non-christians that do.
I’d argue the reason it’s still celebrated is capitalism. Easter is more important in most Christian traditions than Christmas, but less celebrated in society. Why? Follow the money trail. Ask Coca Cola, the modernizer of Santa Claus.
Except for like all the places still celebrating Yule, imbolc, halloween. If Christianity never genocided its way across Europe, we’d still be celebrating at these times with many of the same customs.
Plus if we let the Christian’s get away with stealing everything, we’d have nothing left.
But you’re right, we can do more to remove religion from government.
This is actually how the US was built. The freedom of religion wasn’t meant to all of them but for Christianity. It’s why some historians are calling the US a theocracy.
I know of a rugby player who refuses to play on Sunday because it conflicts with his religious belief. and while it will not sound plausible that I can’t remember his name, I swear I am not making it up.
But I think there is room for give and take – Muslim students and kids aren’t refusing to go to school. They are just being excused for prayers. So demanding to be let out of school all day would be overkill, don’t you think?
Or, you know, none of that bullshit? We could just let it slip back into the primordial muck with superstition and shitting into our bare hands… But, no. We like our invisible sky daddies and not being collectively intelligent. 🫥
Or, like, we could maybe recognize that humankind has always had diversity of beliefs, and just go ahead and respect that fact within reason.
That’s the problem with anti-theists pretending their beliefs aren’t a religion. By acting like it’s something different, you think it gives you permission to call for taking away other’s rights. I respect atheism, but people like you can keep your bigoted hypocritical fundamentalist Atheism to yourselves.
There are plenty of reasonable definitions of religion that would apply to atheism, but even that aside, it’s a-theism, not a-religionism, it’s a rejection of theism, and while many atheists do come at the topic from a generic anti-religion angle, there are many atheistic religions, like The Satanic Temple, who are doing fantastic legal work as a officially recognized religion to fight the current right wing legal nastiness like the abortion ban in Texas by arguing they have religious freedom to preform abortions.
So you’re right in the strictest sense that the philosophy of atheism is not de-facto a religion, but next tmme I would recommend making an actual argument rather than incoherent swearing at someone with a mildly spicy take, you’re making us all look bad.
Depends on context. In regards to a lot of Federal discrimination legislation like that in Canada, atheism is actively protected under the subheading of “religious belief”.
In some Provincial discrimination legislation it is covered by the term “creed” rather than religion but if something goes to the level of the Federal Supreme Court then for purposes of protection against discrimination or for matters of hate speech atheism is considered for all purposes legally a religious belief.
Linguistically laws often term Atheism more broadly as a set of spiritual beliefs. Believing entirely in the absence of the supernatural is still describing what you believe about spiritual matters. Atheism is not a complete absence of belief. You still have things you believe about spirits - you believe they do not exist. If you truly had no spiritual beliefs you would have to be completely unaware that the concept of the belief of the spiritual exists at all including disbelief in the spiritual.
Fundamentally law that applies atheism as a religion employs this logic despite religion having connotation of an internal dogma - something absent in atheism.
Too ignorant. There is no pretending. Not having a belief is not a belief.
Believers are the hypocritical ones. By definition. And you can be very lucky that religion is still supported by some states. Because it really shouldn’t be. Nothing in religion reflects reality.
Might as well invent a tax for used-up mind-energy for people who think a lot. Who cares if mind-energy can be proven, you’ll gladly pay it, right? Riiiight? Thoughts have to come from somewhere. The big energy-thought-pool. There should be six days of think-rest per year to protect the energy balance. No thinking allowed. How does that sound? Let me write that down, so people in 1000 years can use my book as proof.
Who are the hypocritical ones, sitting on their holidays and rituals, and forcing them on everyone? It’s not the atheists.
You’re sounding rather manic here. Relax, the evangelicals are not coming to get you.
I personally would prefer it if we could shake off the last vestiges of christocentrism in our culture - the predominance of their national holidays, their stranglehold on government and taking away women’s and lgbtq rights, and even the documenting of history based on bc and ad.
But your assertion is illogical because religion is incidental to bigotry, sometimes used as a vehicle for it, but not inherent to it. For example I once worked as an intern for a summer camp owned and operated by a Lutheran church. It was run by a pastor and her wife, and much of their operations were specifically meant for sheltering and supporting lgbtq+ youth. They never once made any attempt to convert me, and only ever made me feel welcomed and accepted for who I was.
One of the core problems with most branches of Christianity, historically, and into today is the idea of religious exclusivism. They hold that the only valid belief is their belief, and everything else is false and must be done away with. This idea that only Christianity was valid is what allowed them to feel justified in the eradication of pagans in ancient Rome, forced conversions in Europe, and the genocides and cultural erasure of indigenous people on Turtle Island.
So for you and other antitheists to say that only atheism is correct and valid, is just another form of religious exclusivism. Clearly you are already calling for the cultural erasure of all these other competing beliefs, just as the Christians in antiquity did. And likewise, state-atheism already has a history of oppression under Mao and Lenin. Are you a tankie too?
As a sidenote, it would be more accurate to say agnosticism, or even agnostic-atheism are nonbeliefs or nonreligions. But the more proselytizing and dogmatic Atheism gets, the more religiony it gets. So yes you are religious, and yes you are hypocritically guilty of the same bigoted religious exclusivism that your oh-so-hated Christian brothers are. You want to be better than them? Then don’t be like them. Support a religiously plural world, a world where we can explore belief freely and still respect each other despite, or even because of, differences of worship.
You should write a book. Some people might believe it. But in my opinion, it is complete bullshit.
I believe in no God. There was never a god, and there will never be a god. A creature with powers? Maybe. I watched Star Trek. But a god? Creator of everything? Never. That is what atheism means.
Yet I have to live with theists, and they yield a lot of power. Not god-given, but self-imposed. I’m not angry. But you talk about LGBTQ rights? Where is my right to ignore theist holidays? There are laws against that. IMO, you are the bigot. Talking about rights.
And that is not a religion. And I’m not acting religious. I don’t see why you interpret that as being angry, but you are already trying to convert me to something of your liking, something that is in its core dividing and prone to create inequality.
So no, I will not yield and simply say, oh, what gives. Religions are destroying freedom. Often on a state level. Much worse than the LGTBQ community has to face. Religion basically created the hate against LGTBQ. So don’t tell me to oblige.
There is no god, so everyone acting in god’s name is misguided. They sometimes do good. Fantastic. And trying to defend freedom is not a religion either. Every animal does it. Humans just argue about it more.
Nothing you say can convince me of a god. Not even a God showing up could. He’d be “god-like” at best. I do not believe in any god.
I’m not trying to convert you, atheism is fine and has a lot going for it. So give the persecution complex a rest. Having to share a world where other people are granted their own rights, does not necessarily infringe on your rights. You think your freedom is infringed because people get days off on theist holidays? That’s like when straight people complain about gay marriage. Don’t like gay marriage? Nobody is forcing straight people to be gay. Don’t like theist holidays? Then don’t celebrate them.
And you say yourself that if God themself came down, you would still not belief in God? That’s like when a Christian says that no amount of evidence contradicting the Bible can shake their faith in the Bible. The whole idea with atheism is to be skeptical and evidence-based. And yet here you are with a faith so strong it cannot be shaken by anything.
Antitheists are as hypocritical and cognitively dissonant as carnists. Believe whatever you want, but here’s a reality check: there are as many religions as there are people. The world has always had a diversity of belief, and always will. You will always have to share this planet with theists. Any program that seeks the eradication of all but one religion will always be a hugely destructive and traumatic failure, because humans are always looking to disagree with each other and explore new possibilities. And yes, at a certain point atheism becomes a religion, particularly when it becomes dogmatic and institutionalized. You’re not special. You in particular have demonstrated a religiosity that is only comparable to the staunchest Christians.
You really do not get the point. Atheism does only mean to not believe in a single, almighty God.
I have no problem accepting powerful aliens, extradimensional beings, or unimaginable creatures. As long as they can be proven not to be hallucinations.
Whatever they are, they are not God, because God is some contradictory being thought up by people, conjured out of nothing, without relatives or ancestors. Religions based on such concepts are nonsensical in the least.
The stories are inconsistent; the whole concept is ridiculous. No matter what comes down, I will not believe. Atheism is not a religion.
I could accept religions being wrong, and that people mistakenly declared some alien to be God, and invented ridiculous stories around the concept.
It’s what monkeys do, jackass, and even they know better than to believe some kid-diddlin’ geezer in a frock who says his dad is watching you breathe. Jog on.
Unless the country’s primary religion is on the line, you are not going against all religion - you are going against the specific religion in question (or religions). Systems resit change, so if you advocate for “let’s not give this minority’s religion equal rights, and instead take away the rights of the primary religion” only the first part will get implemented.
Analogy: Whenever there is a talk about legalizing same sex marriage, someone will always argue that the state should not get involved in any kind of marriage. Does this position have merit on on its own? Yes. But when presented in the contest of same sex marriage legalization, is it anything but pure support of continuing the oppression of same sex couples?
Your logic is flawed insofar as “tolerance for intolerance” as well as propped up by complete conjecture & hyperbole. (Eg. “only the first part will get implemented”, “Whenever there is a talk about”, “But when presented”, etc. [citations needed])
Got any more general purpose fit-all objections? The only thing here that is at least a bit specific is the “tolerance for intolerance” thing, but even that is completely unrelated - while many religions have their share of intolerances, celebration holidays is not one of them.
How is a common rest day bullshit? Don’t take the weekends away. You could even prohibit supermarkets from opening on sunday/Saturday to encourage it. In Germany this is rather common. (But with too many exceptions and little flexibilty)
Japan has Golden Week. China usually shuts down entirely for their New Years. Several European countries have multi-week holiday periods in the summer. It’s definitely a thing outside America.
Maybe for some lucky folks. I get Christmas Day. If the boss is feeling generous hey may let us leave early on Christmas Eve. We’re off for Easter, but since we’re closed on Sunday anyway it’s not actually a holiday.
How about holidays because humans are living, breathing, thinking, emoting beings that need decent food, shelter, rest and recreation? The closing of businesses on at least one weekend day need not be religious. If we run oit for a day or two, we get some from a neighbor or are just out for a day or two?
hear me out, i may be less for adding more religious holidays.
this is based on trying to use b and h as a professional service. they close for EVERY Jewish holiday. there’s so many of them. so many more then Christian holidays that others close for. AND they still close for those Christian holidays.
it makes them unpredictable and hard to use. if they also started taking off Muslim holidays they’d be closed every 2 days… that’s just too much. i don’t think we as a society can afford to take that many holidays.
it’s very hard to explain to you boss why we have to delay because the partner we’re contracted with is closed until Monday because of a holiday that your boss has never heard of.
This would be my argument for allowing people of various religions to take their religious holidays, but not require everyone to take them (if they don’t want to).
So (and these will all be hypothetical because my knowledge of holidays across various religions is pretty poor – sorry) :-
Imagine there are four main religions in the UK – Potterism, Everdinery, Swannism and Sherlockian.
Potterism celebrates the 31st of July, 31st of October, the 2nd of May, the 1st of September and the 19th of September as its holy days.
Everdinery celebrates the 10th of March, the 20th of May, the 31st of August, the 9th of January and the 5th of July.
Swannism celebrates the 3rd to the 5th of May, the 10th of August, the 12th of September and the 12th of December.
And Sherlockian celebrates the 1st of February, the 9th of March, the 12th of June, the 24th of September and the 10th of October.
Along with all these, all four religions celebrate the 31st of December, the 1st of January and the 23rd of August. Just because.
(Really making this up as I ago along).
The celebrants of each religion can take their days off as a holiday (without using up their paid holiday allowance), but businesses do not have to close. Bank holidays become a thing of the past.
Schools ignore them, and school holidays are arranged around more sensible times (summer holidays, spring holidays, winter holidays).
Religion is taken out of public life more or less altogether.
Now I accept that in “real life” this will be more complicated, but businesses can adapt for Jewish, Muslim, Christian and other workers and would not need to shut down on such a wide scope
The only exception might still be Christmas, because that has become more of a secular thing than a religious one.
I listened to an interesting podcast about something like this, it might have been on 'cautionary tales '. Apparently at one point some Soviet area tried organising everyone’s days off in shifts instead of everyone taking Sunday off and factories lying idle. Basically tho you actually loose a lot of the social value of days off if you don’t get them at the same time as other people. Can’t visit your family or friends unless they have the same day off as you, for example. And what if your kid’s school’s day off isn’t the same as yours?
That was the lesson I got when I started working and finally had my holiday. Great, I’m off, but no one else is. At least all of the museums, attractions and activities are open.
But conversely if everyone is forced to take the same day, or days, then it entirely ignores the idea of different cultures.
In Islam their… (sorry – can’t think of a better way to phrase this) their Sunday is Friday. So it is most likely that in a Muslim family most of them would want their rest day to be Friday.
Christians would take Sunday. The Jewish day of rest is Saturday.
Yeah – there’d be allowances for schools, and teachers in state/secular schools.
I understand the friends problem, and it’s something to work around, but as I said if you force every culture and every person into taking the same day just because one culture or one religion says “this is the day” then… it seems somewhat dictatorial.
I find the opposite. Nothing is more frustrating than a Holiday where everything is all closed as well. Sometimes you see enough of family and friends and you have life stuff to catch up on.
I’ve known a lot of people who thrived on Second- and Third-Shift, or found jobs that let them trade holidays with their own day-off of choice, and/or made sure to work weekends and take weekdays off. The world stopping for everyone at the same time is great if you want to sit on your couch and watch tv, but can get in the way if you want to live your life.
My da hosts a Bible study group in their home, and recently I glanced at a booked they were going through called “The War on Christianity” or some shit like that. I just gave a short laugh and said “Oooooh, you poor oppressed Christians!” before my mother gave me “the look” that said “I know how you feel, but please don’t start shit right now.”
These people have no idea what oppression is. They think that people having negative opinions of Christianity is “oppression”. They think that folks fighting for abortion rights is “oppression” against Christians. They think that folks telling them that they gave no intention to get involved in their religion is “oppression”.
They are still allowed to gather freely, to hold positions of power, own homes and businesses, proselytize, protest, etc.
They’re just mad that they’re finally being called out for their harmful, hateful, and bigoted viewpoints. It’s “oppression” because they can’t force everyone else to follow their rules.
It’s easy to see why they feel that way. Imagine an Affirmative Action style of law was passed to prioritize felons to get jobs. Non-felons (who have ALL the advantages) would suddenly find themselves occasionally losing a job a person who is different for genuinely wrong reasons. “I didn’t get the accounting job because someone who did time for 3 counts of Wire Fraud applied and got preferential treatment”. If that were me, I’d be pissed. In fact, I’d feel a little bit oppressed. I mean, same direction but hitting your later points. What if a law came out protecting people on the sexual predator registry against being discussed or discriminated against? I think you and I could agree to riot in the streets, no? Even though it be protecting a minority from the majority.
As wrong as their mindset is, they think Christianity is the one and only “right thing” wrt religion. So despite being the majority, if someone gets any protection from them for being “wrong”, they feel as oppressed as you might feel if you couldn’t stop a child predator across from the town’s elementary school… Now you and I know that there’s no foundation for Christians to say all other religions are wrong and theirs correct, but Christians who feel that way don’t.
Again, it might not help to understand why there’s some logic to their complaints, but it’s context and knowing our “enemy” can be valuable…
That’s not quite the same thing though because you’re talking about giving another group of people preferential treatment over everyone else.
But what things like abortion laws give people is the right to self-determination. No one saying that anyone who doesn’t want an abortion has to have an abortion they are just saying that it’s an allowable option.
In your example it’s like saying that exfelons have the right to have their record sealed once they’ve served their time. They’re not given preferential treatment they’re just equalized to everyone else.
That’s not quite the same thing though because you’re talking about giving another group of people preferential treatment over everyone else.
Obviously. I’m explaining how people with a flawed mindset think, not defending that mindset.
But what things like abortion laws give people is the right to self-determination
Also obviously true. There are some common-sense counterpoints (basically, anti-choice folks don’t act like abortion is murder, they pretend that it is, and that shows their lie), but if a person genuinely thought abortion was literally murder, it becomes an apple-to-apple comparison to their broken alt-right point of view; and importantly, it’s consistent. Consistent viewpoints are often harder to rebut than ones with obvious self-contradictions.
In your example it’s like saying that exfelons have the right to have their record sealed once they’ve served their time. They’re not given preferential treatment they’re just equalized to everyone else.
That’s why I didn’t use that example. I’m trying to show why certain twisted beliefs are consistent enough for millions of people to hold them. If my example were ex-felons (while it is a somewhat more appropriate comparison) it would not lead to an internally consistent viewpoint.
As I said to the other commentor, my explanation isn’t about trying to defend that user’s parents to him. It’s trying to help him understeand, a basis through which they can perhaps decide what to do next, or not do next.
Then you missed my argument. I’m trying to help the reader get an understanding to his family’s insanity, not say their insanity is correct. There is no knowledge that is not power. So knowing how the other side thinks is important.
I understand it just fine. And it’s still fucked up.
“It’s okay to bomb Palestinian civilians because the Jews are God’s chosen people and the land was given to them as their divine right” is unforgivable. Yet, it’s part of my da’s religious belief because “it says so in scripture.”
If you’re using religion to justify harm, direct or indirect, you’re a shit person who has no business telling others how to live their lives. And they can shut their fucking mouths if they try to tell me how they’re the real oppressed ones.
Isn’t Hanukkah more comparable to something like Pentecost in importance instead of Christmas? Meaning, not important at all to most of the modern day practioners. And the only reason why it is brought up so much is because it happens to somewhat coincide with Christmas so people can be inclusive with their happy holiday wishes.
Hanukkah isn’t an important religious holiday, but it is an important cultural one. Partly because it’s adjacent to Christmas (for north american Jews at least) and partly because the story occurred later on in Jewish history compared to much of the Holy texts.
I don’t know anyone who takes days off work for Hanukkah, most just want to be home for sun down to light the candles.
The Muslim Christian comparison doesn’t really hold up, holy days they actually get off happen 2-3 times a year but Muslims have to pray five times a day every day. I would hope if a Christian or any other religion (or heck non religious students who need a mindfulness break) would be respected for a prayer break. Otherwise it would be unfair.
That said more holidays sounds great so by all means give us the Muslim ones off of school too 😎
Christians by the bible and old customs are also supposed to pray in the morning noon and evening. Thats why the churches ring the bell at those times.
So it is only by not taking their religion all too serious anymore that christians dont ask for their noon prayer.
I know Catholics and Anglicans have liturgy of the hours, but based on what I learned in my studies they have never been mandatory save for priests and nuns! Contrasted with Islam where praying five times a day is one of the five pillars of the faith and salvation is seen as dependent on those.
There seems to be a misunderstanding here. I assume you’re referring to Psalm 55. Psalm 55:16-19 (NLT):
But I will call on God,
and the Lord will rescue me. Morning, noon, and night I cry out in my distress, and the Lord hears my voice.
He ransoms me and keeps me safe
from the battle waged against me,
though many still oppose me.
God, who has ruled forever,
will hear me and humble them.
That’s not a mandate, it’s a description of how often David prayed. But there is a mandate in 1 Thessalonians 5:16-18:
Always be joyful. Never stop praying. Be thankful in all circumstances, for this is God’s will for you who belong to Christ Jesus.
God is always listening, and He doesn’t like it when prayers (as in people who pray) babble just to check boxes. The same almost certainly applies to scheduled prayers. If there’s a legitimate purpose, there’s nothing wrong with that, but praying just because it’s praying time doesn’t make sense. Especially since we’re supposed to keep the comms open all the time anyways.
Not sure how you are interpreting the Thessalonians verse, which EXPLICITLY says “never stop praying” as god doesn’t like it when people pray for no reason. Seems to me that, at least for this specific verse, this is exactly what god wants.
I’m back with more research. In the original Greek, the word used there was “adialeiptōs,” which is typically translated as “without ceasing.” Looking up its definition, I got “without intermission, incessantly, without ceasing.” The word was also used as part of the following verses (KJV because it’s a more direct translation):
For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers (Romans 1:9)
We give thanks to God always for you all, making mention of you in our prayers; remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father (1 Thessalonians 1:2)
For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. (1 Thessalonians 2:13)
And in adjective form:
that I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. (Romans 9:2)
I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day (2 Timothy 1:3)
The most common interpretation among theologians seems to be the “keep the comms open” kind of thing, but it looks like another valid interpretation, especially given that last verse, is more like “don’t take any days off from prayer.” Nor periods of the day. In other words, be praying a lot, and never pause that practice.
I didn’t mean that was how I was interpreting Thessalonians. That bit instead stems from Jesus talking about how to pray. He said something along the lines of “don’t babble like pagans, who think they’ll be heard because of their many words.”
“Never stop praying,” depending on how you read it, either means “be praying at literally every moment,” “never abandon the practice of prayer,” or some more vague “be in the attitude of prayer all the time.” I always thought it was the latter, as some translations say “pray without ceasing.” The first just doesn’t make sense. I’ll have to do some more research later. But that’s why I said “we’re supposed to keep the comms open all the time anyways.”
For daily prayers, yes that is a daily occurance. We pray 5 times a day but only the afternoon prayers are something we’d need to take a break for.
But you can work around it and you might only need to take a 5 minute break once a day. So like the post and you have mentioned it’s not that much of an interruption.
However, Fridays are a different story. We have to go our sermon which might be an hour so. In the US Saturday+Sundays are off so that’s not something that would interfere with a work/school schedule. Personally, in our high school we held our own prayers after school on Fridays. But I know for a fact that didn’t work for all my Muslim peers.
Holidays are another issue, we’d need to take 2 days off a year to observe our holidays. I wouldn’t go as far as so say this is systemic oppression. You just get an excused absence or use pto lol.
Where it would become a problem is if your requests to take off work/school were to be denied. But thankfully that isn’t usually an issue in the US.
Besides, in some school districts non-Christian holidays are starting to become recognized and may already be off.
Overall there is a consistent minor friction causes by daily schedule differences. And especially in school a student may never even ask for accommodations for fear of being “different”. Even though when you ask generally when you ask you will be accommodated.
The ENTIRE COUNTRY (the UK this is) will be forced to SHUT DOWN for the weekend, whether they are Christian or not. Banks. Businesses. Everything will close for the entire weekend.
But wait – it gets worse.
The school year is split into three terms – Winter, Spring and Summer. And because Easter is so early (because a bunny looked at a gopher’s shadow or something) the Spring term starts in January (with the New Year) and ends on the 24th of March (I think). That’s barely enough time to get kids settled in their classes. Then the summer term is like A BILLION WEEKS LONG because Easter is so early.
Then — when Easter is a lot later – you get the two bank holidays in May (one of which is religious, one of which isn’t) that fuck up the summer term and make it almost not worth going back for the one week before you are off again.
This is entirely because of Christian holy days
And on top of all this there is the fact we still keep “Sunday special” – a day that only one religion gives a crap about. Thankfully we are getting over that and starting to treat Sunday like every other day of the week. But if you ask most people they think it should still be “a rest day” because it is Sunday.
This entire country bends over backwards to accommodate Christianity in everything it does, and yet the Little Englanders always feel Christians are hard-done by.
Well like I said I have no issues with the holidays being changed! Either adding more or changing the dates so everyone can celebrate their own religious or non religious traditions on the same days. Agree with you about Sundays too, nobody should be forced to work that day but otherwise I don’t think it should be treated differently. I don’t think that changes the leaving class to pray points though.
This entire country bends over backwards to accommodate Christianity in everything it does, and yet the Little Englanders always feel Christians are hard-done by.
Might be one of those “you don’t respect me as an authority but I’m going to act as if you don’t respect me as a person” kinda things.
It is not legally required for places to close for any of these holidays, and a large amount simply do not (whether it’s the majority or not I cannot say). I have worked in many places where I don’t get these days off.
On these holidays… most people go out and go places which need people working, so businesses choosing to close on these holidays is their own decision, which they should do in my opinion, it’s nice to know that you and everyone you know is off. I don’t really care why we’re having the holiday.
I’m pretty sure Sunday trading laws do actually require businesses to close early on a Sunday.
Yeah I’ve just looked it up;
any shop that is over the size of 3,000 sq ft (somewhat arbitrary size but there you go) may only open on a Sunday between the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Attempts to remove this restriction have historically been politically blocked
The rest of the time they can do what they want which usually means 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. or just 24 hour
Most supermarkets will be 24-hour except on Sundays when they weirdly close at 4:00 p.m. - if they were legally allowed to be open longer I’m sure they would be.
Can you say Merry Christmas or is that oppressive in the states?
I left the states and started traveling before that became a thing, and I noticed when I visited years later that everyone said happy holidays instead of Merry Christmas.
What’s the general culture rule on that now?
Do I say Merry Christmas and then the other person just says happy whatever their holiday is?
It was also quite confusing as a Brit. Here a “vacation” is called a “holiday”. And here the people are not so religious, Christmas is more often celebrated unreligiously now, saying Merry Christmas is not really an issue. The first time I heard “the holiday season”, I presumed that meant summer, because people go away on summer holidays then.
I always thought that was an interesting quirk between American English and British English. The work “holidays” comes from “holy days”, which would be specific religious days where you don’t have to work. A “vacation” is when you vacate your place of work temporarily.
What’s funny is I still say Merry Christmas out if pure habit, which would probably make one of these Christofascists happy until they see my actual lifestyle, music, etc.
Saying Merry Christmas isn’t political. If some mouth breather who votes against their own economic interests thinks it’s political, that’s their burden to carry.
You can say “merry Christmas” . You can say “happy Hanukka”. You can say “happy holidays” or whatever other holiday greeting you’d like to give.
Some people may get pissy, but they aren’t worth wasting your time on. If someone doesn’t like the way in which you wish them a good day, they probably have more going on than you have time to help with. Move on and enjoy your day.
I usually say “happy holidays” and have never had someone correct me or argue with me and I grew up in Texas, where the religiously entitled nut job roams the countryside as far as the eye can see.
Add comment