Is this our very own KY Cabal John "Jack/Hack" Hanbury?? If so, I guess he has more time to compose these little letters to the editor berating the ACLU now that he's running his own not-so-busy law firm.
quote: Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH "http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041215/OPINION03/412150314/1014/OPINION Is this our very own KY Cabal John "Jack/Hack" Hanbury?? If so, I guess he has more time to compose these little letters to the editor berating the ACLU now that he's running his own not-so-busy law firm"
That letter is signed "John" not Jack, so I don't know if it is the same Hanbury of USM infamy. Regardless of who wrote it, it is a great letter and I agree with it in every detail. I make that statement as one of the most adament supporters of this message board and of AAUP's mission. But whether or not the Christ in Christmas should be replaced by an X in Xmas is a different type of freedom-of-speech issue which I hope will not become a part of this board's discussions.
NO QUARTER & MERRY CHRISTMAS! They are not mutually exclusvie.
quote: Originally posted by: X for Christmas, T for Tennessee " That letter is signed "John" not Jack, so I don't know if it is the same Hanbury of USM infamy. Regardless of who wrote it, it is a great letter and I agree with it in every detail. I make that statement as one of the most adament supporters of this message board and of AAUP's mission. But whether or not the Christ in Christmas should be replaced by an X in Xmas is a different type of freedom-of-speech issue which I hope will not become a part of this board's discussions. NO QUARTER & MERRY CHRISTMAS! They are not mutually exclusvie. "
sorry . . . I can't agree with this letter at all. It is simply a rhetorical gambit. Those of you who have taken Logic 101 -- ever heard of the "straw man argument?"
No one has attacked anyone's right to say "Merry Christmas" This is a thinly veiled excuse for Hanbury (it is the same one, his real name is John) to attack the ACLU, liberals and secularists for the "crimes" he'd like to use this excuse to link them too.
quote: Originally posted by: X for Christmas, T for Tennessee " That letter is signed "John" not Jack, so I don't know if it is the same Hanbury of USM infamy. Regardless of who wrote it, it is a great letter and I agree with it in every detail. I make that statement as one of the most adament supporters of this message board and of AAUP's mission. But whether or not the Christ in Christmas should be replaced by an X in Xmas is a different type of freedom-of-speech issue which I hope will not become a part of this board's discussions. NO QUARTER & MERRY CHRISTMAS! They are not mutually exclusvie. "
Whoa, Nellie! I have an Xmas tree up at my house, as we speak. I have no problem with people celebrating Xmas or Kwanzaa or Chanukkah or Winter Solstice or any other winter holiday or none at all! I just thought that it was funny (if it is indeed the same Hanbury) that he now had time to write about such trivial (IMHO) matters.
quote: Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH "Whoa, Nellie! I have an Xmas tree up at my house, as we speak. I have no problem with people celebrating Xmas or Kwanzaa or Chanukkah or Winter Solstice or any other winter holiday or none at all! I just thought that it was funny (if it is indeed the same Hanbury) that he now had time to write about such trivial (IMHO) matters."
sorry -- case of tunnel tunnel vision . . . . the little black lines on the screen are actually beginning to squiggle . . . .!!!!
Is it illegal to sing Christmas carols in public school? Or to display a manger scene or even to say the words "Merry Christmas" in those halls of learning?
Many public school officials act as though such prohibitions were clearly laid on in the Constitution and defensively ban every vestige of "religious expression" out of fear of an expensive ACLU lawsuit.
But this year, help is on the way: An army of 700 lawyers is being deployed to protect America's schools from the ACLU grinch.
quote: Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH "Whoa, Nellie! I have an Xmas tree up at my house, as we speak. I have no problem with people celebrating Xmas or Kwanzaa or Chanukkah or Winter Solstice or any other winter holiday or none at all! I just thought that it was funny (if it is indeed the same Hanbury) that he now had time to write about such trivial (IMHO) matters."
Yep, truth. I missed your main point. I do understand now. Please accept my apology. Like they say, an idle mind's the devil's workshop. Maybe both mine and Jack's are too idle. When I opened up Hanbury letter on my computer, word ADVERTISEMENT in big and bold at the upper right. At first I thought his letter might actually be his advertisement!
Okay, you've pushed one of my "hot buttons." First, Stephen Judd is absolutely right, the original letter is just posturing.
Second, the "x" in "xmas" is not a substitute for "Christ," it is a symbol for Christ. Just like the little fish on the back of cars. See: here, here, and here.
Third, what's wrong with being civil? Why try to offend non-Christians? Sure, I'll feel free to greet most folks with "Merry Christmas" but not my Jewish or atheist friends.
BTW, I got a Christmas card (bulk mail) today that says, "As we enjoy special times with our family and friends, We are grateful for the freedoms we share in this great land. We wish for you and your family all the joys of the holiday season. Happy Holidays! Trent and Tricia Lott
Jack should write and straighten him out. The address is on the envelope.
quote: Originally posted by: stephen judd " sorry . . . I can't agree with this letter at all. It is simply a rhetorical gambit. Those of you who have taken Logic 101 -- ever heard of the "straw man argument?" No one has attacked anyone's right to say "Merry Christmas" This is a thinly veiled excuse for Hanbury (it is the same one, his real name is John) to attack the ACLU, liberals and secularists for the "crimes" he'd like to use this excuse to link them too. "
Shelby's ex Risk Manager supports Christmas, whereas those ACLU (ACLU...AAUP, what's the difference - liberal organization beginning with an A...) types (think professors) don't.
It is a blatant attempt to remind the Shelby supporters how they are supposed to think and who they are supposed to side with. Very clever, diabolically so.
quote: Originally posted by: X for Christmas, T for Tennessee " Yep, truth. I missed your main point. I do understand now. Please accept my apology. Like they say, an idle mind's the devil's workshop. Maybe both mine and Jack's are too idle. When I opened up Hanbury letter on my computer, word ADVERTISEMENT in big and bold at the upper right. At first I thought his letter might actually be his advertisement! NO QUARTER. HAPPY HOLIDAYS."
Apology accepted, no harm done. Of course, this thread is already taking on a life of its own....! Gotta love the board posters (myself included, of course)...always ready for a good debate/discussion/opinion war, etc.!
PS--I'm a Unitarian Universalist (look it up at http://www.uua.org), so at my church we officially celebrate all of the winter holidays. But I was raised a Methodist, so I tell my kids that we celebrate Xmas at our house because we are "cultural Christians" much like my friends who are "cultural Jews" and celebrate Chanukkah.
Very interesting discussion here. I'd like to give it a somewhat different twist.
When I arrived at USM I was surprised that there was no AAUP chapter. After reading Exit 13, however, I developed a tongue-in-cheek hypothesis to try to explain the absence of an AAUP chapter from this campus. Specifically, my tongue-in-cheek hypothesis was that the university leadership in the days of the civil rights movement confused the names of several of the 4-letter organizations existing at that time - because those organizations all had 4 letters and those letters appeared to be very similar when viewed together: e.g., AAUP, ACLU, NAACP. At that time in USM's history the letters AAUP & ACLU evoked strong negative emotion. When the university leadership saw the letters AAUP, those four letters - being similar to the others - acquired a negative connotation also. Just a tongue-in-cheeck hypothesis. But is was my hypothesis after reading Exit 13.
quote: Originally posted by: A 4-letter word "Very interesting discussion here. I'd like to give it a somewhat different twist. When I arrived at USM I was surprised that there was no AAUP chapter. After reading Exit 13, however, I developed a tongue-in-cheek hypothesis to try to explain the absence of an AAUP chapter from this campus. Specifically, my tongue-in-cheek hypothesis was that the university leadership in the days of the civil rights movement confused the names of several of the 4-letter organizations existing at that time - because those organizations all had 4 letters and those letters appeared to be very similar when viewed together: e.g., AAUP, ACLU, NAACP. At that time in USM's history the letters AAUP & ACLU evoked strong negative emotion. When the university leadership saw the letters AAUP, those four letters - being similar to the others - acquired a negative connotation also. Just a tongue-in-cheeck hypothesis. But is was my hypothesis after reading Exit 13. "
.....I meant to say that the NAACP & ACLU evoked the negative connotation; when the letters AAUP appeared the university leadership might have become confused. [See - even I confused those letters when writing my post!]