Re: [ga] Re: [announce] Season greetings (Y2K)

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

On 17 December 1999, "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu> wrote:


>
>I'm not a Christian either, but I will most happily accept good wishes
>from anyone....I thought the complaint was rather mean-spirited.
>


Think whatever you want, Michael.  Why was Christmas the only religous
observance listed?  Why not Chanukah?  Why not any other religous 
observance?  The Secretariat seems to have a firm grasp of the various
calendars thoughout the world, yet only listed one religous observance.

It may seem trivial, but it's just another means of subjecting many
to exclusivity.  It just so happens that this one is often
subconscious and accepted in many societies.  I'm very, very tired of
people pushing an exclusionary politics, whether it be in formal
communications or through informal actions.

Furthermore, I find the inclusion of a religous salutation in an
official communication from the DNSO offensive.  Are we to now assume
the NC officially endorses or implicity supports Christianity?

There was a reason Church and State were seperated, you know.

(yes, yes, I know, now I'm being geocentric.  Since I'm mainly
addressing the issue of the inappropriateness of the religous
inclusion, I'm just holding up the reasons for the US Government
maintaining that seperation.)

-- 
Mark C. Langston
mark@bitshift.org
Systems Admin
San Jose, CA