PFP member received death threats after challenging public Xmas decorations

[anticap]

From the "how is this news?" yet at the same time "good for him, I guess" department:

Irv Sutley, chairman of the central committee for his local "Peace and Freedom Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_and_Freedom_Party)" of California, received 100 death threats (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20091224/NEWS/912239982/) via the party headquarters after his complaints led to the removal of "stars and angels" from Christmas trees in Sonoma County buildings. Sutley took issue with the county using tax dollars to "show favoritism to any particular cult (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20091221/NEWS/912219968/)."

Local residents, responding like petulant children, whined that they had been "[robbed of] their joy," which apparently hinges on their ability to saturate every square inch of town with symbolism from their particular cult of Yeshua the Nazarene.

Spurred to an act of civil disobedience in a show of solidarity with his pouting Christian comrades, Barry Collins, a Jewish attorney with the Public Defender's Office, defiantly topped the lobby tree with a star. The oppressors relented, the ban was overturned, and the children squealed "Christmas is back!"

Sutley, described by one Internet commentator (who was perhaps overly-stimulated by holiday cheer) as the aborted fetus resulting from the rape of the Grinch by Ebenezer Scrooge (http://forums.pressdemocrat.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3601086917/m/6581034259?r=6581034259#6581034259), says he may pursue litigation after consulting with attorneys.

[Revy]

this was funny. all these people raging about Christmas being taken away. Remember the "War on Christmas" Fox News was always yammering on about? Who doesn't...

I don't see how a star is religious, although I could see how it could represent the Star of Bethlehem.

[RedSonRising]

I suppose I agree with the man, but calling religious culture something akin to "cults" will never get any progressive or revolutionary anywhere with the masses whatsoever.

[Wanted Man]

Well, I'm glad that this party has set its priorities straight: make sure that Christmas trees are secular, and if the people get pissed off and put a star on top anyway, take the bastards to court! It's good that we're at this stage. I mean, it's not like there's a financial crisis or murderous wars in the Middle East or anything.

[Revy]

Well, I'm glad that this party has set its priorities straight: make sure that Christmas trees are secular, and if the people get pissed off and put a star on top anyway, take the bastards to court! It's good that we're at this stage. I mean, it's not like there's a financial crisis or murderous wars in the Middle East or anything.

The Peace and Freedom Party endorsed pro-capitalism, pseudo-left populist Nader last year, over socialist campaigns that had their own members running (PSL & SPUSA). so....this isn't really a party that knows its priorities.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Jesus that is a sad tale. Death Threats may be over the top, and for white-collar wine sipping Sonoma are probably less than serious, but the dudes a prick. Face it, he's an asshole who's isolating himself from the community he should be trying to win over.

Even if he wins its going to be a pyrhic victory. The expression "Pick your battles" comes to mind.

[Saorsa]

That is not a fight worth picking.

[Sleeper]

This is the sort of thing that can be easily resolved with a public vote. Should religious decorations, or decorations that could be construed by a reasonable person to be Religious, be allowed in county buildings?

Just let the people of the county vote on it, no lawsuits, no death threats, just a vote.

As long as Religion does not enter into the actual Politics of any given place or the treatment of the citizens of that place, then I believe that when it comes to things that are purely symbolic, the will of the citizen should prevail. The only way to establish the will of the citizen is with a vote.

[Reuben]

Seriously as an atheist this epitomizes everything I hate about the new secularism. It is for people who would rather be fighting culture wars than class wars,, who would rather go to court than go on strike. He may indeed have noticed that the government is biased 'towards a particular cult'. He should be more concerned about the governments bias towards the ruling class and against the working class.

[Sleeper]

Well said, Reuben.

Fight the big battles first.

[bricolage]

This is the kind of knee jerk atheism that emerges out of a separation of religion from the material conditions that give birth to religion and allow religious beliefs to be sustained. Trying to, literally, destroy the outward physical structures of organised religion before you attack the alienation, atomisation, dispossession, poverty, exploitation... that allows such structures to stand is just backwards. Understandably I would not think the same of someone doing this in say Saudi Arabia where the role of organised religion in society and the state is remarkably different, but a country such as the US or the UK is definitely not like a country such as Saudi Arabia.

[Wanted Man]

I don't even mind attacking religion in public or the status of Christmas or whatever. But what could possibly be gained from complaining to local government to make them ban stars in trees, and then threatening to sue when the ban is reversed?

Perhaps he also thinks that the people in his community are "petulant children" (like the OP of this thread), or at least hardcore religious troglodytes who need to be fought through the ever so fair and benevolent legal institutions.

It reminds me of that guy in the US who went to court to try to have the "In God We Trust" removed from dollar bills, claiming that it was just as bad as racial segregation. He also tried to have the phrase "One nation under god" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. Note that he has no problem with money, nor with the Pledge; just with the religious aspects of them. Typical one-issue liberal crap.

Who the fuck are these people? Do they also complain when they don't have to go to work on Christmas? :confused:

[gorillafuck]

I hate this aggressive atheism that's done through complaining to officials or courts about the most petty shit.

[anticap]

Perhaps he also thinks that the people in his community are "petulant children" (like the OP of this thread)

Actually, I found the story rather ridiculous all 'round, and I tried to portray it as such. You'll note that I tipped my hat, albeit somewhat tongue-in-cheek, to those same people for resisting the ban. But as I see it the people on the defensive in the "War on Christmas" are every bit as ridiculous as those on the attack. It's much ado about nothing.


It reminds me of that guy in the US who went to court to try to have the "In God We Trust" removed from dollar bills, claiming that it was just as bad as racial segregation. He also tried to have the phrase "One nation under god" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance.

I'm rather less offended when a citizen attempts to secularize the State than when the State -- rather petulantly, I must say -- attempts to circle the wagons of reaction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_Protection_Act) in defiance.


Typical one-issue liberal crap.

Sure, we ought to be focusing on the structural causes underlying these issues. But that doesn't mean we ignore them in the meantime. I'm glad Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white person, whether she, or those she inspired, understood the structural causes of racism or not. (Anyone who pretends that I'm equating the two is merely attempting to avoid my point.) Secularism, racism, sexism, etc., are all surface issues (or, if you prefer, "liberal crap"), because they all have structural causes that are not addressed by fighting for/against them. But these battles still need to be fought.

Just because the working class supports something doesn't remove it from the table of criticism. Yes, most of the working class loves Christmas, so much so that many of them engage in one-issue conservative crap like boycotting capitalists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_controversy) who attempt to be PC, in order to ensure that their religion is crammed down everyone's throats every year. Most racists are working-class, too. So what? I support the working class as such; I don't support everything one might find in working-class culture or tradition. I'm reminded of the rattlebrained lifestylists who've converted to Islam in a show of solidarity with the Muslim peoples being oppressed by the U$. I mean, seriously, what the fuck? Solidarity with an oppressed group doesn't mean accepting everything they stand for.

This attempt to ban stars and angels from Christmas trees was a petty little battle that served only to further alienate people from secularist concerns. But not all such battles are as petty -- and some are worth fighting even if they alienate people.

[cyu]

Excerpts from http://everything2.com/title/Jesus+undoubtedly+said+this+or+something+very+like +it

1. "Jesus undoubtedly said this or something very like it"

2. "Jesus probably said something like this"

3. "Jesus did not say this, but the ideas contained in it are close to his own"

4. "Jesus did not say this; it represents the perspective of a later or different tradition"

Yes, I'm sure I remember Jesus saying, "Thou shalt kill those who remove Christmas decorations from Christmas trees."


The oppressors relented, the ban was overturned, and the children squealed "Christmas is back!"

Christmas died the moment pro-capitalists turned it into a consumerist holiday and culture-war. It has been dead ever since.

[The Red Next Door]

Don't we have better things to do than to role play scrooge?