• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Feds force bank to remove religious/Christmas message

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
Last edited:

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
And we have people bothered by the continued complaints of things being unconstitutional. To interpret this display as discriminatory is beyond ridiculous.
 

oxyMORON

A Darker Knight
I don't understand all the political correctness of Christmas time. I think people have forgotten that without Christmas, December would just be a shitty time of year where the weather is cold and days are short.

Sure, there's Hanukkah, but Hanukkah isn't as open and extravagant as Christmas. There aren't as many songs about Hanukkah let alone ones that sustain a lively mood. There wouldn't even be a holiday season is Hanukkah was the only holiday carrying the load. I don't mean that in a bad way, but that's how I see it.

I'm glad they haven't gone so far as to change the words in popular songs from Christmas to holiday. That would just be too much.
 

Mirage

Secret Agent
Staff member
V.I.P.
Exposing somebody to one particular religion over another is NOT THE SAME THING as forcing them to follow that religion. The White House could mow John 3:16 into its front lawn and it would be well within the law as long as people aren't forced to become Christians.
 

Doc

Trust me, I'm The Doctor.
V.I.P.
The big argument here, 'Brix, is that certain people feel the government shouldn't make any effort to promote any religion at all. The reason "In God we trust" is allowed is because it doesn't promote any single religion (or, in the case of the bible, several religions). This verse of the day thing isn't allowed because it promotes the religions that follow the bible. The only group that has a right to be offended by "In God we trust" is the atheists who, generally, aren't influenced by such things as they don't believe in a diety so the promotion of one publicly doesn't offend atheists because they are very accepting of the beliefs of other religions.

Sure, there's Hanukkah, but Hanukkah isn't as open and extravagant as Christmas.
It's also unfair to compare a comparatively less important Jewish holiday to the most important Christian holiday. Yom Kippur, I believe, is the most important Jewish holiday. Christianity is way more mainstream and their main holiday, Christmas, has in turn been turned into a huge commercial holiday because of the importance that day has to Christians that, by an extremely large margin, is the largest religions group in the United States. Somewhere around 80% of Americans are Christians. Hanukkah only gets public recognition because it's so close to Christmas.
 
Last edited:

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
Well sanity prevails: After National Outcry, Fed Reverses Anti-Christian Bank Decision in OK | The Blaze

I just don't understand why some people(the Federal Reserve in this case) think we have to be so darned homogenized. If a business puts a sign out that offends someone, who cares?
Exactly, there is no "offensive clause" in the Constitution. The intent of the Establishment Clause is that the federal government would not establish a national religion, which would violate what John Locke termed "the liberty of conscious". A Bible verse in a privately owned bank doesn't come close to establishing a religion. Don't like the Bible verse? Bank somewhere else.
 

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
And we have people bothered by the continued complaints of things being unconstitutional.
Not even in the realm of relevant to this.

I agree this is beyond stupid however. I'm glad to see they turned it around. There's a difference between having Christmas decorations and forcing people to believe something. Unfortunately, I think a lot of people see them as one in the same. On the one hand, I'm 100% for separation of church and state, but this is not even worth getting upset or fighting over.
 

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
Not even in the realm of relevant to this.

I agree this is beyond stupid however. I'm glad to see they turned it around. There's a difference between having Christmas decorations and forcing people to believe something. Unfortunately, I think a lot of people see them as one in the same. On the one hand, I'm 100% for separation of church and state, but this is not even worth getting upset or fighting over.
I beg to differ, if we as citizens stop complaining about government encroachment then we slowly lose our liberties and freedoms. The Fed trying to do this is clearly unconstitutional.
 

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
How is it unconstitutional? I can think of a few reasons, I just want to hear yours.

As soon as I read "small town" before my previous post, I saw no issue. If this was a federal bank, I think they would have been well within their right to order them to take down such religious paraphernalia.
 
Top