Then why does it HAVE to be manifested materially?No she is saying you are paying too much attention to the damn money. It isn't about the money. If someone wanted an X-box and didn't come close to having the means to get one but a friend or uncle or something goes out of their way to get one for them then they are greatful. It isn't the money. It's that someone cared enough to go out and get it.

Give Santa the boot!
#121
Posted 14 December 2004 - 12:58 PM
#122
Posted 14 December 2004 - 02:37 PM
The rest of the year, I don't bother buying/wanting to receive something from your 'evil empire'.
You're all taking this to extremes, I think. Lighten up, just a liiiittle. The holiday is meant to be fun.
#123
Posted 14 December 2004 - 03:28 PM
Know what I want for Christmas? Textbooks for the college!
OK, that at least isn't capitalism worship. There's nothing wrong with textbooks.
You're all taking this to extremes, I think. Lighten up, just a liiiittle. The holiday is meant to be fun.
Actually, a "holiday" is a holy day. It was never meant to be all fun and games.
#124
Posted 14 December 2004 - 04:45 PM
It isn't about the money. The money isn't an object. The only effect money has is the weight of the buyers wallet. But they don't care how much it costs. All they care about is that someone they care for wants this thing so they are going to get it for them. All the person who received the gift thinks is "Wow! Someone I care about cares enough about ME to get me something."I'm paying too much attention to the money? It seems to me that people who like sending and recieving expensive gifts are focusing too much on the money.
Either way, you won't convince me that an X-Box has meaning.
Of course the days after x-mas is when we get the most item returns at work. Usually bad sweaters. But 9 times out of ten they are still touched by the thought.
#125
Posted 14 December 2004 - 05:46 PM
So if it's the thought that counts, why bother with the money, and the stuff?But 9 times out of ten they are still touched by the thought.
#126
Posted 14 December 2004 - 06:37 PM
#127
Posted 14 December 2004 - 06:58 PM
You misunderstand. No-one's suggesting you keep the money for yourself, that's even worse than using it to buy people things they don't need. Use it to make the world a better place, or something.Because it means you actually gave up something for them instead of hoarding all your money for yourself... You sacrifice a little cash for someone to give them a gift and they feel happy as well, you say that you hate the idea of materialism on Christmas it shows you off as self-centered because you aren't sharing to anyone.
It's a pretty damn far leap from charity to avarice.Maybe you don't understand what the kids were going through in poverty back when St. Nick was truly around, but I do happen to know what it is like just about and I was grateful that Santa (who was really the people who cared) gave me gifts to cherish as a child since I didn't have many toys to play with.
#128
Posted 14 December 2004 - 08:24 PM
#129
Posted 14 December 2004 - 08:42 PM
That's ridiculous. I want a PS2, I need food. I'm not getting one of them. That's OK.What you seem to be forgetting is that there are no needs, there are only wants.
It does improve the world, but not because of that. I'm really more concerned with everyone getting fed than some people being happy.Sharing does make the world a better place because it makes people feel better
I'm FOR sharing. That's why I'm suggesting we all take a step back from the corporate teat.it makes people feel better that you care enough to give them at least something they want instead of not spending a dime for some idealistic concept that it is a great evil to be nice to some for once.
"Most people" don't celebrate it. Most people in the United Staes do, but that's different.How can you say Christmas is so horrible now when almost everyone in the entire world, for one day, shows how much they care and share the joy even if they aren't Christian.
#130
Posted 14 December 2004 - 09:28 PM
#131
Posted 14 December 2004 - 09:36 PM
We could become less dependant on out corporate overlords- in the long-term, we COULD escape Babylon and Captivity.*You aren't FOR sharing because you said that we should get rid of Santa who shares with the kids and get rid of material items which includes food, textbooks, and anything else you buy. This is ridiculous, give me one positive thing that will come out of getting rid of Santa, just one.
What do you mean? Be more clear.You don't need food, you want food just because you want to live, obviously you haven't made it quite that far in your studies so far.
No, it doesn't. Asia alone, which has a very small Christain population, is half the world, and the remainder is as Muslim as it is Christain.Christmas is the most celebrated holiday in the world and celebrated by most people like in Japan, Britain, America, France, Canada, Mexico, Germany, Scandanavia, and many other countries which equals more than half the world in the end.
*Analogy, if you didn't get that.
#132
Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:13 PM
You don't need food, you want food just because you want to live, obviously you haven't made it quite that far in your studies so far.
Actually Alak is a pretty smart fifteen year old. But anyway, you're splitting hairs now. Food is a need, and almost anybody would define it as such. If you say that you want to live, then you've effectively negated the definition of the word "need." Redefining words isn't allowed.
#133
Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:21 PM
Need, Oxford English Dictionary, Consise Fifth Edition, Volume Two: A condition of lacking or requiring some Necessary thing, either physically or (now) psycologically.Food is a need, and almost anybody would define it as such. If you say that you want to live, then you've effectively negated the definition of the word "need." Redefining words isn't allowed.
Hwo do I take that?Actually Alak is a pretty smart fifteen year old.
#134
Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:35 PM
#135
Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:37 PM
#136
Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:44 PM
Hwo do I take that?
It's supposed to be favorable. You are fifteen, right?
#137
Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:50 PM
Yep.It's supposed to be favorable. You are fifteen, right?
No, it's really very different, which is why we have different words for it, and economics has nothing to do with it.You wand food because you want to live, it really is not that complicated if you try to think about it. A need is nothing more than a really strong want that people use too often as a way out of giving meaningful things to someone. I am 15 as well and know enough about economics to understand that.
I think you're still missing the point, read our posts again.The biggest problem I see with Christmas is those people that go around complaining about how horrible Christmas is because everyone is getting things as they sit comfortably in their own life.
See above.Those people that condemn everyone because they take joy in recieving things from people.
Santa Claus is a symbol of commercialism.There are more important things to get rid of then Santa Claus who doesn't even exist.
#138
Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:54 PM
You are missing the entire point here, you are trying to destroy something that gives people joy without any positive outcomes from it. At what cost will it come to give up Santa Claus, will anyone even give a look a Christmas anymore. Is that what you would like instead? Then they won't learn a single thing about what God truly gave to us over that time, but apparently having no presents be selfishly given around is more important to you than that.
#139
Posted 14 December 2004 - 11:50 PM
Well, my idea includes the use of an alternative system.And your little idea is not really all that positive because if you get rid of corporations the entire economy will be crushed and everyone will be poor and on the streets.
Well, that doesn't really bother me so much.At what cost will it come to give up Santa Claus, will anyone even give a look a Christmas anymore. Is that what you would like instead? Then they won't learn a single thing about what God truly gave to us over that time, but apparently having no presents be selfishly given around is more important to you than that.
#140
Posted 15 December 2004 - 02:04 AM
Why don't you go after the biggest false idol like the Bible instead of Santa Claus.
Try saying that again.

But this time, explain yourself. And please don't tell me you're a Christian, or I'm going to lecture you about heresy.
#141
Posted 15 December 2004 - 09:40 AM
You don't. I have never had the means to get my mother anything for Christmas. Every year all I do is give her a big hug and tell her I love her (yes I'm a momma's boy). That's all she needs. The money and stuff is a "because I could" thing. This year I just might be able to get her something. And it is probably be something as small as blinds for our kitchen. And that because I know how much she wants our home to look nicer. It is a more than 30 year old trailer. I think it's about done.So if it's the thought that counts, why bother with the money, and the stuff?
#142
Posted 15 December 2004 - 12:17 PM
If the first two sentances be true, then you're not into the "BUY MORE" mentality, and you don't count (And I mean that in a nice way).You don't. I have never had the means to get my mother anything for Christmas. Every year all I do is give her a big hug and tell her I love her (yes I'm a momma's boy). That's all she needs. The money and stuff is a "because I could" thing. This year I just might be able to get her something. And it is probably be something as small as blinds for our kitchen. And that because I know how much she wants our home to look nicer. It is a more than 30 year old trailer. I think it's about done.
#143
Posted 15 December 2004 - 01:43 PM

FREE JOLLY JENKINS!
#144
Posted 15 December 2004 - 04:39 PM
#145
Posted 15 December 2004 - 04:48 PM
That's closer to the Communitarian Movement of the 1840's, which was an idealist form of sacred socialism. Of course, the model is completely nonfunctioning. Read up on the Northampton Association.But if you want to escape economics then you might as well sell all of your possesions and go live out in the woods somewhere naked because that is as far as you are going to get without it.
I know this isn't my fight, but I have to: Celebrating Christmas without being a Christain dilutes your spirituality without gaining converts, so it works to the opposite effect.But the one most important thing is to accept everyone into the faith and your comment about all non-Christians should not be allowed to celebrate Christmas goes directly against that.
#146
Posted 15 December 2004 - 04:54 PM
#147
Posted 15 December 2004 - 05:05 PM
What exactly are you responding to?And a country cannot function without economics, even civilizations have economics. Socialism is a type of economy like capitalism and communism.
#148
Posted 15 December 2004 - 05:20 PM
#149
Posted 15 December 2004 - 05:31 PM
#150
Posted 15 December 2004 - 06:05 PM