Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Teacher tells kids Santa is 'make-believe' (1st graders)
AP ^ | Thursday, December 4, 2003

Posted on 12/04/2003 2:56:56 PM PST by presidio9

Edited on 04/29/2004 2:03:32 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580 ... 761-768 next last
To: jwalsh07
Please explain to me just who teaches the Christian concept of giving via Santa Claus. Certainly nobody in the media, nor teachers, etc. Maybe some parents, but that's about it.

If this were the 1800's, you would have a valid argument since people learned about St. Nicholas.

Ask anybody about him today, and they won't know squat.
541 posted on 12/04/2003 11:18:02 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
Gosh, he's bigger than I thought he was!
542 posted on 12/04/2003 11:18:12 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 531 | View Replies]

To: FLAMING DEATH
Such a long post for such a short question.

Blatant and Intentional Lie Number One. I specifically mentioned I was responding to no fewer than three separate from you, addressed speciically to me. It does your argument precious little good to be caught out in baldfaced prevarications of this sort.

I suspect that I will walk away from you with information you know to be false, specifically because you opted not to leave me with factual knowledge. The end results are no less deceitful, or pernicious.

It also does profits your argument little to wax (poorly) poetic, at the expense of clear and unambiguous meaning. Try re-stating that in english, if you please. Assuming it meant anything whatsoever, I mean.

This is exactly what you did in response to my question. You, by your own definition, lied. And I can make you do it over and over again.

I haven't seen anyone quite this desperately, heartwrechingly in love with themselves, and their own swaybacked platitudinizing -- and for such scant reason, to boot -- since the last time Hillary addressed an audience on nationwide television. :)

Blatant and Intentional Lie Number Two. Kindly point out to me -- right here, in front of G-d and the FReepers assembled -- where, precisely, I lied to you; and/or where you "made [me] lie." We both know full well neither of these hallucinatory episodes took place, anywhere outside of the confines of your own skull.

What I plainly did say -- and as any /all can readily confirm, simply by referring to the previous postings in question -- is that I most certainly would lie to you, given sufficient cause to do so. This is manifestly not the same thing that you are spuriously, dishonestly claiming.

You mentioned, in response to another poster, earlier, that "[I] most certainly have lied, in the past." Self-evidently, your willingness to do precisely that is on ready and public display, in the present day.

Lying is lying, whether to children, adults, whatever. I even mentioned in one of my posts that it would be just as wrong to lie to an adult as to a child.

In that case: I should rather think you owe me an apology right about now, don't you think...?

If it was indeed hairsplitting, you'd have had no problem answering my question.

Blatant and Intentional Lie Number Three. I have answered every serious question you've put to me, as you well know (and -- again -- as the archived record clearly indicates). You're batting less impressively than the ninth-place hitter for the Yakult Swallows, at this point. I can cope with the public humiliation on your part, certainly, if you can.

If it makes you feel any better, rest assured that I feel that lying to anyone is wrong.

Ahhhh... how I adore cheap irony. :)

Wrong again, and you just showed that you clearly don't understand my point.

Oh, I understand your "point" (poor, palsied thing that it is) a good deal more capably than I think you yourself do, certainly. Let's summarize, shall we? "Lying is always bad, unless it's by omission, in which case it's not bad. Also, lying in buck-toothed attempt to 'win' an online argument is forgivable, so long as said lying is in defense of the point that all lying is bad. Amen."

There. That's pretty much all you've managed to stammer out thus far, once all the spluttering and arm-waving have been taken out of the equation. Why... was there anything else you wanted to add to that, at this late date...?

I'm still waiting for you to deal directly with the question that I asked you, because you did not in this post. A simple, one line response will do nicely.

Blatant and Intentional Lie Number Four. I answered ALL your questions, of course. You're simply in a sulk because my answer(s) weren't of the sort you were hoping, tailored to your increasingly Clinton-esque high school word games and what-have-you. Go back and re-read, if you weren't capable of determining this for yourself, the first time out. Trace the sentences laboriously with one index finger. Move your lips. Whatever helps, ultimately.

In short: give me one good reason to respond to your next posting, if possible.

So far: this has been depressingly like arguing with a liberal: lots and lots of emphasis upon feeeeeeeelings... and no substantial intellectual counter-argument.

Frankly... I'm bored, buttercup. :)

543 posted on 12/04/2003 11:18:38 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("The Clintons have damaged our country. They have done it together, in unison." -- Peggy Noonan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Mr. Pope? Doesn't sound familiar...

Egads... there's one I missed????
544 posted on 12/04/2003 11:19:26 PM PST by Tamzee (Pennsylvanians for Bush! Join http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PA4BushCheney/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 521 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
Hey, thanks for the pic of Santa's house!

Another great tool with which to corrupt and abuse my unsuspecting children ;-)
545 posted on 12/04/2003 11:21:48 PM PST by Tamzee (Pennsylvanians for Bush! Join http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PA4BushCheney/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 531 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
You know what I hate? I hate it when somebody comes on a thread after about 400 posts and starts replying to people at the very beginning, usually about issues that we've settled long ago.

It messes up the "flow."
546 posted on 12/04/2003 11:22:05 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Don't ask...he's my very own personal stalker, who pops up on threads he sees my nic on, posts some sort of drivel, and then is gone.

Truly "sick and getting sicker," to quote Bob Grant.

547 posted on 12/04/2003 11:22:07 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 533 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
That photo was taken in late September! (Alaskans spend a lot of time indoors)
548 posted on 12/04/2003 11:22:50 PM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
Oh, so now Christ was a Libertarian ? No force or fraud ? He didn't use FORCE, then, when overturning the money changers' tables ? He didn't tell his deciples to sell their last shreds and buy a sword to use in battle ? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...you must read another Bible, than I do.

And a very happy whatever , to you. Me? I'll be having a VERY merry Christmas. :-)

549 posted on 12/04/2003 11:23:01 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 539 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
LOL, LOL, LOL
550 posted on 12/04/2003 11:23:39 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 540 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
Punch here
551 posted on 12/04/2003 11:23:41 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
If this were the 1800's, you would have a valid argument since people learned about St. Nicholas. Ask anybody about him today, and they won't know squat.

Incorrect. That is PRECISELY how we taught our children about Santa Claus. Santa in no way replaced Jesus as the meaning of Christmas.... Santa was Santa because of how much he loved Jesus.

552 posted on 12/04/2003 11:25:36 PM PST by Tamzee (Pennsylvanians for Bush! Join http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PA4BushCheney/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
BRAVO !
553 posted on 12/04/2003 11:26:04 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
It's a beautiful photo. Thanks so much.
554 posted on 12/04/2003 11:26:39 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Yep, he is and Bob has always been spot on. I started listening to Bob Grant, full time, when I was preggers...and that's now 3 decades ago. LOL
555 posted on 12/04/2003 11:27:56 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
That is PRECISELY how we taught our children about Santa Claus. Santa in no way replaced Jesus as the meaning of Christmas.... Santa was Santa because of how much he loved Jesus.

Exactly right, Tam.

556 posted on 12/04/2003 11:28:44 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: brewcrew
Sorry, but I didn't get that "spirit of giving" when I was eagerly awaiting my own presents from Santa.

I didn't run out and give my presents to some other kid.

Since today's Santa is cut off from St. Nicolas completely, your argument really is quite lame and only a few children will understand this representation of Santa.
557 posted on 12/04/2003 11:28:50 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
I love Bob Grant. When I call him, I always ask him "is this hate radio?" and he laughs and laughs. He's the best.
558 posted on 12/04/2003 11:30:02 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: onyx
The nay sayers just don't get it, or don't WANT to get it. All they want to do, or so it seems to me, is to argue, put down what the majority thinks/does ( how very like an insult child ! ), garner attention ( see the last parenthesized note ), or and/or all of the preceding.
559 posted on 12/04/2003 11:31:26 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
oh for crying out loud, no you moron.

Where did I call myself Paul?
560 posted on 12/04/2003 11:31:55 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 536 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580 ... 761-768 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson