Should fireplace fires be banned?

[trickblue]

Link (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/22/EDNKTDK1S.DTL)

Should fireplace fires be banned?
Jeffrey Earl Warren

Under the auspices of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, "public hearings" are being held to determine the fate of the family hearth.

Those of us who live in rural areas have a pretty good idea what the outcome is going to be.

Still, in the interest of basic fairness, we'd at least like the decision-makers to employ the rudiments of the scientific method, rather than riding the winds of energy dependence and global warming hysteria, before coming to a final decision.

The scientific method follows a rigid methodology. Ask a question. Do background research. Construct a hypothesis. Test the hypothesis. And then, communicate the results.

So what is the question? Are the fires in our homes bad because they add to global warming? Release carbon dioxide into the air? Pollute the atmosphere with soot and particulate matter? All of the above?

Where is the research? The Chronicle reported that "government studies" indicate that 33 percent of all "particulate matter" comes from your fireplace and mine. With all the industry and all the cars in the Bay Area, does anyone actually believe that?

Shouldn't we be given more quantitative information such has, "How many fireplaces are there in the nine counties? How many are used each night? How many hours is each fireplace used? How much "particulate matter" is expelled from each fire? How many parts per million are in the air? How much dissipates into the atmosphere?"

Is this decision truly about air quality or global warming?

Interestingly, one loses on the issues of global warming because the odd paradox is, the more there is cloud cover or "smoke" in the air, the cooler the Earth will be. It is well documented how the Earth's temperature cooled after the explosion of the volcano Krakatoa. From that standpoint, one ought to encourage fires which produce the maximum amount of smoke.

Of course, that position is politically absurd.

Those of us in rural communities feel bullied by this sort of nanny state legislation. We'd like to believe that a man's home is indeed his castle. Most of us live in small towns or the country for a reason. We don't like cities. We don't like traffic. We don't like noise. We don't like the dirty air.

Our air is clean, and we take umbrage when someone says our fires are polluting their air.

If the ban goes into effect, what is the cost to society? What is the benefit? We need to weigh these carefully.

Then there is this question: Why do we burn?

We stoke our hearths for two reasons.

First, many rural people burn wood because they can't afford to heat their old houses with electricity. Many more feel that burning wood does less damage to the planet than increasing their carbon footprint by using so much electricity.

Banning fires would hurt the elderly who live on fixed incomes and the poor in general. It would be an added tax on the rest of us and increase dependence on petroleum.

Second, for many of us, a fire crackling in the fireplace is about a different kind of energy - psychic energy. After a day's work, is there anything nicer than coming home and having a class of Napa Valley Cabernet in front of a roaring fire?

Rainy Sundays find us stretched out on the couch, newspapers scattered, 49ers on the TV, and a fire roaring in the fireplace.

On wintry school nights, our children used to come down into the living room to do their homework in front of the fire as my wife and I read.

During the energy crisis in California, our family closed the parlor doors and gathered in one tiny room around the fire. it was a scene out of a Jane Austin novel. Five of us read, played chess, did homework and paid bills, in a chilly room heated only by our tiny hearth.

Never was our family closer. The fire was more than a source of heat. It was a mystical, magical magnet of love, warmth and togetherness.

We worry that the real issue here isn't about health, global warming or energy savings, but about control.

Were it not about control, the dialogue would be about baffles and filters to eliminate soot, not about outright bans.

Home fires are not about "particulate matter." They are about warmth, love, quality of life - and for many an economic necessity. How cold are those who would take that from us, their neighbors?

Jeffrey Earl Warren lives in St. Helena. His columns can be read at www.jeffwarren.com (http://www.jeffwarren.com).

[notherbob]

Cars and trucks run 24 /7/365. Fireplaces make only a small contribution part of the year from far fewer sources. The big money in fossil fuels and autos naturally want to blame someone else.

Influence peddling is alive and well as is fear mongering.

[iceberg]

Cars and trucks run 24 /7/365. Fireplaces make only a small contribution part of the year from far fewer sources. The big money in fossil fuels and autos naturally want to blame someone else.

Influence peddling is alive and well as is fear mongering.

no fires in a fireplace. wow, next thing you know we can't take a dump in the toilet cause of the damage we do.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Cars and trucks run 24 /7/365. Fireplaces make only a small contribution part of the year from far fewer sources. The big money in fossil fuels and autos naturally want to blame someone else.

Influence peddling is alive and well as is fear mongering.

I agree...too far and too few for them to make a difference.

This is not London in the dark years.

[Ben_n_austin]

I agree...too far and too few for them to make a difference.

This is not London in the dark years.


Do you mean I stopped eating meat for nothing? It's not the cow's gas? :D

[BrAinPaiNt]

Do you mean I stopped eating meat for nothing? It's not the cow's gas? :D

Never trusted a vegetarian. Can't trust a person that turns into a salad shooter when they get the runs.:p: ;)

[jman]

Never trusted a vegetarian. Can't trust a person that turns into a salad shooter when they get the runs.:p: ;)

Whoooo...didn't need that visual at 6 am this morning...LOL

[burmafrd]

This is what happens when you let libs run things. Nanny state to the max. So much for individual freedom.

[vta]

This is what happens when you let libs run things. Nanny state to the max. So much for individual freedom.

:laugh2:

It hasn't been 'libs' running this country for the last 7 years...
It's been politicians.

[CowboyJeff]

Who cares what socialist California does......Texas will never go along with that.......thank goodness!!!!

[burmafrd]

sadly, politicians are all we have now in washington and too many other places. Leaders with brains and courage and charactor are in very short supply.

[Seven]

No worries fellas. In a few years global warming itself will eliminate the need for such devices. "Gather 'round the iceplace kids..........." :)

[iceberg]

well at least that will resolve the debate.

[jterrell]

If San Fran wants to address public safety(i am not saying anything about sexual preferences if thats what you clods thought:~ hehe ok so it crossed my mind too) they need to flatten out some of those gawd-forsaken roads.

[big dog cowboy]

Never trusted a vegetarian. Can't trust a person that turns into a salad shooter when they get the runs.:p: ;)
:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

[AbeBeta]

as a Californian, I can give a little more context here. First, fireplaces are crap. They don't heat at all and many have no system in place to clean the particulates in the smoke. Wood stoves on the other hand are used throughout CA in rural areas because they generate far more heat -- you could actually heat your home with a wood stove whereas a fireplace does not provide heat outside a 10 foot radius and requires far more fuel. Modern wood stoves recycle and combust the particulates. Most stove manufacturers make inserts that go directly into the fireplace.

The argument that poor people need fireplaces is BS. You visit any rural home and you'll find a wood stove, not a fireplace. Rich people use fireplaces to show off. People who live in warmer climates use fireplaces. Nobody in their right mind would heat a house with a fireplace.

[Nors]

Nobody is ever going to legislate that I can't burn wood in my fireplace. Sure seems like a more natural way to recycle resources (wood) and heat my house.

[AbeBeta]

Nobody is ever going to legislate that I can't burn wood in my fireplace. Sure seems like a more natural way to recycle resources (wood) and heat my house.

But you can burn cleaner w/ some sort of catalytic system (or other non-catalytic) systems - that's what legislation should focus on for new construction.

[peplaw06]

But you can burn cleaner w/ some sort of catalytic system (or other non-catalytic) systems - that's what legislation should focus on for new construction.

Well let them come in my house and write me a ticket. You better get a search warrant first to find out what I'm burning. I suppose next you're going to tell me not to fry bologna because of the smell.

[zrinkill]

Who cares what socialist California does......

:bow:

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well let them come in my house and write me a ticket. You better get a search warrant first to find out what I'm burning. I suppose next you're going to tell me not to fry bologna because of the smell.

I don't think they would need a search warrant to find out what you are burning. I am sure they would know what it was. You being a lawyer it would have to be evidence or what you are full of...BS.

JUST KIDDING...making a very lame lawyer joke.

On a serious note.

It would never fly due to rural areas alone.

[AbeBeta]

Well let them come in my house and write me a ticket. You better get a search warrant first to find out what I'm burning. I suppose next you're going to tell me not to fry bologna because of the smell.

Don't be such a baby - you actually could be burning more efficiently (i.e., using less wood and getting more heat out of the wood you do burn). Also, did ya miss the part about new construction?

[Jarv]

Get yourself a nice Vermont Casting Vigilant wood stove like I have. The two front doors open like french doors, you can then put a screen in front of it and have a fire. Close up the doors and viola, you have a wood stove.

I burn over 3 cords a year and save a ton on oil.

[jterrell]

Don't be such a baby - you actually could be burning more efficiently (i.e., using less wood and getting more heat out of the wood you do burn). Also, did ya miss the part about new construction?

While peplaw and I are hardly ideological comrades I think he is making a quite salient point:

How do we have legislation that must be enforced in homes without violating basic privacy rights?

In various places there will be burn bans when it is dry for fear of fires spreading but that outdoors ban is a lot different than in someone's actual house.

For myself being able to do what you want in your own home is seriously sacrosanct, a man's home is his castle and all that jazz.

Instead of legislating fireplaces perhaps an educational campaign to detail the actual value of a wood burning stove versus the rather useless fireplace is warranted. I could even see certain housing communities ban them at the construction level but alas not introduce legislation to ban using ones already in existence.

[Sasquatch]

Second, for many of us, a fire crackling in the fireplace is about a different kind of energy - psychic energy. After a day's work, is there anything nicer than coming home and having a class of Napa Valley Cabernet in front of a roaring fire?

Rainy Sundays find us stretched out on the couch, newspapers scattered, 49ers on the TV, and a fire roaring in the fireplace.

On wintry school nights, our children used to come down into the living room to do their homework in front of the fire as my wife and I read.

During the energy crisis in California, our family closed the parlor doors and gathered in one tiny room around the fire. it was a scene out of a Jane Austin novel. Five of us read, played chess, did homework and paid bills, in a chilly room heated only by our tiny hearth.

Never was our family closer. The fire was more than a source of heat. It was a mystical, magical magnet of love, warmth and togetherness.

Thpoken like a true 49ers fan.

I don't suppose a wood stove, many of which are quite attractive and more efficient than fireplaces, could provide the same bonding experience while being more environmentally benign? You can still enjoy your Cab and family Jane Austen readings, madame.

[AbeBeta]

Get yourself a nice Vermont Casting Vigilant wood stove like I have. The two front doors open like french doors, you can then put a screen in front of it and have a fire. Close up the doors and viola, you have a wood stove.

I burn over 3 cords a year and save a ton on oil.

Jotul makes a better looking stove, IMO

[AbeBeta]

I could even see certain housing communities ban them at the construction level but alas not introduce legislation to ban using ones already in existence.

Isn't that exactly what I suggested the focus should be?

[iceberg]

Thpoken like a true 49ers fan.

I don't suppose a wood stove, many of which are quite attractive and more efficient than fireplaces, could provide the same bonding experience while being more environmentally benign? You can still enjoy your Cab and family Jane Austen readings, madame.

for me, i can't believe we've gotten to the point where a fireplace is no longer PC.

PC needs to die and move on.

[AbeBeta]

for me, i can't believe we've gotten to the point where a fireplace is no longer PC.

PC needs to die and move on.

PC is what some folks label anything that has to do with the environment, etc.

What has to die and move on is that automatic categorization as "PC" to justify discounting an idea.

[peplaw06]

Don't be such a baby - you actually could be burning more efficiently (i.e., using less wood and getting more heat out of the wood you do burn). Also, did ya miss the part about new construction?There is nothing about new construction in the article. That's something you got from somewhere else, and I don't see how it's enforceable, aside from everyone moving into a homeowners association. If it was more efficient to run a HDTV as opposed to a CRT TV, that'd be great and all. But I have a CRT TV right now, I don't have to pay money to keep it.

I could be doing a lot more things efficiently, but the beauty of freedom is that you can't tell me how to live.

Of course, you could continue to look down your nose at me, that freedom goes both ways. Just don't hold your breath that your arrogance is a way to get your point across to me.

[AbeBeta]

There is nothing about new construction in the article. That's something you got from somewhere else, and I don't see how it's enforceable, aside from everyone moving into a homeowners association. If it was more efficient to run a HDTV as opposed to a CRT TV, that'd be great and all. But I have a CRT TV right now, I don't have to pay money to keep it.

I could be doing a lot more things efficiently, but the beauty of freedom is that you can't tell me how to live.

Of course, you could continue to look down your nose at me, that freedom goes both ways. Just don't hold your breath that your arrogance is a way to get your point across to me.

Perhaps you should chose your battles more carefully. Really now. Is being able to burn whatever you want whenever your want in your fireplace such a HUGE aspect of freedom? That's what you choose to rail against? You might look up a little something called the Patriot Act if you are so concerned over your freedom.

[Sasquatch]

What has to die and move on is that automatic categorization as "PC" to justify discounting an idea.

Complacency tries to give itself a cloak of respectability by denigrating all calls for change/sacrifice for the better of the community as PC run amok.

We extol sacrifice when it's in the cause of war but balk when it comes to sacrificing everyday comforts and entrenched habits.

[AbeBeta]

There is nothing about new construction in the article. That's something you got from somewhere else, and I don't see how it's enforceable, aside from everyone moving into a homeowners association. If it was more efficient to run a HDTV as opposed to a CRT TV, that'd be great and all. But I have a CRT TV right now, I don't have to pay money to keep it.

I could be doing a lot more things efficiently, but the beauty of freedom is that you can't tell me how to live.

Of course, you could continue to look down your nose at me, that freedom goes both ways. Just don't hold your breath that your arrogance is a way to get your point across to me.

Perhaps you should chose your battles more carefully. Really now. Is being able to burn whatever you want whenever your want in your fireplace such a HUGE aspect of freedom? That's what you choose to rail against? You might look up a little something called the Patriot Act if you are so concerned over your freedom.

[peplaw06]

Perhaps you should chose your battles more carefully. Really now. Is being able to burn whatever you want whenever your want in your fireplace such a HUGE aspect of freedom? That's what you choose to rail against? You might look up a little something called the Patriot Act if you are so concerned over your freedom.It's not just about being able to burn what I want to burn. It's about the sanctity of my home. Come on ab. You're smarter than your myopic retort suggests. (Why am I always saying that? Maybe I give you too much credit.)

And who ever said anything about the Patriot Act? This thread is about a specific topic. Don't assume you know my positions on that.

[AbeBeta]

It's not just about being able to burn what I want to burn. It's about the sanctity of my home. Come on ab. You're smarter than your myopic retort suggests. (Why am I always saying that? Maybe I give you too much credit.)

And who ever said anything about the Patriot Act? This thread is about a specific topic. Don't assume you know my positions on that.

Sanctity of your home, eh? Take that another step. Shouldn't I be able to grow marijuana in my home then? Or take it in another direction, what if my house it such a mess that rodents invade and impact my neighbors?

I brought up the Patriot act b/c it seems a far more reasonable concern than having your fireplace limited. Come on LawDogs, you can afford that wood stove insert that will burn cleaner.

[iceberg]

PC is what some folks label anything that has to do with the environment, etc.

What has to die and move on is that automatic categorization as "PC" to justify discounting an idea.

no. what *I* call PC is someone saying their way of thinking is better than mine and forcing me to change.

like the inability to say "merry christmas" or santa saying "ho ho ho" cause it "offends" people. i'm sorry if you don't understand why i feel this way, but it's not simple categorization.

[iceberg]

Complacency tries to give itself a cloak of respectability by denigrating all calls for change/sacrifice for the better of the community as PC run amok.

We extol sacrifice when it's in the cause of war but balk when it comes to sacrificing everyday comforts and entrenched habits.

no - it runs amok when the changes are FORCED, sas. if you knew me at all, sacrafice for the common good is NOT a problem for me.

people making *everything* a sacrafice is.

[Jarv]

Sanctity of your home, eh? Take that another step. Shouldn't I be able to grow marijuana in my home then? Or take it in another direction, what if my house it such a mess that rodents invade and impact my neighbors?

I brought up the Patriot act b/c it seems a far more reasonable concern than having your fireplace limited. Come on LawDogs, you can afford that wood stove insert that will burn cleaner.

I look forward to burning wood I cut down on my property in my fireplace this Winter watching O'Reilly on Fox news showing how a wiretap caught a terrorist ring. Heck, I even burn garbage there sometimes ...

:).

Maybe later I'll treat myself to a couple hundred rounds at the shooting range.

[iceberg]

I look forward to burning wood I cut down on my property in my fireplace this Winter watching O'Reilly on Fox news showing how a wiretap caught a terrorist ring. Heck, I even burn garbage there sometimes ...

:).

Maybe later I'll treat myself to a couple hundred rounds at the shooting range.

you planet killer....

we've been burning wood since before man could grunt up something understood yet now - it's hurting the environment or a problem to some. please, regulate my life more and give me more changes i tradition i must swallow *because*. then when i disagree, please tell me what a selfish individual i am.

[AbeBeta]

no. what *I* call PC is someone saying their way of thinking is better than mine and forcing me to change.

like the inability to say "merry christmas" or santa saying "ho ho ho" cause it "offends" people. i'm sorry if you don't understand why i feel this way, but it's not simple categorization.

Merry Christmas doesn't offend people - the idiotic assumption that everyone celebrates Christmas and is Christian does.

Let me ask this, if people wished you a Happy Eid ul-Fitr every day for a month would you be annoyed? Feel not included? Sure you would. They'd be suggesting their holiday and way of thinking was better than yours -- after all, why the hell would anyone be different?

You don't want issues like global warming shoved down your throat? Then why are you cool with Christmas being shoved down mine?

[iceberg]

Merry Christmas doesn't offend people - the idiotic assumption that everyone celebrates Christmas and is Christian does.

Let me ask this, if people wished you a Happy Eid ul-Fitr every day for a month would you be annoyed? Feel not included? Sure you would. They'd be suggesting their holiday and way of thinking was better than yours -- after all, why the hell would anyone be different?

You don't want issues like global warming shoved down your throat? Then why are you cool with Christmas being shoved down mine?

am i in a land where eid ul fitr has been a tradition for hundreds of years? if so, i learn their ways, not expect them to learn mine. if i want to fit in, i understand why they do it and take no offense at it.

so no. i wouldn't but by all means, continue to answer these questions you put before me, for me.

if i go to rome, they won't change for me, *I WENT THERE*.

if i go to mexico, will they put up signs in both languages for me so i feel ok and warm and fuzzy? or will they have some form of expectation that since i went there, i'm ok learning their culture.

i can keep my own culture w/o being offended by someone celebrating their own. but i do find it odd you can have culture appreciation months in many companies as long as it's not our own.

i'm not ashamed of who i am or the way this country has come to be. barring few examples here and there, sure. and yea, i hate the song "have your self a merry little xmas"cause it's condecending. merry "little" xmas? so yes, forgive me if i expect people who come *here* to live *by their own choice* to allow our own cultures to move on with me. they can celebrate theirs. i support that too. i'll buy a dradel for a kid if it helps.

all races and nations are welcome to celebrate xmas with us. if you'd rather not - then don't. but don't expect an entire country of hundreds of years of traditions to simply go "sorry, my bad" because someone that came here misses home.

they're more than welcome to have the same freedoms i do. but that's not to generasize all faiths to the point none mean anything.

too PC for me.

merry christmas.

[AbeBeta]

am i in a land where eid ul fitr has been a tradition for hundreds of years? if so, i learn their ways, not expect them to learn mine. if i want to fit in, i understand why they do it and take no offense at it.

so no. i wouldn't but by all means, continue to answer these questions you put before me, for me.

if i go to rome, they won't change for me, *I WENT THERE*.

if i go to mexico, will they put up signs in both languages for me so i feel ok and warm and fuzzy? or will they have some form of expectation that since i went there, i'm ok learning their culture.

i can keep my own culture w/o being offended by someone celebrating their own. but i do find it odd you can have culture appreciation months in many companies as long as it's not our own.

i'm not ashamed of who i am or the way this country has come to be. barring few examples here and there, sure. and yea, i hate the song "have your self a merry little xmas"cause it's condecending. merry "little" xmas? so yes, forgive me if i expect people who come *here* to live *by their own choice* to allow our own cultures to move on with me. they can celebrate theirs. i support that too. i'll buy a dradel for a kid if it helps.

all races and nations are welcome to celebrate xmas with us. if you'd rather not - then don't. but don't expect an entire country of hundreds of years of traditions to simply go "sorry, my bad" because someone that came here misses home.

they're more than welcome to have the same freedoms i do. but that's not to generasize all faiths to the point none mean anything.

too PC for me.

merry christmas.

So are you saying that the nation, as it was historically -- e.g., Christian and English speaking -- must remain so despite major changes to the population? Just to take two groups for example, we've seen a huge growth in Hispanics and Islam worshipers. What you call "PC" is about recognizing that countries change rather than clinging to the past. We can recognize change by shedding the assumption that everyone is just like us rather than simply saying "I was here first - you fit in."

Seriously now, is it really such a huge deal to have to have a "holiday" party rather than a Christmas party? Or to think before you wish Mohammed or Hillel a Merry Christmas?

[jterrell]

ahhh my eyes, my eyes....

i hate siding with the third reich here :lmao2: but Merry Christmas is not offensive to anyone but the insatiably miserable.

i have athiest friends who i wish merry christmas too and they wish me back a merry xmas or whatever but they do not get their feelings hurt.

now berating someone with merry christmas over and over as an insult is a different thing but well wishes based on one's own beliefs directed to another without malice is just friendly. anyone who wants to wish me happy hannakuh or happy kwanza i am ok by that. heck, i'll even accept gifts:)

[AbeBeta]

ahhh my eyes, my eyes....

i hate siding with the third reich here :lmao2: but Merry Christmas is not offensive to anyone but the insatiably miserable.

i have athiest friends who i wish merry christmas too and they wish me back a merry xmas or whatever but they do not get their feelings hurt.

now berating someone with merry christmas over and over as an insult is a different thing but well wishes based on one's own beliefs directed to another without malice is just friendly. anyone who wants to wish me happy hannakuh or happy kwanza i am ok by that. heck, i'll even accept gifts:)

I'm not saying it is offensive to me -- but I know others for whom it is as it highlights that they are different and that their obvious differences are not being respected by others. I've seen dudes who wear yarmulkes wished Merry Christmas -- that can be taken as very disrespectful by some. At worst it is just plain ignorant.

But again, my original point here is that Christmas is something that is "shoved down people's throats" and we need to recognize that we do so. Everyone who complains about other issues being 'shoved down their throats' needs to think about this. You wanna shove Christmas down my throat, fine. But shut up when you perceive others to be pushing beliefs you don't agree with (e.g., environmental issues).

[BrAinPaiNt]

Bah Humbug and I am tired of environmental issues.

So there...a big screw you to all. :p: ;)

[AbeBeta]

Bah Humbug and I am tired of environmental issues.

So there...a big screw you to all. :p: ;)

I am so giving you a stocking full of carbon credits this year

[iceberg]

So are you saying that the nation, as it was historically -- e.g., Christian and English speaking -- must remain so despite major changes to the population? Just to take two groups for example, we've seen a huge growth in Hispanics and Islam worshipers. What you call "PC" is about recognizing that countries change rather than clinging to the past. We can recognize change by shedding the assumption that everyone is just like us rather than simply saying "I was here first - you fit in."

Seriously now, is it really such a huge deal to have to have a "holiday" party rather than a Christmas party? Or to think before you wish Mohammed or Hillel a Merry Christmas?

why should i put away traditions i've done for 42 years because muslems are here now and want to practice things *their* way? i'm not stopping them. hell, i'll help build a mosque if they need me to. i *encourage* them to do whatever it is that makes them comfortable.

should this country change? sure. but to what degree and why? because muslems whine? do we simply stop all we do because someone can't understand OUR side of things? is it such a huge deal for them to recognize *our* ways and if not participate, at least be respectful?

i don't want to cling to the past simply because it's the past anymore than i want to change simply because someone whined. both can be dangerous in their own ways.

i should not have to alter my faith and ways simply because the PC generation is trying to ensure no one gets hurt or offended. that's an impossiblity and i learned long ago not everyone will be happy at all times. esp in big mixed crowds. switching to "holiday" party vs. x-mas seems to be a parent doing whatever it takes to make the child stop crying.

you come to america, expect to see american culture that's been around since we founded this country. if that's offensive to you, then maybe this country *isn't* for you.

i can't see another country bending over backwards to ensure those not natural to there are comfortable and not offended. not saying this is the model to follow, but you give someone rights, suddenly they want mine too.

i should not have to give up my rights for someone else to appreciate their own. if i worked for a japanese company i'd expect it to have japanese influences. not say "hey, we hired some white boy - put santa up now so he's happy".

like i said - i encourage them to participate in their own faith and traditions. but i also encourage us to keep the ones we've had and not change for the sake of a few people not being able to understand.

is it really a BIG problem or have a few just whined really loud?

[iceberg]

I'm not saying it is offensive to me -- but I know others for whom it is as it highlights that they are different and that their obvious differences are not being respected by others. I've seen dudes who wear yarmulkes wished Merry Christmas -- that can be taken as very disrespectful by some. At worst it is just plain ignorant.

But again, my original point here is that Christmas is something that is "shoved down people's throats" and we need to recognize that we do so. Everyone who complains about other issues being 'shoved down their throats' needs to think about this. You wanna shove Christmas down my throat, fine. But shut up when you perceive others to be pushing beliefs you don't agree with (e.g., environmental issues).

wow - the old "shut up if you don't like it". fine. then tell those who get upset at a simple greeting to quit getting their panties in a wad as it was NOT meant with disrespect. they can reply back with their own greeting and i'd just say 'thanks'! if it's meant to be a polite well wish statement.

merry christmas is meant to be a friendly statement of goodwill and hope that the other party you're telling that too is having a good 'holiday' season and hopes they're doing well. it's not "you will take my God and love him damn it!" as they're trying to turn it into.

[AbeBeta]

why should i put away traditions i've done for 42 years because muslems are here now and want to practice things *their* way? i'm not stopping them. hell, i'll help build a mosque if they need me to. i *encourage* them to do whatever it is that makes them comfortable.

should this country change? sure. but to what degree and why? because muslems whine? do we simply stop all we do because someone can't understand OUR side of things? is it such a huge deal for them to recognize *our* ways and if not participate, at least be respectful?

i don't want to cling to the past simply because it's the past anymore than i want to change simply because someone whined. both can be dangerous in their own ways.

i should not have to alter my faith and ways simply because the PC generation is trying to ensure no one gets hurt or offended. that's an impossiblity and i learned long ago not everyone will be happy at all times. esp in big mixed crowds. switching to "holiday" party vs. x-mas seems to be a parent doing whatever it takes to make the child stop crying.

you come to america, expect to see american culture that's been around since we founded this country. if that's offensive to you, then maybe this country *isn't* for you.

i can't see another country bending over backwards to ensure those not natural to there are comfortable and not offended. not saying this is the model to follow, but you give someone rights, suddenly they want mine too.

i should not have to give up my rights for someone else to appreciate their own. if i worked for a japanese company i'd expect it to have japanese influences. not say "hey, we hired some white boy - put santa up now so he's happy".

like i said - i encourage them to participate in their own faith and traditions. but i also encourage us to keep the ones we've had and not change for the sake of a few people not being able to understand.

is it really a BIG problem or have a few just whined really loud?

Again -- what I'm hearing is that it is OK to shove stuff down people's throat if you agree with it or practice it. But when others shove things down your throat you don't agree with it and feel you are in the right. Why does one immigrant group get to come and set the standard? That seems awful ethnocentric to me -- the "we got here and kicked ***" so we get to say what goes argument just doesn't cut it.

[AbeBeta]

wow - the old "shut up if you don't like it". fine. then tell those who get upset at a simple greeting to quit getting their panties in a wad as it was NOT meant with disrespect. they can reply back with their own greeting and i'd just say 'thanks'! if it's meant to be a polite well wish statement.

merry christmas is meant to be a friendly statement of goodwill and hope that the other party you're telling that too is having a good 'holiday' season and hopes they're doing well. it's not "you will take my God and love him damn it!" as they're trying to turn it into.

You mean it as a statement of goodwill and most people take it that way. But it is perfectly reasonable that others who don't believe was anything more than a false prophet and have been persecuted for that belief -- might have a very different perspective. The birth of for those folks does not represent goodwill but rather a belief system that promoted terrible outcomes for many. Surely you can see why those folks might be a *little* upset about you telling them to enjoy the celebration of ' birth.

[iceberg]

You mean it as a statement of goodwill and most people take it that way. But it is perfectly reasonable that others who don't believe was anything more than a false prophet and have been persecuted for that belief -- might have a very different perspective. The birth of for those folks does not represent goodwill but rather a belief system that promoted terrible outcomes for many. Surely you can see why those folks might be a *little* upset about you telling them to enjoy the celebration of ' birth.

again, the basic premise you give me is that their rights are ok but i must keep mine to myself. i must respect how they believe but keep my beliefs to myself.

the key is "most" people, americans and those who moved here or otherwise, understand. are we dealing with just a few people who yell - like we commonly do in any aspect. there are extremists in all points of view, i understand that. if this is 5% of the muslem community who's "outraged" we'd dare say or have merry christmas" in print somewhere, why do the rest change for the 1?

awhile back we were going to have a team dinner at a very nice rest. where they carve the meat in front of you and you eat all you want. about $60 a head + drinks/desert/coffee. 29 people were fine with it, 1 person was a vegatarian and said no. we wound up having to go somewhere that 1 person was happy with and in the end, that person didn't even go after making 29 people change.

so again, i ask how big of a problem is it *Overall*? the "i'm sensitive pc generation" does bother me. how come that's meaningless but what bothers them is critical?

again, all i'm after is mutual respect with the common "default" being the traditions of the country you're in. if we start changing with the wind, to me we lose identity and a history and i don't understand why we should do that, *IF* as you say, most understand and are not offended.

i don't believe the majority should change for a small minority. that's all.

[jterrell]

Bah Humbug and I am tired of environmental issues.

So there...a big screw you to all. :p: ;)

you really need to control your gas, that is bad for the environment and well really all involved. :lmao2:

[iceberg]

Again -- what I'm hearing is that it is OK to shove stuff down people's throat if you agree with it or practice it. But when others shove things down your throat you don't agree with it and feel you are in the right. Why does one immigrant group get to come and set the standard? That seems awful ethnocentric to me -- the "we got here and kicked ***" so we get to say what goes argument just doesn't cut it.

we can set the standard cause we founded this country. maybe not by the most noble of means, but i can't think of too many countries that were taken over by peaceful means.

i'm not shoving anything down anyones throat. in your scenario we now live in a world where you question the color of car i drive. the way i dress. the way i decide to decorate my home. why? because someone may be offended if i don't.

again - name me another country that takes immigration into account to such a "gosh, i don't want to offend you" level. the default expectation is that you came here, understand we have our ways. your way i change to any whiner and have no identity.

[AbeBeta]

again - name me another country that takes immigration into account to such a "gosh, i don't want to offend you" level. the default expectation is that you came here, understand we have our ways. your way i change to any whiner and have no identity.

Interesting, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, however Iceberg may define Christianity as the default religion of the nation.

[iceberg]

Interesting, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, however Iceberg may define Christianity as the default religion of the nation.

by default then, what is?

and if congress can make no law respecting the establishment of it, then how come they can make one that says i can't practice it?

you're fighting one side and i'm trying to see both. this is going nowhere.

i understand a few people may find it offensive. but when i find something offensive and i'm in the minority, *i* change or alter my behavior.

you're more or less advocating that the country changes it's ways for a few. that is at least how you're coming across since you also said "most" don't have a problem with it.

if most don't, why so much attention to the few?

just because there isn't a law in place doesn't mean there isn't a default religion. we founded this country on religious freedom did we not? who's stopping them from replying with their own way of thought?

no one.

so why is this an issue?

cause the PC crowd thinks they get it right every time and want to force that down my throat and it gets old.

we live in a majority rules country. i didn't make it that way and i can't change it from where i am. but the PC crowd who's afraid to offend one or two people sure want millions to change for a few.

i just don't see that as practical, logical, or beneficial in the end.

i won't stop them from doing their thing, leave me to my thing and let's figure out a way to get along, not generasize the world.

[AbeBeta]

so why is this an issue?

cause the PC crowd thinks they get it right every time and want to force that down my throat and it gets old.

we live in a majority rules country. i didn't make it that way and i can't change it from where i am. but the PC crowd who's afraid to offend one or two people sure want millions to change for a few.

i just don't see that as practical, logical, or beneficial in the end.

i won't stop them from doing their thing, leave me to my thing and let's figure out a way to get along, not generasize the world.

Majority rules? So that means that folks not in the majority need to suck it?

Perhaps if you though of this not as "don't offend" but rather "make everyone welcome" you wouldn't be as fired up.

I find it funny you focus on the majority rules issue. We've established that the majority of scientific organizations believe that human consumption is causing global warming - yet you don't accept that.

[iceberg]

Majority rules? So that means that folks not in the majority need to suck it?

Perhaps if you though of this not as "don't offend" but rather "make everyone welcome" you wouldn't be as fired up.

I find it funny you focus on the majority rules issue. We've established that the majority of scientific organizations believe that human consumption is causing global warming - yet you don't accept that.

and i don't tell people to stop behaving the way they do either, do i?

those who hate bush have had to "suck it", right? i do hope i've been more respectful in my replies to you than saying "you don't like it - screw you!". so i'd appreciate it if you'd not try to put me on that side. i'm not saying "suck it" i'm saying find better ways than stopping traditions 100% all together.

i said i'd be glad to open my mind to other religions and learn more about them.
i'd help build a mosque if they need my help so they can practice their religion.
we should put up 4-5 displays at this time of the year in public places and talk openly about differences *and* simularities vs. remain ignorant.

so far you're just trying to twist what i say to some perverse view you can then argue with but i'm not going there. my stance is clear.

you do your thing. i'll do mine. respect the other and there is no problem. tell me i'm wrong and suddenly - we've got to hash it out.

the minority can work for change within the common means available to them. it's how the system works and it's how yes - things change. but again, how many people and what % of the population actually finds:

"merry christmas"

offensive?

if 2%, yes, they need to find a way to deal with it and not force 98% to do it their way.

are you advocating that 2% who whine really loud should get their way and the 98% who are ok with it should "suck it"?

[AbeBeta]

the minority can work for change within the common means available to them. it's how the system works and it's how yes - things change. but again, how many people and what % of the population actually finds:


So people putting forward what you call a "PC" agenda are pretty much doing this -- they are working for change withing the common means available to them.

They do so and you call them whiners.

[iceberg]

So people putting forward what you call a "PC" agenda are pretty much doing this -- they are working for change withing the common means available to them.

They do so and you call them whiners.

what % of people *want* this change? 2%? 5%? we're quick to cave in because no one wants to be seen as insensitive. is that right? should 95-98% stop their faith for the 2-5%? you've never answered that, only implied they have rights we can't ignore then take away my rights to give to them. yes, i have a problem with that mentality. very PC.

and they're not asking me to change, or trying to find a common ground, they're TELLING me to change.

i find that offensive so therefor they must stop it.

hey, i'm using YOUR logic now.

why do you not tell me what % of the population is asking for this? is there a reason for that? if we can't rule by majority, how else would you advocate we do it?

work with me to find solutions to problems, i'm there. tell me I FIND THAT OFFENSiVE - STOP IT! we got a problem. so far i see section 2 shouting loud and clear vs. anyone actually trying solution 1.

merry christmas.

[AbeBeta]

what % of people *want* this change? 2%? 5%? we're quick to cave in because no one wants to be seen as insensitive. is that right? should 95-98% stop their faith for the 2-5%? you've never answered that, only implied they have rights we can't ignore then take away my rights to give to them. yes, i have a problem with that mentality. very PC.

and they're not asking me to change, or trying to find a common ground, they're TELLING me to change.

i find that offensive so therefor they must stop it.

hey, i'm using YOUR logic now.

why do you not tell me what % of the population is asking for this? is there a reason for that? if we can't rule by majority, how else would you advocate we do it?

What %? Obviously enough to have an impact. And if enough people are vocal enough to be heard and have their opinions honored then really, who are you to say it isn't "enough" people. Clearly it is enough to bring about some sort of change and awareness that Merry Christmas all over the place pisses some folks off.

[iceberg]

What %? Obviously enough to have an impact. And if enough people are vocal enough to be heard and have their opinions honored then really, who are you to say it isn't "enough" people. Clearly it is enough to bring about some sort of change and awareness that Merry Christmas all over the place pisses some folks off.

well lets see - so far i've tried to:

build a mosque to help get along and keep the common peace.
suggest doing the top 5 religions as displays in public places and have reps there to answer questions about their faith
have opportunities to discuss and learn about other faiths vs. forcing 1

and more if i go back and look.

you've just said more or less to shut up and never say *it* again.

what ever happened to freedom of speech in this instance, btw? is freedom to tell people to shut up more important?

and i never said it may not piss SOME people off. SOME people need to get thicker skins and quit trying to make MOST suit ONLY THEIR purposes.

SOME times anyway.

as i can see i've offered compromise and been open to suggestions to try and resolve this hellacious problem that will surely scar kids of non-christian faiths for all eternity (if MTV reruns hasn't already done that) and the only answer you give me is to take my rights away for SOME people.

not very realistic but hey - *very* PC.

hence my problem with it.

[iceberg]

What %? Obviously enough to have an impact. And if enough people are vocal enough to be heard and have their opinions honored then really, who are you to say it isn't "enough" people. Clearly it is enough to bring about some sort of change and awareness that Merry Christmas all over the place pisses some folks off.

btw - 1 loudmouth is still 1. just annoying at times.

[Ben_n_austin]

You guys are putting me to sleep with this crap. Everyone knows that we should strive towards weening off of fossil fuels completely--it's going to run out.

The question is, when do we pull our head out and realize that the fuel issue controls our society?

Who cares about the validity or soundness of global warming. By the time we're done figuring that out, we'll be out of oil.

This has been made into a political debate when the answer has been obvious all along: We need to change.

[AbeBeta]

well lets see - so far i've tried to:

build a mosque to help get along and keep the common peace.
suggest doing the top 5 religions as displays in public places and have reps there to answer questions about their faith
have opportunities to discuss and learn about other faiths vs. forcing 1

and more if i go back and look.

you've just said more or less to shut up and never say *it* again.

what ever happened to freedom of speech in this instance, btw? is freedom to tell people to shut up more important?

and i never said it may not piss SOME people off. SOME people need to get thicker skins and quit trying to make MOST suit ONLY THEIR purposes.

SOME times anyway.

as i can see i've offered compromise and been open to suggestions to try and resolve this hellacious problem that will surely scar kids of non-christian faiths for all eternity (if MTV reruns hasn't already done that) and the only answer you give me is to take my rights away for SOME people.

not very realistic but hey - *very* PC.

hence my problem with it.

That clearly wasn't what I said -- this isn't about someone "suiting" someone else's purposes -- it is about recognizing that just because you happen to be in a majority that you don't shove your views -- or in this case your holiday -- willie nillie down the throats of those of everyone around you. This is about everyone taking that time to realize that other people celebrate other holidays and that, despite your belief that they should get thicker skin, that throwing alleged prophets in someone's face has the potential to offend.

At the very least, think before you wish everyone Merry Freaking Christmas. That dude in your office who won't go out Friday nights and that guy Mohammed, neither of whom wanted any leftover ham -- those dudes might not dig your Christmas wishes. That weird chick who dresses like Stevie Nix and talks about being a witch? Likely not down with Christmas. Toss them a Happy Holidays . That hottie in the Santa hat and reindeer sweater? Probably OK to go with Merry Christmas.

[Viper]

It’s funny how the oil industry manipulates some people. Oil and gas prices are extremely high, individuals are looking for alternatives to heat their homes. Let’s ban those alternatives! BTW, there are high efficiency fireplaces, kicking out up to 70,000 BTU’s.

[Viper]

You don't want issues like global warming shoved down your throat? Then why are you cool with Christmas being shoved down mine?

Your wife making you doesn’t equate to us shoving it down your throat!:D

[jterrell]

You guys are putting me to sleep with this crap. Everyone knows that we should strive towards weening off of fossil fuels completely--it's going to run out.

The question is, when do we pull our head out and realize that the fuel issue controls our society?

Who cares about the validity or soundness of global warming. By the time we're done figuring that out, we'll be out of oil.

This has been made into a political debate when the answer has been obvious all along: We need to change.

absol-friggin-lutely.

i do not know how many times this needs to be stated to be understood.

it's like one side saying to beat the packers we need to run the ball because this or that stat point sot that while the other side argues vehemently against that stat. in the end you still have to beat the friggin packers regardless.

look out for those trees....

[iceberg]

That clearly wasn't what I said -- this isn't about someone "suiting" someone else's purposes -- it is about recognizing that just because you happen to be in a majority that you don't shove your views -- or in this case your holiday -- willie nillie down the throats of those of everyone around you. This is about everyone taking that time to realize that other people celebrate other holidays and that, despite your belief that they should get thicker skin, that throwing alleged prophets in someone's face has the potential to offend.

At the very least, think before you wish everyone Merry Freaking Christmas. That dude in your office who won't go out Friday nights and that guy Mohammed, neither of whom wanted any leftover ham -- those dudes might not dig your Christmas wishes. That weird chick who dresses like Stevie Nix and talks about being a witch? Likely not down with Christmas. Toss them a Happy Holidays . That hottie in the Santa hat and reindeer sweater? Probably OK to go with Merry Christmas.

there's a HUGE difference betweeen asking me to be more considerate of those who may not be christian vs. not allowing "merry christmas" to be said and public displays of our tradition still allowed.

to me that is what you were saying.

i shouldn't say merry christmas but i should stereotype and profile based off looks? i can't win that way either cause now i'm stupid and just stereotype.

i understand and in fact *am* considerate of other views. hence my wanting to compromise on so many levels. but there should not be laws passed to stop 200 year old traditions because SOME people don't like it.

if "majority rules" (and in this case, vast majority i would imagine) rules bothers you, what else would you suggest to come to a final resolution?

[AbeBeta]

i shouldn't say merry christmas but i should stereotype and profile based off looks? i can't win that way either cause now i'm stupid and just stereotype.


You aren't stereotyping - you are being careful not to offend someone who potentially doesn't celebrate Christmas by using the more universal "happy holidays" - that's called being aware and sensitive to cultural differences.

[iceberg]

You aren't stereotyping - you are being careful not to offend someone who potentially doesn't celebrate Christmas by using the more universal "happy holidays" - that's called being aware and sensitive to cultural differences.

the issue as i understood it was that we should't say merry xmas or celebrate our holidays as we have for 200+ years. we shouldn't put up xmas displays and so forth.

NOW the issue seems to be "please be aware the middle eastern person next to you may not want to hear it and just say happy holidays instead".

which is it?

i do the 2nd all the time because i'm not out to offend anyone and do understand the differences. however, i disagree on the 1st one that we shouldn't stop all our traditions for a few that find it offensive.

are you or are you not NOT advocating we stop openly celebrating xmas? (edit - sick last few days and type worse than usual on my rubber keyboard)

[iceberg]

You aren't stereotyping - you are being careful not to offend someone who potentially doesn't celebrate Christmas by using the more universal "happy holidays" - that's called being aware and sensitive to cultural differences.

however, a side question now - are you against profiling at an airport for example? since we can use their skins color and "typical" background to know when and when not to say something like "merry xmas" can we also use it as a way to filter terrorists? is that also being aware of cultural differences?

[AbeBeta]

however, a side question now - are you against profiling at an airport for example? since we can use their skins color and "typical" background to know when and when not to say something like "merry xmas" can we also use it as a way to filter terrorists? is that also being aware of cultural differences?

Completely different issue -- one involves being respectful and the other attributing negative characteristics.

[iceberg]

Completely different issue -- one involves being respectful and the other attributing negative characteristics.

but you use the same criteria for either. their skin color and/or method of dress.

if i go to someone who's apparantely from the middle east and use their own terminology so i sound all PC and "with it" - what if he's been born in america, christian, and has a kid in the school pageant playing a wise man this year.

you're asking me to stereotype and be sensitive in every instance for the 2-3 times in 100 it may really matter.

and you've still not said if we should or should not stop openly celebrating xmas.

but since we're not getting anywhere, i'll close by saying i need to get some wood for my fireplace cause i feel like a fire in there. hopefully i don't cause too much harm to the world.

happy merry holidays this christmas.

[AbeBeta]

but you use the same criteria for either. their skin color and/or method of dress.

if i go to someone who's apparantely from the middle east and use their own terminology so i sound all PC and "with it" - what if he's been born in america, christian, and has a kid in the school pageant playing a wise man this year.

you're asking me to stereotype and be sensitive in every instance for the 2-3 times in 100 it may really matter.

and you've still not said if we should or should not stop openly celebrating xmas.

but since we're not getting anywhere, i'll close by saying i need to get some wood for my fireplace cause i feel like a fire in there. hopefully i don't cause too much harm to the world.

happy merry holidays this christmas.

and I'll close by saying you need to look into wood stove inserts. You'll use far less wood and cut your heating bills considerably.

[iceberg]

good advice. thank you. : )

[ConcordCowboy]

Sorry...I believe in Global Warming, but I draw the line at my Fireplace.

I like it and it stays.:D

[iceberg]

Sorry...I believe in Global Warming, but I draw the line at my Fireplace.

I like it and it stays.:D

planet hater. 3 whales and 2 square feet of rainforrest just died because of you.

[ConcordCowboy]

planet hater. 3 whales and 2 square feet of rainforrest just died because of you.

Holybejeeeezus I didn't realize how much damage they did.

OK...lets board them all up!