Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Can someone explain the purpose of this resolution to me?

  1. Dec 17, 2007 #1

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This was just passed on December the 6th. Why?

    Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith. (Introduced in House)

    HRES 847 IH1S


    110th CONGRESS

    1st Session

    H. RES. 847
    Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.


    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    December 6, 2007
    Mr. KING of Iowa (for himself, Mr. AKIN, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. BAKER, Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CARTER, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. FEENEY, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Ms. FOXX, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GINGREY, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. HAYES, Mr. HERGER, Mr. ISSA, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. JORDAN of Ohio, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. KLINE of Minnesota, Mr. KUHL of New York, Mr. LAHOOD, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LAMPSON, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. MCCAUL of Texas, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mrs. MUSGRAVE, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. POE, Mr. SALI, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. TERRY, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. WALBERG, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, and Mrs. DRAKE) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    RESOLUTION
    Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.

    Whereas Christmas, a holiday of great significance to Americans and many other cultures and nationalities, is celebrated annually by Christians throughout the United States and the world;

    Whereas there are approximately 225,000,000 Christians in the United States, making Christianity the religion of over three-fourths of the American population;

    Whereas there are approximately 2,000,000,000 Christians throughout the world, making Christianity the largest religion in the world and the religion of about one-third of the world population;

    Whereas Christians identify themselves as those who believe in the salvation from sin offered to them through the sacrifice of their savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and who, out of gratitude for the gift of salvation, commit themselves to living their lives in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible;

    Whereas Christians and Christianity have contributed greatly to the development of western civilization;

    Whereas the United States, being founded as a constitutional republic in the traditions of western civilization, finds much in its history that points observers back to its roots in Christianity;

    Whereas on December 25 of each calendar year, American Christians observe Christmas, the holiday celebrating the birth of their savior, Jesus Christ;

    Whereas for Christians, Christmas is celebrated as a recognition of God's redemption, mercy, and Grace; and

    Whereas many Christians and non-Christians throughout the United States and the rest of the world, celebrate Christmas as a time to serve others: Now, therefore be it


    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

    (1) recognizes the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world;

    (2) expresses continued support for Christians in the United States and worldwide;

    (3) acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and the Christian faith;

    (4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization;

    (5) rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and

    (6) expresses its deepest respect to American Christians and Christians throughout the world.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110HeWjhL::
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 17, 2007 #2

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Ostensibly, it looks good to a majority of their constituents and to the religious majority in the US. I can't read their minds, nor would I want to try - but presumably it's free advertising for next year's (2008) Congressional elections.

    i.e. it's politics as usual. :rolleyes: :yuck:

    To further elaborate, and to be more precise -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_(law)#Non-binding - well it's wikipedia, but it's reasonable correct. I'm sure the definition of non-binding resolution and how it entitled or described is buried in the House Rules, somewhere over the last 200+ years.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2007
  4. Dec 17, 2007 #3

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Ok, that's not what I'm asking. I know what a resolution is. :smile:

    What is the purpose behind the resolution? Sucking up to a specific religious group? Is this what we pay them to do? I find it appalling.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2007
  5. Dec 17, 2007 #4
    Recognize Christmas for what it is, a Christian holiday that celebrates the birth of one of the most influential people to ever walk the earth. I think you are over-reacting. Don't be a scrouge!
     
  6. Dec 17, 2007 #5

    FredGarvin

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I think Christmas/Jesus has enough PR people already working for him. He doesn't need a congressional resolution. It's a waste of time and our money.
     
  7. Dec 17, 2007 #6

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Hey, I'm not a scourge, not yet. :wink:

    They're singley recognizing Christians. Did you read it all?

    It's so transparent in praising Christians, gee do you think it might have a political purpose? This is America, where supposedly all faiths are equal, but not according to this. I think it's rather insulting to people of other faiths, and those who choose no faith. I think the way it's worded is very wrong, and there is no justifiable reason for it.

    Nothing against Christians, but other religions are celebrating holidays this time of year. Oh, but they don't constitute as large a base of voters. :rolleyes:

    I'm steamed. This is so wrong. There is supposed to be no favortism.
     
  8. Dec 17, 2007 #7

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't think Jesus would have approved (I've been watching all of the Jesus shows on National Geographic) you've got to admire the man, he was very smart.
     
  9. Dec 17, 2007 #8

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Well it's sucking up to a certain fraction of those who describe themselves as Christian. Christianity is not monolithic, and I'm sure there are many who would be offended in being lumped into a single group for the purposes of political gain.

    I also find it appalling and rather disingenuous, and very inappropriate. Why not wish all persons peace and goodwill regardless of their faith.


    I was thinking the same thing.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2007
  10. Dec 17, 2007 #9

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Maybe it was easier for them to all just vote on the resolution than to sign individual Christmas cards for all their constituents? :uhh:

    As a resolution, it does nothing, and it's not like there has been any concern about any of those matters that they needed to pass a resolution as a way of giving someone a slap on the wrist (often the purpose of a non-binding resolution), so I have to agree, they're just wasting our money to be spending time on this instead of other needed legislation (like the appropriations bill...cough...). So, yeah, I'm guessing it must be pandering to voters. Unless they wrote it up during the Christmas party over too much egg nog or something.
     
  11. Dec 17, 2007 #10
    Actually, I read in the news that this bill is a reaction by a Christian congressman (I think from Iowa) to similar measures that were recently passed recognizing Hinduism and Islam. So Congress is indeed recognizing a plurality of faiths, and Christianity didn't even come first.

    Hmm...I'm not entirely sure about this (the approval part, not the intelligence part). I tend not to watch religious shows on TV, but I have read the New Testament quite a few times, so I know most of what there is to know about Jesus. While Jesus would of course not approve of the politicians who think that regressive income tax and private gun ownership are necessarily the will of God, it seems to me that he would consider it all peoples' responsiblity to honor God both publically and privately.

    Alas, that's a discussion for which this board is not suited. What I can say, however, is that we might not be so quick to label all of these resolutions a waste of taxpayer money. All the pork that gets passed in Congress constitutes a far larger expenditure. And at the end of the day, most Americans call themselves religious in some sense or another. If politicians were to ignore the issue of religion, it would still not diminish the potent effect of religion on American culture. It's better to address the issue than to pretend it doesn't exist.
     
  12. Dec 18, 2007 #11

    chemisttree

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    What is interesting is that 9 Democrats voted against it! Last October's resolution recognizing the comencement of Ramadan had no nay votes....
    I don't think we have passed a similar resolution for Judaism.

    Maybe now Al-Qaeda will leave us alone!

    (Edit: Oh yes, a resolution recognizing Diwali (Indian holiday) passed with no nays as well October 29, 2007)
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2007
  13. Dec 18, 2007 #12

    chemisttree

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:


    :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2007
  14. Dec 18, 2007 #13
    I would vote this down in a heartbeat if given a chance. I'm not even sure the facts they claim are true. This document provides benefits to a specific religion, even if they are only observed and not practiced. It's almost like passing a law making Christianity the official religion of the United States.

    People's rights to freedom of religion are already protected by law. No individual should receive undue favors based on their belief.

    Next thing you'll see is court cases against people who decide to put Xmas signs outside their property.
     
  15. Dec 18, 2007 #14

    chemisttree

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Christmas is an official holiday in the US. Would you still vote against it? As a politician? That's just:rofl:
     
  16. Dec 18, 2007 #15
    Is that why it is on December 25th? I thought that was an effort by the church to overtake the Pagan celebration of winter solstice. Happy Festivus everyone!
     
  17. Dec 18, 2007 #16
    No, I don't care about Christmas. It's not Christmas that I would be voting against.

    What I would vote against would be #2, #5, #6, and possibly #4. I see no reason why the government should favor any religion, or support, based on faith, individuals who are not citizens of the United States.

    #4 kind of baffles me. Does this mean the U.S. government supports the Puritan's actions at the Salem witchcraft trials?
     
  18. Dec 18, 2007 #17

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I find the entire thing offensive. Our government has no business making "resolutions" recognizing any religion. (As if American Christians are a persecuted minority! :rofl:)
    This in particular seems yet another transparent attempt to rewrite early US history. Part of the "America is a Christian nation" propaganda campaign.

    Build up that wall!
     
  19. Dec 18, 2007 #18

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I thought it was about the annual appearance of some jolly old guy in a red suit with white trim. Ho, ho, ho!

    And what about the slaughter of millions of innocent trees, which are ritually sacrificed?! No word about that.
     
  20. Dec 18, 2007 #19
    Yes, I agree that this statement is in accordance with the first amendment (whether or not I agree with that philosophy is another issue...). But I think that the favoritism charge is largely mitigated by the similar resolutions passed acknowledging Hinduism and Islam. What's your opinion on these resolutions?
     
  21. Dec 18, 2007 #20
    If he existed, that is. This looks to me as almost violating the Establishment Clause (had it been binding).

    Hitchens, me like.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Can someone explain the purpose of this resolution to me?
Loading...