Originally Posted By wahooskipper I'm not raising my child as a consumer. And, I certainly don't plop my kid in front of the tv (though, admittedly, PBS and Nickelodeon are providing programming now that teaches something rather than just having a cat chase a mouse). But, part of my childhood was, in fact, making a trip to the mall to see Santa or the Easter Bunny. And, I still get chills when I see Santa at the end of the Disney Christmas parade or the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade. It is as much a part of me as the chills I get when I walk under the Main Street RR Station.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Yeah, childhood was much more precious back in the 'good old days.' Like, turn-of-the-century America, where my Grandmother, at the age of 9, drove the family's muleteam through their crops. My grandmother is 98 years old. She'll set you straight about 'the good old days' and how precious things seemed. It's a better world now, people. Which has very little to do with The Easter Bunny.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer You had the Easter Bunny in the mall when you grew up, wahooskipper? I didn't. The idea of having pictures taken with the Easter Bunny came along relatively recently. And all so you parents could drag you in to have your picture taken with him for a few bucks. But I'm glad you aren't raising your child as a consumer and that you don't use TV as a babysitter. But don't you agree that there is too much commercialism aimed at our kids?
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Well, we are all enjoying a website devoted to a company that has mastered the art of commercialism aimed at kids. Is there too much of it? Absolutely. Yes, we did have the Easter Bunny at the mall when I was a kid. Must be something about those wacky Californians. All I'm saying is that the role of the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause (and the tooth fairy and the Great Pumpkin for that matter) is farily innocent. If you aren't into it, hey...that's fine. But, I don't think the answer is to drive away their imaginary existence.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer I agree that the role is innocent - that's why I hate to see that role co-opted for profits and marketing.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Well, American Greetings created a holiday (Sweetest Day) to sell more greeting cards. Talk about commercialism! I have to say though, if the malls didn't have Santa and the Bunny, I don't know who would. I work for a City in South Florida. In years past the parks and recreation department would have Santa drive through town on Christmas Eve and have the big Easter Egg Hunts. You can guess what happened there...government can't do that anymore. I guess private entities are the only other option so you might see Santa at an amusement park or a mall.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "Need to start renaming those planets because some kid may turn into a serial killer because the planets they study may benamed after greek or Roman Gods and the religious right thinks they may be brainwashed. While we're at it get rid of Mars bars ....Saturn cars...." Well, I nominate Uranus, for obvious reasons, LOL!
Originally Posted By TomSawyer The malls still have Santa and the Bunny. They aren't going anywhere. Their name might change as the religious holidays get more and more diluted by commercialism, but they'll still be there. But it isn't the liberals forcing them to change their names in the malls - it's business.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I don't think it is business because I don't think there is a great outcry of Americans saying, "hey...you can't call the big floppy thing the EASTER bunny! In fact, if you don't change the name RIGHT NOW then I'm not shopping here anymore!"
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA But again, what does 'The Easter Bunny' have to do with the actual holiday of Easter? Why decry the loss of 'The Easter Bunny' when perhaps the actual reason for Easter should be the cause of concern.
Originally Posted By sherrytodd As a non-Christian I felt that I should chime in as we as a group seem to be blamed for everything. So what is Easter and Christmas to a non-believer? To me it has been and always will be a celebration of family, of tradition and of childhood innocence. It drives me crazy that my son's school can no longer have Christmas parties, Easter parties or Halloween parties (you can't blame that one on us). The magic of childhood is dying. Children are becoming jaded. TV has taken the place of imagination and creativity that were a vital part of our childhoods. It's no wonder we can't relate to our children. We've sanitized all the things that would teach our children to relate to us. The mall manager can call the Easter bunny whatever he or she wants. In our house, the Easter bunny will always visit, my son will still try to catch leprachans in March, Trick or Treating will be mandatory and every year we will continue to get the biggest, most beautiful Christmas tree we can find. Because, when I share these traditions with my son, I'm passing on to him the traditions that my family created.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Yes it is wrong to have pagan symbols for christain holidays. But it wasn't any church that created those symbols.<< This may be true, but it was the Church that chose to coopt these symbols. Part of the genius of the Christian Church, after it had been officially adopted by Rome, was its program to win the "hearts and minds" of converts. (Just as Rome had conquered, and held, most of the Western world by recognizing, and accommodating, local customs in conquered territories.) The Church's skill at this is referenced quite well in the Wikipedia entry about Easter: >>Bede's Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum ("Ecclesiastic History of the English People") contains a letter from Pope Gregory I to Saint Mellitus, who was then on his way to England to conduct missionary work among the heathen Anglo-Saxons. The Pope suggests that converting heathens is easier if they are allowed to retain the outward forms of their traditional pagan practices and traditions, while recasting those traditions spiritually towards Christianity instead of to their indigenous gods (whom the Pope refers to as "devils"), "to the end that, whilst some gratifications are outwardly permitted them, they may the more easily consent to the inward consolations of the grace of God".<< <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter#Easter_controversies" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E aster#Easter_controversies</a> The Church's elevation and veneration of Mary was in direct response to the widespread worship of the Goddess in pagan cultures, since there was no equivalent in either Judaism or early Christianity. Indeed, the idea of Mary as either Immaculate, the Queen of the Universe, and the Mother of God is viewed as blasphemy by protestants (as it would be by the early Church). And what does all this have to do with the controversy over having the Easter Bunny removed from shopping malls in America in the early 21st century? Your guess is as good as mine. But I believe that the Easter Bunny transcends religious tradition, and is simply a part of our cultural landscape, a landscape that is becoming more barren on a daily basis as the forces of various and sundried narrowly defined causes clamor for satisfaction on their own terms.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Oh, and as far as "Sweetest Day" being a cooked up holiday to sell greeting cards, here's the Wikipedia entry on THAT one: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweetest_Day" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S weetest_Day</a> "Sweetest Day" was actually cooked up by the candy manufacturers, although the first one in 1922 was officially the idea of a candy company employee. Apparently it is strong in the upper midwest. I never heard of it growing up in Oregon. (Parenthetically, how could this holiday, started in 1922, be a response to the Great Depression???)
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Dug...#70...well said. As a good, Catholic parent I have no problem differntiating Christmas the winter shopping holiday with the Birth of Christ to my child. He gets to enjoy both celebrations. In a cute homage to both, on Christmas Eve our church has the usual array of Christian symbolism but at the end of the service the lights go out and a Santa Claus walks down the middle aisle bearing gifts for the newborn Jesus. It kind of makes the kids in the church remember the reason for the next day's joyous celebration. In other words...whats wrong with having both?
Originally Posted By sherrytodd RE #71 - Any excuse to eat more candy is good enough for me. *marks Sweetest Day on the calender*
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Sweetest Day is October 19th, same day as my anniversary...though we didn't plan it that way.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Count me in as someone who was unaware of "Sweetest Day." I wonder if it faded when Halloween became such a candy-heavy day. I think it might not have been so in the 20's.
Originally Posted By mele Yeah, like there needs to be more candy. Holiday candy shows up in stores in September (in Autumn colors for back-to-school lunches) and sticks around through Easter. We went to Target the on Dec. 26th last year and right next to the discounted Xmas candy, there were shelves of Valentine's candy. It's absurd. However, I have to admit that I like buying differently wrapped or colored candy. It's so stupid but I like pink M&Ms. LOL
