Attorney general (MA) tells Wal-Mart to close stores on Thanksgiving

BOSTON --Attorney General Tom Reilly told Wal-Mart officials on Tuesday they had to close their Massachusetts stores on Thanksgiving, after receiving complaints the retailer intended to stay open.

In a letter to the Arkansas-based company's local counsel, the chief of the attorney general's Business and Labor Protection Bureau said state law prohibits stores from opening on either Thursday or Sunday, Dec. 25, when Christmas will be celebrated.

"For more than a century, Massachusetts has recognized that Thanksgiving is unlike other days -- it is a day when families can come together and enjoy a day of rest," labor bureau Chief Nicholas Messuri wrote, citing revisions to the state's so-called Blue Laws as recently as 1994. "In that most recent revision of the law, the protection for Thanksgiving remained in place."

Those same laws allow the sale of retail drugs and medicines, so Messuri said Wal-Mart could open its pharmacies and permit employees directly operating them to work.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/11/23/attorney_general_tells_wal_mart_to_close_stores_on_thanksgiving/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News

Making sure no one has to work overtime that day? Gas stations? Airports? Air traffic controllers and police usually have to work. They get to go home?

STORES. Did you read the article linked to?

with their families, why isn't EVERYONE home with their families.

Your argument, I hope, is facetious.

it's just hard to remember the good old days when I lived with blue laws in Penna. Like being in the dark ages.

Having lived at near polar opposite ends of the spectrum both literally and philosophically -- Massachusetts and Florida -- I defend the blue laws in these special circumstances, even though Christmas is supposedely a Christian holiday, and shouldn't be "officially" recognized by the state. But the holiday itself is too much of a cultural thing anymore, diluted and devoid of original intent. Unless you consider the whole Jesus thing just a brilliant marketing strategy in and of itself, in which case the discussion veers off into dangerous territory best avoided here.

In Florida, nothing ever closes and you can practically buy beer at the toll booths, at 6:00 a.m. Sunday before Sunrise Service, if you're so inclined. So, moving to Massachusetts I found it refreshing in ways which you may not be able to fully understand until you've experienced the silence and peacefulness of world virtually closed down. No reason for people to go out, because nothing's open. Stay home with the family. Or don't; go hang out a bar with friends if that's what you want to do. But on these two days out of 365, no one has to go to work and the world just seems to slow down and mellow out, almost long enough to let you catch your breath.

We cannot allow our citizens to become total slaves to corporate America. White collar workers are familiar with the term "mental health days," and often take them when little more than the pressure of a PowerPoint presentation confronts them. Imagine working seven days a week, perhaps in a couple of different jobs, for piss-poor wages, for a big box that just wants to stay open so you'll give more of your paycheck back to the company store when you do your "Holiday Gift Giving." But in Massachusetts, there are at least two days,, two lousy stinking days out of 365, within a month of each other, no less!, when you are guaran-fucking-teed that The Man is not going to call you in to fill in for Lurleen on check-out, who called out sick again. No way.

These two days are the blue collar workers' "mental health days." Except for that they probably can't afford the lost wages, and....


*sigh*

>>>These two days are the blue collar workers' "mental health days."<<<

Workers of the world could get that every week.

Massachusetts law is pretty strict as to what can and cannot be open on holidays - especially Thanksgiving and Christmas.

Grocery stores and department stores cannot be open. I believe there's an employee level so smaller mom and pop places can be open. Not sure though.

I spent Thanksgiving in FL one year and I was flabergasted at what was open on that day. Not what I was used to at all.

Christmas Day. I spent a couple of them alone with absolutely nothing to do but watch the telly or read a book.

Remember, Florida derives a goodly bit of its income (and those lowly hourly wage workers their small living allowance) from tourism. Tourists don't like it when there is nothing to do and Thanksgiving and Christmas are the bigger part of wintertime tourism.

That said, most businesses that stay open on those days have abbreiviated hours.

It shocks me.

Not a year goes by when, while preparing Thanksgiving dinner, something comes up and I need to run to the store that morning to get a missing ingredient or replace something that has gone bad or that I didn't have in sufficient quantities. And its not just because I wait until the last minute to figure it out...I work long hours and I don't have the luxury of starting my Thanksgiving preparations days in advance.

onenote

A brazilian other stores. My Harris teeter closes at noon on Thanksgiving, and customers complain! I worked alot of retail holidays in my life, so I make sure HT management knows I shop there because they do this for their employees....

Because you never know- what if I get sick and need some cold medicine or whatever. But the problem for me was finding somewhere to eat when I could not get home for Thanksgiving and had nowhere else to go (I basically have no friends so sometimes spend holidays alone).

what do YOU think? do the air traffic controllers and police go home?

I imagine it's the issue of standard retail.

He is enforcing "blue" laws that have been on the books for centuries.

The AG himself has no such power to dictate, just to enforce.

This is not new. Shaws, a large supermarket chain, filed a complaint with the AG office to prevent Whole Foods from opening.

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2265132

that everything pretty much was closed, leaving the cities and towns virtual ghost towns on Thanksgiving. But a lot of restaurants would rather stay open, now, in order to let families eat Thanksgiving meals away from home. The employees DO volunteer in many places, but they also get double-overtime pay as well in many instances.

Many small businesses will open part of the day, usually the mornings. It's their call.

As someone who used to be on a rotating schedule, you take your chances as to which holiday someone is going to end up working. But it's inevitable that some people, in mandatory jobs, must work some holidays.

I started work at 4:45 am, and always volunteered to run a register when my office duties were done. $49.68 an hour for 8 hrs, went a loong way to taking care of Christmas expenses for the kids, and we were all off until Monday, so we just had turkey on Friday :)

straight time. It made me sick.

of a restaurant...we are all too tired to cook, and have renovations going on at home...!

The law is clear and stores tried this dodge years ago and failed.
The economy won't collapse if stores have to wait until 6 A.M.
Friday to open.

I didn't like blue laws that forced stores to be closed on Sundays when I was a kid and I don't like laws that force stores to be closed on Thanksgiving and Christmas. Shit, why are stores open on Veterans Day or Memorial Day, then. Or Martin Luther King's birthday? Shouldn't they close on those days so people can spend them in quiet reflection of the sacrifices of those who have defended this country or of a great man who struck a mighty blow for equality?

If the stores think that there is enough business out there to justify being open on these days, the state shouldn't stand in their way. I'm particularly glad that grocery stores are open here in Virginia on Thanksgiving day (at least for limited hours). A lot of folks work long hours during the week and the morning of Thanksgiving may be the only time they have to do some last minute shopping for items they need for their Thanksgiving dinner.

Dumb law.

onenote

Considering that this is a federal holiday, and my own union negotiated to get this day off for its members, I'll note your remark- and take exception.

Not personally, you understand, but on behalf of the workers. This is a day most people get off, especially kids. It's a federal holiday, soo everything "authority" or "official" is closed; nobody can do personal business not associated with purchasing. Unless one uses electronic account options in their bank, one cannot even transfer money from checking to savings.

Everything people need to do is simply no doable. Except retail work.

I personally would vote for a federal law requiring retail employers to be utterly closed, with zero staff for any purpose, on each and every federal holiday, without exception.

Or is our addiction to consumption and profit so severe we cannot allow that to happen, roughly once per month?

Its that this law only applies to retail. It doesn't protect workers at movie theaters, bars, restaurants, etc. If those places do not open, its because they choose not to (including the choice to enter into an agreement with a union making the day a holiday, which I applaud). It doesn't protect some of the most vulnerable workers: busboys and dishwashers, ticket takers and custodial workers; convenience store workers.

As I have said. Its the irrationality of this law that bothers me.

onenote

Nothing like cramming a religious holiday down the throats of every person in the state. Am I the only one to find this a bit surprising - and archaic - coming from Massachusetts?

granted, Christmas is, but not Thanksgiving.

- as I attended a Thanksgiving church service last night.

Just who do you think those Pilgrims were thanking???

But I was raised Catholic & the Church Year does not include Thanksgiving.

Perhaps the Puritan Church Year does include Thanksgiving. I know it does NOT include Christmas.

way. If the store wants to open and they can find employees willing to work, the state can't say squat.

have been on the books for years and years. The AG is just enforcing them. Walmart is being treated the same as any other company of the same type.

But the State says most stores should be closed on that day.

Down here in Texas, most stores will be closed on Thanksgiving. Not by law, but by custom. (I remember when NOTHING was open on Sundays or holidays.) But the shoppers will be out on Friday.

"Cramming" a day without shopping down people's throats does allow workers a day off. If the citizens of Massachusetts wanted a change, I'm sure they could make it happen.

- why the state should dictate the comings and goings of private enterprise and its citizens on a day that has no significance other than to eat turkey and watch football. Next thing you know they'll be closing the stores and telling us what we can and cannot do on Superbowl Sunday.

Not every culture observes our Thanksgiving and for some people it may be the one day they have off to be able to shop. I also remember when things weren't open on Sunday and holiday's. It was because of religion.

The article states that Mass also does this for Christmas. I don't think it can be said that Christmas isn't a religious holiday. If I was reading this about Alabama or Mississippi, I wouldn't be surprised. But Massachusetts???

- making Thanksgiving a National Holiday states that the holiday is all about thanking GOD. Not about turkey. Not about football. But about thanking GOD.

While the holiday may not be on the church Liturgical Calendar, it is most definitely a holiday born of religion.

LINCOLNS THANKSGIVING PROCLAMATION 1863

The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequalled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle, or the ship; the axe had enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.

Abraham Lincoln

Anyone who can say that Thanksgiving is not a religious holiday has a great deal to learn about history.

And though Mass. is a very liberal state now, as a colony it was essentially founded as a Puritanical theocracy. All government functions were conducted only by "members" of the church by and large within the church walls. Laws were based strictly upon scripture. If you recall in the Scarlet Letter, by Hawthorne, the trial of Hester Prynne is conducted in the church.

I'm sure Massachussets Blue Laws are an old holdover from the days when church and state were still allowed to hold hands.

The origins of holidays really don't matter as much as what they have come to mean as the years pass. In today's society, Thanksgiving is celebrated by most in a completely secular manner...eat the turkey, argue with relatives, fall asleep in front of the TV watching football, and that's it.

Same with Halloween, Easter, and we're almost 100% there with Christmas nowadays; the secular has long dominated over their beginnings to the point that it really isn't a religious holiday. Hell, many of these days were swiped by the Christians from ancient pagan celebrations anyways, so just look at it like we swiped em back in the name of secularism. :)

from the implication that it's okay if Mass has these laws because Thanksgiving is a secular holiday. Though it may be celebrated by and large that way now does not change the fact that the law was put in place when it wasn't. It also doesn't change the fact that the law is silly, regardless of the reason for it.

Blue laws aren't new. Most of them have roots as old as colonial/territorial law. The fact that Thanksgiving is treated the same way as xmas in Mass is purely because it was originally a religious holiday. These are old do-gooder/my-religion's-more-powerful-than-yours laws only intended to prevent heathens and sinners from tempting the greedy Christians to break the sabbath and violate the religious holidays.

Of course it's seriously secular now. But that only points out how ridiculously archaic these laws are beyond the fact that they violate the separation of church and state.

Personally, I think if we are going to regulate commerce so closely, we should fuck the churches and instead require all businesses to be closed on Mondays, the crappiest day of the week, or maybe Wednesdays, humpday.

Is this a sudden conversion?

- on this thread that I attended a Thanksgiving worship service last night. I even sing in the choir. Don't attempt to put an anti-religious label on me as I've attended church all my life.

My point is that Thanksgiving is a holiday with religious roots and that it is celebrated by the Christian church as a time of Thanksgiving to God. As it is a holiday with religious roots, the state has no business telling any retail or other business that they cannot be open on that day.

Separation of Church and State. Either you believe in it or you don't.

Why should you?

Especially coming up to Christmas, most stores are open 7 days a week--with extended shopping hours. I doubt anyone is suffering from lack of shopping opportunities.

I should have that right. So should Wal-Mart.

Dis-liking Wal-Mart is not a wild card to cram religion down peoples' throats.

Thanksgiving is not a religious holiday. Maybe it was considered a religious holiday a long time ago, but it sure isn't today.

"Fight the power! Overthrow Thanksgiving! Power to the people!" :eyes:

When Lincoln made Thanksgiving a Nat'l Holiday, he explicitly highlighted its religious importance.

Celebrate it if you want to, but don't force it on others (Wal-Mart or otherwise).

I gather they'll say they give thanks to those family and friends close to them (as would DU Christians, Pagans, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc.); people who are religious will also no doubt give thanks to whatever spiritual entity they believe in. People can be thankful and give thanks without intoning the name of a god.

No one I know -- including my very Christian mother -- would consider Thanksgiving a religious holiday. They consider it a family holiday, will a bit of harvest festival thrown in.

operating a business is a privilege, not a right. The state gets to regulate the businesses it grants licenses to.

WalMart can always take the Attoorney General to court to dispute this.

After all, if the state gets to decide how people do business, that's within their rights. No gay-themed stores, either. Or occult-material.

They can always take it to court.

Many companies don't allow for ANY vacation time during the first year of employment. Since schools aren't in session over Thanksgiving and Christmas it only seems logical for a state concerned with the health of families to insist that workers be given at least those two days off every year. Sure, we're all concerned about making a buck, but is that the ONLY thing in life that really matters to any of us ?(say I , who works seven days a week-but I don't have kids)! I see this as a worker protection issue, not a religious or corporate freedom issue.

How 'bout Easter, Good Friday, and Revival Week, Ramadan, etc.

Thankfully, the State has found other means to see to the needs of workers w/o pandering to the religious right.

This law is illegal.

I don't give a damn when those two days are-make it Labor day and Martin Luther King day, who cares. Should school children NOT be allowed to have a break over Thanksgiving and Christmas? I'm an atheist, but I also think that there's a good bit of logic in choosing those two days to give some American workers a break.

I was a manager at a chain bookstore for many years, and we were always open Thanksgiving Day, 7am-11pm. It make me sick. Especially since the same employees had to be back in at 6am the next day. IT IS A FAMILY HOLIDAY!!!! The guy who owns the company is a "good Christian man," too. Everyone says so....!

And businesses will lose money if they open, so they won't open. Except that not everyone sits around all day with their family. That's why, where stores are allowed to be open, they often are, but only for a part of the day. Not because the state dictates that, but because that's what makes sense given the needs and desires of their clientele.

onenote

If they wish to be, especially since for the next month they will work their asses off. If other people don't want to spend time with their families, I couldn't care less.

I worked many, many holidays and missed times with my family, and Thanksgiving is one holiday EVERYONE should have off (as much as possible -- I understand nurses and cops, etc have to work). It's family/friends oriented and is no longer a distinctive religious holiday.

I'm sad that a poster on a progressive site believe workers who make little more than minimum wage should be made to work and miss time with their families, just because someone wants to go to Kmart.

The poorest workers in this country are treated so badly. It disheartens me. And here on DU.

It carves out exceptions that apply to busboys, janitors, dishwashers and other low-paid workers at restaurants and bars. It exempts movie theatres, so the worker that tears your ticket or that sweeps up the spilled popcorn -- no protection for him or her.
Its the law's irrationality that bothers me.

onenote

Because you are begrudging these workers having a day off. You shop on Thanksgiving Day, and said you're glad stores are open in VA on this day... for YOUR convenience, no worries about the workers'. I refuse to do that, no matter if I've forgotten something important, which I did last year. This doesn't make me better than you, Onenote, it just means I can't do this. I've been there, and it makes me feel guilty. Solidarity.

Retail workers are by far poorer than janitors, and many others you mentioned. But this isn't a pissing contest about who's poorer.I agree they should all get off Thanksgiving too, and I'd love to see the law say that nationally. It doesn't. But for now, in Massachusetts, at least some of the poorest workers can be with their families for one day. ONE DAY, before they go back to their low paying jobs with zero benefits and less respect.

I worked as management in this industry for almost a decade, and I know how these people are treated by Corporate and many managers, and I know what they get paid. I would still agree with the law even if it said only retail workers who work in blue buildings got the day off.

Sure Wal-Mart employees are horrifically underpaid, but retail employees include unionized grocery store employees, department store salespeople who work on commission and make a far better living than the man or woman who sweeps up the local movie theater or mops the floor at the corner bar. But you're right, a pissing contest about which workers are the poorest is pointless.

I just stopped by my local grocery store on the way home from work. Its crazy with people. Presumably many of the folks working at this store (which stays open until midnight) won't be able to travel to be with their families this holiday because they couldn't get away today. Many are single and will be getting together tomorrow with other "Thanksgiving" orphans. If the stores are forced to close tomorrow, why not force them to close early today. And open late on Friday. Heck,my law firm is closed Friday. Why shouldn't the state close the bakery that day too?

I know I'm taking this to an absurd level, but my point is that if the state wants to make a rationally based decision that the public interest is served by giving working people a day off on Thanksgiving, it should apply it across the board. More appropriately, however, the state should say that every employer has to give every employee two paid days off. As it is now, my guess would be that unionized employees in Mass are worse off than those in states where its legal for a store to be open, but the union can either negotiate for a higher wage that day or even a day of paid leave. This law basically protects the stores from having to pay higher wager or compete with stores with lower overhead that might take some business from them on Thanksgiving.

And if my sink backs up on Thanksgiving and I want to run to the store to get some Drano, why should it be the state rather than the store that decides that I don't have that option?

Most stores around here close early, if they open at all. I asked the check out clerk this evening if she was going to be working tomorrow and she said yes. I asked her if that bothered her. She said she didn't mind. While her husband and son watch football and start the meal, she's going to be earning extra cash for the holidays. And she'll be home in plenty of time to enjoy the evening with her family.

That's just one person and there may be more that hate working on Thanksgiving, but that also is true for those non retail workers.

I still can't fathom a basis for the distinction. I'd much rather everyone benefit and that probably won't happen unless these laws are struck down and there is an incentive to guarantee everyone a couple of days off -- days that are determined not by the state, but left to the employee and employer (and union where applicable) to work out.

onenote

if the Holidays were "paid" days off. This is rarely the case when one works retail. Being forced to take a day off without pay could actually create a hardship on the worker.

For that reason, I disagree with forcing businesses to close.

The state should not be in the business of telling businesses that they have to honor certain holidays. As long as they follow labor laws, allow those who have a religious conflict the day off and pay appropriate wages to their workers for those days, the government should stay out of it.

But I remember having to work EVERY Christmas and EVERY Thanksgiving, or I would lose my job. Now I'm in computers so it's no problem.

Back then, the fact that I was unmarried and had no children secured me having to work.

I think the state is thinking of it's workers who can't get out of it who want to. The people of the state can VOTE it down if they don't like it.

Sounds like the place VOTED in the laws.

It's an American holiday, akin to a Harvest festival. Of course churches have services that day -- to give Thanksgiving. But, many churches also have July Fourth services, or Veteran's Days service. Thanksgiving is secular -- it can be celebrated and enjoyed by ANYONE, regardless of creed, and is.

What if the state mandated that everything be closed on President's day, so people could spend time with their families? Would it be okay then?

Just enjoy the time at home, people, geez...

Everything. Even something positive.

It's probably one of the busiest, exhausting days of the year for those of us who get up at the crack of hell to start cooking. Then after being on our feet in a hot kitchen for hours, it's time for the clean-up, which extends well into the afternoon.

(Can you tell I'm not crazy about cooking duties?):p

However, I am thankful to have a hot kitchen and food to cook. So this is the only time you'll hear me whine. Carry on.

Norman Rockwell shared his beliefs in oils for the whole world to see. The paintings speak for themselves as well as him.



&width=400

Shaw's Supermarket weilds religous blue laws as a weapon
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2265132

I expect walmart shoppers to be ticked the employees aren't there to serve them on Christmas and Thanksgiving...

I'm glad for the employess though. The majority probably don't want to work on Thanksgiving and Christmas.

The ones who don't believe in those holidays can start collecting their ballot signatures so the state can vote on it.

that stay open on these days. Or the movie theatres. Or the sports arenas. (How can it be that the people of Massachusetts stand idly by in those years when the Bruins or Celtics play at home on Christmas)?

onenote

If I was paid sever hundred thousand or a million to play, I'd do sports on Christmas.

you'd do sports on Christmas too. Will of the people and all that.

onenote

I don't have a personal problem about these laws. I just think that they are irrational, unjustified anachronisms. I do have a problem with people making assumptions about my motives. I disagree with these laws and have stated my reasons. You agree with them and stated your defense. I have challenged that defense. You have responded with "sounds like you have a personal problem".

I don't. But even if I did, I still haven't seen a substantive defense for laws that close a grocery store with seven employees, but allow every movie theatre, bar, restaurant, and sports arena in the state to be open.

onenote

Odd, I don't remember saying that.

I said I'm glad the workers don't have to work because I used to have to.

I never said I agree with these laws. It is not the same thing.

I don't care one way or another, but given a choice, I'm against all mandates. I like to carry auto insurance, but I'm against being forced to. So don't go putting words into my month.

I prefer the majority deciding over any one particular person or group. I have stated her repeatedly that I do not always agree with the majority decisions.

Guess you're just too black and white to understand a grey person.

Seriously. I do. And I share your preference for the majority deciding over any one particular person or group. But not when the decision of the majority is irrational. If the state wants to protect workers by giving them a guaranteed day (or two) off, the state can and should require all employers (not just some) to give all employees a day or two off. But specifying those days as Thanksgiving and Christmas and then adopting numerous exceptions so that it only impacts one type of business just doesn't make any sense to me.

onenote

I'm sorry I guess I should have made myself more clear. I don't support any law that forces people into things.

Eventually the US will wake up and will be more worldly. With the RW in, it just feels like were going backwards. I think even much of the rw know banning gay marriage is wrong. The holidays will chage as the us gets more worldly. I expect Mass to end up being the first state to really change.

the christian reactionary fundamentalists are right! oh my!:yoiks:

:evilgrin:

ahh, how i love it when my enemies place themselves between a rock and a hard place...

one way to "starve the beast.."

Obviously nobody here is old enough to remember the phrase "Banned in Boston, or the old Boston Watch and Ward Society. Man, you think the Fundies were strict and had power? They had NOTHING on the BWWS.

From: http://nielsenhayden.com/electrolite/archives/002702.html

In fact the whole “banned in Boston” thing has little or nothing to do with the Catholic Church. Quite the contrary, it was the culture of Boston Protestantism that spawned the Watch and Ward Society, a “citizen’s vigilance” group, founded by Anthony Comstock in 1878, which worked with Boston’s then quite un-Catholic municipal authorities to root out books, plays, and other artistic expressions deemed too depraved for public view—for instance, the novels of Sherwood Anderson, or magazines like H. L. Mencken’s American Mercury. A word from the Watch and Ward Society would regularly send police cracking. For sheer effectiveness, later Catholic pressure groups like the League of Decency had nothing on them.

There's nothing, nothing like a Boston Bluenose to take the fun out of everything.

:evilgrin:

At least they were. I recall spending part of a Thanksgiving in a bar in Brighton watching lonely old alcoholics eat turkey dinners delivered in styrofoam containers. That was 1989.

This Blue Law thing is a load of crap. I'm all for making things difficult for Wal Mart, but they should be allowed to be open every day if they want. Employees who work holidays generally receive overtime, so in many cases working holidays is desireable.

holidays. - I've been there and done that.

Gawd, I'm glad I work in computers now.

I used to have to work every Thanksgiving and every Christmas because I wasn't married and didn't have kids. I really protested and it literally came down to keeping my job.

That's washington state back in the 80's.

I think people are ticked because the store workers aren't there to serve them.

Time and a half isn't worth it to people who want to be with their families. hey I had a family to go to on thanksgiving too - my grandparents - but I kept having to show up way late after working.

It should be very optional if people are going to work on the holidays but I know from my own experience, it never was.

The people of their state voted it in. If they don't like it they can vote it out. I'm glad for the store workers.

I've worked many many Thanksgivings, Christmas Eves, Christmas days.
You know why? I wasn't married. Yeah they'd tried to do if you work one you get the other off, yeah, that never happened to me, I'd be stuck working both.

Thanksgiving, I'd maybe be able to make it to dinner, and then bring a tupperware filled with left overs for supper, or I'd miss dinner (lunch time to non-Texas folk, that's when my family eats the big meal) and have left overs for supper. Yep.

Oh, and then making Christmas dinner with my parents, to then leave immediately after and go work the rest of the day. It was a joy to be able to serve coffee instead of actually being with my family. Or if I was working some place that was closed Christmas Day, I'd hear customers bitch the previous weeks, because we were closed. It was never ending.

So, yeah I agree with these blue laws. I've been the one working all holidays. I soooo appreciate it that now I have a job that's closed on holidays.

And as superconnected said "The people of their state voted it in. If they don't like it they can vote it out."

no extra pay.... or be fired.

So let's shut down everything on those days too.

onenote

I am surprised there were so many people seemingly against this idea.

The way I see it, the retail business has become too much of an all-encompassing part of our lives. Other countries don't even have the same number of 24-hour stores that we do - in many other countries the stores aren't even open past 5pm or on Sundays. It would be strange to us to have to live like that, but people are complaining about Wal-mart being closed on a freaking holiday?! There's also the important matter that retail workers don't normally get the same holidays off that most workers in other industries get. The mall is open on Memorial day, Fourth of July, Labor day, New Year's Eve/New Year's day, etc. Having worked in retail myself, I think this is great! Let the retail workers get at least TWO guaranteed vacation days a year!

It's not about whether or not Thanksgiving is a religious holiday or whether it's fair that some people like hospital employees still have to work. Retail is not essential to the survival of the people of this country. The capitalist machine will not stop altogether if we give it a day of rest. We will all survive just fine if we can't go hang out at Walmart on Thanksgiving day. :eyes:

I deplore all attempts by government to make people observe religion or a particular holiday that they may not care to enjoy.

If MA gets away with this, soon other states will start demanding stores stay closed on Sundays and prohibit alcohol-consumption amongst other things on "holy days." They can easily use this incident as a pretext.

"Thanksgiving" is most definitely a religious holiday. Who else do give "thanks" to?

I think you and others here are only supportive of this because its directed against Wal-Mart.

If the MA legislature wants to pass a law against overworking employees, then so be it. They do not have to invoke a ridiculously illegal law b/c they don't like Wal-Mart.

This law is unconstitutional, and I hope it gets shot down 9-0.

I work with are happy tommorow and friday is a holiday.

I'm in washinton state. I'm in a room with 12 people -me and one other woman in the room are white americans. The rest are Mid Easterners.

I doubt they're celebrating Thanksgiving, but they are pretty happy tomorrow is a holiday.

I'm a vegetarian so I'm not going to be eating turkey. I don't consider Thanksgiving to be religious. You can give thanks to anyone you want, or skip giving thanks. I see it as family time.

I bet if you tried to get rid of it and christmas, the majority will vote against you. Then you will complain to no end because the MAJORITY got what they wanted. Something tells me the majority is ruling in Mass. too. That's the odd thing about democracys - the majorty tends to win elections when they aren't rigged.

The majority did exactly what you describe. They singled out a group of people who do not share their beliefs and attempted to force their version of morality on them.

Everytime anyone even mentions equality in that context, the majority huffs and puffs just like you describe, and raises more barriers between gay citizens and legal recognition.

Does the majority have the right to dictate religion?

I already mentioned that the majority can be wrong.

I prefer the majority rule to an autocratic rule. As I also already said.

Geesh.

Btw, who do you want to decide whats law and whats not? You apparently don't like the majority deciding. Maybe you feel Bush should have absolute power? I really don't get what you're for here.

I don't deny that I DESPISE Walmart. I do, I hate them. But even if it was a company that I like to patronize, my answer would be the same. I don't see how this is a "ridiculously illegal law" or how it's unconstitutional at all. I don't recall anything in the Constitution stating "all Americans shall have the right to shop at megastores any day of the year".

IF it gets to a point where Americans are required to attend religious services, then damn right I'm going to complain. But I just don't see how shutting down the retail machine for two days a year (Thanksgiving and Christmas) is going to erode the separation of church and state. We certainly have other groups trying to do that.

To me it really does all come down to the fact that Americans have grown way too accustomed to the expectation that every store should be open whenever they want it, and to hell with the workers who might want the day off and can't get it because they have to be there to serve the shoppers. Don't want to celebrate the religious aspects of T'giving or Christmas? Me neither. But I don't need to be able to go out to SHOP just to thumb my nose at *cultural* traditions which had a religious origin. Let the retail workers get a day off!

Where's the day off for gas station employees? Or pharmacy employees? Or the folks who work at movie theatres, and sports arenas. Or at small (fewer than 3 employees) convenience stores that fall within one of exceptions (and who are some of the most vulnerable and exploited workers).

Its irrational as written and as applied. The state has no more business playing nanny in this respect than they would have in declaring that all stores have to be closed on Sundays, something that used to be the case quite commonly and that, thankfully, was either voted out or, in many cases, ruled unconsititutional (as in Virginia).

onenote

A lot of people travel on T'giving, sometimes great distances by car, therefore I can see it being reasonable to have gas stations open. Pharmacies - people still get sick. It's not reasonable to me to have the only available medical care be in emergency rooms. I *do* personally support closing movie theaters and sports arenas, but that's based on my personal preferences and my belief that businesses remaining open on holidays should be doing so because they offer an essential service.

I don't think it's about the government playing "nanny" at all. It's about whether or not people are entitled to retail shopping whenever they want it, at the expense of the workers. There are way more people working at Walmart than at pharmacies or even movie theaters. To me, insisting that the government has no right to do this is saying that one's fear that mandating that businesses close on two holidays could lead to enforced religion (unlikely, IMO) trumps the right of retail workers to get two guaranteed days off per year. In other words, my fear is greater than your right to get a day off. And I just don't agree with that attitude at all.

Why does it exempt small stores, such as convenience stores, that employ fewer than 3 persons...some of the most vulnerable, exploited workers.

The protection of workers argument is nice, but its a post-hoc rationalization of an anachronistic law whose roots have nothing to do with protecting workers and that is so riddled with exceptions that it no longer makes much sense at all.

If the state wants to ensure that everyone gets two days off, mandate that all employers give all employees two days off. Doesn't have to be the same day for everyone. That's how most of the Sunday closing laws were resolved. Instead of forcing stores to close on Sunday, the law simply ensures that employees can't be made to work more than a certain number of days in a week.

onenote

by all means, support such a law. It sounds like this MA law singles out Christmas and Thanksgiving, which is illegal and unconstitutional. There are other ways to undermine Wal-Mart and corporations besides finding religion and forcing it on others.

If this law stands, I guarantee the religious-right in MA will use it as a pretext for other "blue laws" which force one version of morality on everyone.

If it was, why does Massachusetts specifically single out Labor Day as a day on which the Blue Laws DON'T apply? And why does it carve out exceptions for all sorts of businesses (gas stations, pharmacies, etc), including convenience stores that are staffed by fewer than 3 persons on a regular basis --- in other words, some of the lowest paid, most easily exploited workers.

onenote

Money, money, money..... who benefits?

in a 24/7/365 retail store. And I can tell you that I literally have worked EVERY Thanksgiving and EVERY Christmas without fail. (I also have worked almost every other holiday as well, Easter, Memorial Day, Labor Day, etc.).

I have done so without complaint, because I am happy to have a job in this economy.

As far as the blue laws go, I have mixed feelings. I realize that businesses need to make money, but how much? Some jurisdictions have laws where only essential services can be open on holidays, and I know of at least one where the businesses rotate every year. I certainly don't consider Wal-Mart to be an essential service on a holiday, that is just corporate greed. Maybe place to get gasoline and last-minute forgotten items is okay.

Personally I don't see why they cant at least be closed until the late afternoon or early evening so at least everyone can spend time with their families, at LEAST on Thanksgiving and Christmas.

So much for "family values".

After all, legally, everyone has to have the same rights and privilleges from the gov't.

This is a very thorny pandora's box to open.

I don't know how it could be worked out. I am not saying we should do this on religious grounds, but rather because the vast majority of people gather with their families on these two days. (Most of my family does not participate in religious celebrations on these days, we simply eat a nice meal and enjoy each other's company).

Maybe laws regarding "national holidays", which would written with secular language, could apply. I don't know.

It is, for the most part, a moot point anyway. As far as I know there aren't too many places that still have these laws anyway, and even fewer that enforce them. In addition, every year there are more and more places open, at least around here, so the tide is going the other way.

I was merely commenting that it sure would be nice for workers to actually be able to spend time with there families celebrating on holidays. Is 2 days out of 365 really that much to ask? It is usually the workers in the lower paying jobs that are affected anyway, (ie: convenience stores, Wal-Mart etc). People who work in professional fields, government, office jobs etc generally have decent holiday work hours/benefits.

"legally, everyone has to have the same rights and privilleges from the gov't."

It's never been this way. All groups can do is collect signatures and try to get their bill passed.

When the majority there pracitce Kwanza (sp?) or the rest of it, I doubt they'll have a problem. I would vote for their holiday and I don't celebrate it, btw.

Don't expect every religion to get the same representation without fighting tooth and nail and likely buying politicians. It just doesn't work that way.

Every US Citizen possesses the same rights, privileges, and immunities.

The marriage amendments which the majority of red-staters have approved are unconstitutional, and so is this law in Mass.

The 14th Amendment (abridged):

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

end quote

If the Majority has certain elite privileges that you or I do not, like forcing others to observe certain holidays or coercing one version of morality, don't expect to live in a free society for much longer.

can ultimately be struck down by a majority vote.

Sure we all should in theory have equality in everything. Slaverly was unconstitutional from the start but it didn't help them till the 1960's.

Nobody here is saying the majority is right, I'm saying the majority is ruling. I'm also saying I prefer them than any one person making laws we can't change.

Mass has a thanksgiving holiday and a christmas one, I guess you should go ponder why they're getting away with it. Think real hard. And remember, you cited it yourself, it's unconstitutional.

The rest of us are discussing whether the government can coerce or force businesses to close on holidays.

If MA singles out religious holidays, what they are doing is illegal.

People can celebrate Thanksgiving/Christmas to their heart's content whether the local A&P is open or not. That decision belongs to the shop-keepers, unless an impartially-written law demands otherwise.

MA is clearly doing something illegal by your own post.

As far as the shop keepers, they can go rally against it if they complain. Where are they? I'm sure Walmart has the funds to fight this.

I believe the argument turned to majorityism and I started defending the majority. What's the alternative there, oh yeah, giving the decision to a small group or one person. Even more scary than the majority imo.

Scary, isn't it.

trusting one person or a small group is.

I've think we've seen by the senate and bush admin, how corrupt people can get very fast. A small group is wide open for enthropy.

Machavelli said it - men change masters willingly in hope of a better master.

Men will keep changing masters until they realize they need to rule themselves - create a democracy. The pitfalls of democracy aren't being ignored by me on this thread.

Admittedly this is speculation, but would it surprise anyone if the large chains didn't mind this law because they would largely choose not to be open because the amount of business they would get wouldn't justify it. What would make them nervous would be if one of their competitors decided to be open and then suddenly their clientele might be going somewhere else. When the state has passed a law that has the effect of forcing competitors to engage in concerted behavior (i.e., everyone closes), where's the incentive to challenge it? Its the medium sized businesses that I think get screwed by this.

onenote

Blue laws are anachronistic and apply so unevenly as to be utterly irrationally. I checked out the Massachussetts laws (which, by the way, prohibited Sunday store openings until 1994). As I read them (and they are so convoluted and riddled with exceptions as to be nearly impenetrable), retail sales are prohibited not only on Christmas and Thanksgiving, but also on New Year's Day, Veteran's Day, Martin Luther King's Birthday, President's Day, Patriot's Day (a Massachusetts-only holiday), and Columbus Day. Indeed, it appears that the only legal holidays on which retail sales are permitted are Memorial Day, July 4, and Labor Day (Labor Day? So much for the sympathy for the poor working stiff theory).

Obviously, that is not how the law is applied or enforced. And maybe, buried in the exceptions, is an exception to the exceptions that allows stores to open on these other holidays. After all, if you look at the law, it still contains a provision barring sporting events from being held on Sunday if an admission fee is charged. NOw, there are enough subsequent exceptions that this obviously doesn't apply to the Red Sox, or the Patriots or any of the other major or minor professional sports leagues (but the exceptions rule out an exception for wrestling or horse racing).

My point is that these laws are absurd relics. The state shouldn't be dictating whether a business should be open. If it wants to designate certain holidays as days where workers are entitled to time and a half, I'm all for it. That simply impacts the business judgment of the proprietor. But simply shutting them down -- that's irrational.

onenote

if it didn't benefit the majority of them.

It took them until 1994 to remove the ban on Sunday sales and the current laws are so unevenly enforced as to raise a serious equal protection issue.

I'm not sure why this particular issue seems to bring out the majoritarian sentiment in some people. Just because most people don't object to something doesn't mean it should be the law of the land.

One more for instance: I just noticed another thread on DU about wet/dry counties in which the sentiment was strongly opposed to local jurisdictions that banned alcohol sales. Well, the Mass blue laws allow retail sales on Sunday, but limit alcohol sales on that day. What's the difference?

And finally, as a practical matter, under the Mass laws, a gas station can be open on Sundays as can a convenience store if it only employs 3 persons or fewer as an everyday matter. Why should those employees be treated differently from other employees and why should shoppers have their choices restricted in this fashion? It is irrational.

onenote

can take care of any law they want through the collecting signatures, and the putting it on the ballot and voting process.

Just because it's the majority, doesn't make it right, will always be a true statment.

However, living in a democracy, which america is even though republicans only want to see it as a republic, you do end up naturally subjected to what the majority wants. Convince the majority that gay marriage is okay and there shouldn't be more problems with gay marriage. Convince them Kwanza(sp?) should be a holiday too, no problem. I believe they will vote that way.

Right now I do not believe they are ready to throw out thanksgiving and christmas in this country.

I realize some people are vehemently against those two holidays, but I think they need to remember that until they make up the majority or convice the majority, those holidays are going to happen.

Thanksgiving happens quite nicely here in Virginia, even though the stores are allowed to open. Some do, typically for limited hours in the morning, and some don't. And if the state's laws about holiday closings were uniform and not irrationally written and applied (riddled as they are with exceptions and, as far as I can tell, theoretically applicable not only to Thanksgiving and Christmas but also to all other legal holidays other than Labor Day, Memorial Day, and July 4) then I'm not so sure that the "will" of the majority shouldn't be overturned.

onenote

I believe in america as a democracy and ruled by the majority but I don't doubt for a minute the dangers of it.

I know that the majority can be uninformed, as well as turn bad and vote to kill the jews or lynch the blacks. I just trust the people ruling more than autocracys.

Sheesh...

But it might be more interesting to have an actual discussion of the issues.

onenote

Although it would be interesting to see WalMart come out as a Champion of Separation of Church & State!

Edited to add that many objectors to the law are against governmental regulation of Business, rather than the religion thing.

Not greedy business people... poor poor monopoly can't stay open on a Holiday. AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW..... too bad!

On second thought... I say we shut them down permanently for raping this country the way they do. So far they have been veryyyy fortunate... so shut up.

Majority rules?

You don't have an argument... a shame you side with a corporate criminal.

And I'd love for you to show me where I even remotely suggested that I was. Talk about semantic arguments...This isn't about Wal-Mart. Its about every retail establishment in the state, whether big corporate baddie or mom and pop grocery. Its about the state playing nanny. Its about irrationally drawn and enforced laws.

And I still haven't heard why you are such a staunch defender of the principle of majoritarianism in this instance, but, based on your non -response, pretty obviously not committed to majority rules on any and everything.

onenote

If you don't like whats happening in Mass, why not get off your butt and go collect signatures?

That's cool. Just wanted to know if you had a consistent position or if you drew distinctions and, if you did draw distinctions, I was curious as to where the line should be drawn. But apparently you don't draw lines, so nothing to discuss. Bye.

PS - I don't live in Massachusetts. I do live in Virginia, which used to have blue laws and, for what its worth, when at attempt to repeal them was made in 1974, I wrote to my elected officials and expressed my strong support for repeal. What ultimately happened in Virginia is interesting: In 1974 the legislature refused to repeal the laws, but instead allowed each city and county the right to suspend or retain Sunday-closing laws. It wasn't until 1988 that the Virginia Supreme Court struck down the closing laws because the numerous exemptions had changed them from general laws to special legislation, and special legislation is prohibited by the state constitution.

Maybe Massachusetts allows "special" legislation -- majority will and all that.

onenote

I hear that tired old saw trotted out every time anyone tries to make life just a little better or safer for the majority of the people.

Bunch of libertarian non-sense that, if taken to its logical conclusion (which is EXACTLY what the Republicans want) would bring us back to the Lochner Era, where the courts protected the robber barons and the industrialists from progressive reforms.

The majority of people don't work in retail establishments. So if the majority of folks are not at work its not because of a dumb law, its because businesses decided it wasn't worthwhile to be open. And nobody is advocating a law that says that anyone has to go to a store on these days. If everyone stays home, the stores won't open. Its that simple. If a few people go to the stores and the stores are open for a few hours to accomodate them, how is the majority rendered less safe or have their lives "bettered". And it that's the case, why the heck can restaurants and bars and sports arenas and movie theatres stay open if they want?

Calling a blue law a progressive reform is one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time. THey're not progressive reforms, they're irrational anachronisms.

onenote

Cause the law applies to them too. If this was about big box stores, the attentive voters of Massachusetts would've leapt into action to amend the law so that it only applies to stores with 30 employees or some such. But they didn't. So I guess they think every business is a greedy rapist and anyone who wants to shop on those days is just an accessory to the crime.

onenote

Here's the general outline of Blue Laws in Massachusetts. www.mass.gov/dos/bluelaw/

Here's the list of businesses that are exempt:
www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/136-6.htm

And here's the relevant paragraph from that list: 2) The opening of a store or shop and the sale at retail of foodstuffs therein; provided, not more than a total of three persons, including the proprietor, are employed therein at any one time on Sunday and throughout the week.

In my experience,there are plenty of small,independent grocery stores and retail outlets that have more than three persons working at them.

onenote

impact their workers.

:sarcasm:

I don't celebrate either Thanksgiving and Christmas - so why shouldn't I be able to go shopping or work (if I happen to work in a store) on those days? It should be the option of the store owners, employees and customers - why must the state get involved?

One that takes a paternalistic view of the world or, even more troubling, a religious-centric view. The fact that Thanksgiving is not celebrated as a religious holiday by most doesn't disguise the fact that it originated as such and that it, like the Sunday closing laws that have the same historical roots, are reflections of their times.

The Virginia experience is informative, I think. They had Sunday closing blue laws for ages. In 1974 an attempt to repeal them failed, but the state decided to punt the issue to counties and cities to decide locally. It wasn't until 1988 that the Virginia Supreme Court declared the laws unconstitutional because they were so riddled with exceptions as fail scrutiny under the state constitution.

onenote

Why can't the people of Massachusetts decide on their own? Why let WalMart decide?

One note, indeed.

read carefully. The State punted by not repealing the law, but by giving localities the option of allowing stores to open (i.e., absent action by the locality, state law barring opening prevailed). What happened was an intolerably screwed up hodgepodge of exceptions throughout the various jurisdictions. So it went to court and the state law was declared unconsitutional.

My apologies if that wasn't clear from my post. Indeed.

onenote

I sure can't think of one.

business to close on a religious holiday?

ON EDIT: The state can say that workers who don't want to work that day for religious reasons can't be penalized but that is it, imo - if the store can offer inducements to the workers to get them to work on a holiday, that is their and the store's business, not the state's.

For instance, I remember when stores couldn't open on Memorial Day in Massachusetts. I seem to remember them changing the law so they could open after noon, or something like that.

These are state laws and state holidays. Not religious holydays.

Sorry but I think I missed something. Reguarding thanksgiving how would it violate the seperation of church and state any more than say making it a holliday for federal workers?

So you'd lose hands down in any court on a 1st Amendment theory.

The state is entitled to make this decision becuase it has a rational basis- namely, that families need time to be together- and this particular day of the year is the most appropriate time to require time off from work.

No different in theory than a wage and hour law or family leave.

Try again.

Because the distinctions drawn are irrational. Why only families of retail workers? Why not the families of workers in movie theaters or restaurants and bars? Why not the families of convenience store workers (the law exempts retail outlets with 3 or fewer employees)? Even a stated "rational" basis is subject to review to determine if it is in fact rational. This one isn't because its so riddled with loopholes that it undermines the state's claim that its important to give everyone a day off.

onenote

we Jewish people thought it was wonderful.Just fabulous. If you were an observant Jew who didn't shop or run your own business on Saturday, you got the whole weekend off!! Such fun!!
:sarcasm:

onenote

>>we Jewish people thought it was wonderful.Just fabulous. If you were an observant Jew who didn't shop or run your own business on Saturday, you got the whole weekend off!! Such fun!!

So now you finally reveal what is behind your anger at actually closing stores down for a holiday--your orthodox religion. I'm sorry but the world doesn't revolve around your religion. I find it really hypocritcal that you accuse Mass laws of being religious, and yet it is <i>your</i> religon which is the problem.

that. Never said I was. I said that if you were an observant Jew. I'm not. But I happen to have empathy for those that are. Just as I have empathy for adherents to other faiths that celebrate the Sabbath on a day other than Sunday and for those who don't celebrate any Sabbath at all and don't particularly like legislation based on religious conventions.

And by the way, I'm not "angry" about these laws. I disagree with them strongly. What makes me angry is posts that put words in my mouth or distort what I say or accuse me of being a hypocrite.

Finally, I never suggested that the law in Massachusetts was invalid because of separaton of church and state (although an argument could certainly be made to that effect). I said that the law is irrational -- it is so riddled with exceptions that it doesn't serve any valid government interest.

onenote

Here's what you said:

>>we Jewish people thought it was wonderful.Just fabulous. If you were an observant Jew who didn't shop or run your own business on Saturday, you got the whole weekend off!! Such fun!!

So from context I took it that you were an orthodox Jew. If I said "I am a Catholics, and strict Catholics believe..." you would naturally infer that I was a strict Catholic.

>>at all and don't particularly like legislation based on religious conventions.

Except, as others have pointed out a bazlillion times, Thanksgving is not now a religious holiday. It is observed by people of all different faiths, including atheists such as myself.


>>I said that the law is irrational -- it is so riddled with exceptions that it doesn't serve any valid government interest.

It serves the interest of the people. That's who it serves. And that is why the people of Masachussets won't overturn in.

I think that's pretty much unassailable. And when it was adopted, it applied much more broadly. No entertainment, no sporting events, probably no bars and maybe even no restaurants. Now there are all kinds of exceptions. And maybe its the will of the people to create an irraional law with loads of exceptions that doesn't actually end up promoting any valid interest that justifies the law beyond the caprice of the electorate. I just happen to think that the guarantees of equal protection and separation of church and state and other constitutional guarantees that limit the power of the state to regulate absent a valid state interest are significant and that this law doesn't meet those tests anymore.

onenote

That doesn't make it a religious holiday. You can toss that theory right back into the wastebasket, because that's what any federal judge would do!

Why single out Thanksgiving and Christmas, but not Memorial Day or Labor Day or July 4. What's the one thing that distinguishes these holidays? And Hallowe'en isn't a legal holiday, so it really is irrelevant. Its one thing to recognize holidays with religious roots as legal holidays when other dates without such roots are also recognized as legal holidays. Its quite another thing to single out those two days for different treatment than all the other legal holidays.

onenote

This is another "blue law." I cannot stand those things. I used to live in the deep south where they banned the sale of alcohol on Sundays. Closed liquor shops at 10PM every day and require they remain closed on Sundays. Ban beer sales on Sunday and beer sales after 12AM on weekdays and after 1AM on the weekends. It's like prohibition. What I hate big time about this is that it is legislating morality.

One can argue this is a labor issue but I disagree. What if you don't celebrate Thanksgiving or Christmas? Only Christians celebrate Christmas so why should everybody else have to oblige? Same thing for Thanksgiving. I'm going to celebrate my thanksgiving by getting drunk off my ass. That's how I choose to celebrate it. However, I think it's really bad to tell those who may want to work on the holidays that they cannot or those who wish to buy shit that they cannot simply to enforce something from the 1950's. That's just fucking stupid.

My husband and I are not Christian, but we celebrate Christmas. We know quite a few people like us in that regard.

Also, if you think that there are really that many people who WANT to work on the holidays that feel put out by laws like this, I think you need to be a little more in touch with the average worker out there. I worked retail for six years and I can assure you that I never met a single person who actually wanted to work on the holidays. In fact, in most of the stores where I worked, employees would rotate who got which holidays off so that no one got stuck working all of them. Most people in this country, Christian or not, do observe the holidays - or at least enjoy a day off.

Is it the commercial or the festive aspects of the holiday that draw you to it versus celebration of the birth of Jesus 2000 years ago? If the case is the former, why not celebrate Festivus? (Invented on Seinfeld)

"....The law enforced by Reilly is part of the Massachusetts Blue Laws, some of which date to Puritan times and restrict the sale of liquor during religious observances, among other things....."

Puritan times?? Jesus, and I thought they were all from the 50's. Hell. lol Talking about ultra-conservative.....

It wasn't that long ago.

There's more to the Puritans' legacy in Massachusetts than just the rock in Plymouth.

Remember, Reilly is just enforcing state law. WalMart was ignoring law. If the people in Massachusetts want to overturn these laws they can do it. States' rights and all that.

I am originally from Massachusetts. As others have said here, it is nice to have your whole town closed down and peaceful. Plus, it ensures that everyone can have the time off together.

It was also great when Massachusetts actually made stores close on Sunday. It used to be so peaceful.

I don't know what the pro-consumers posters would do if they lived in Germany. In Germany, stores close on Saturday afteroon and don't open until Monday morning--with virtually no exceptions. And if there was a long holiday, the stores might close for 4 or 5 days. Ah peace!

And by the way, Germany is a very secular society. They are just no consumer robots who began to panic if they can't buy things for a day.

I've lived in MA my entire life and while I don't care for the majority of the blue laws and am glad they have been punted over the years for obvious reasons, the majority of people that I know and talk to are glad that there are at least a few days out of the year when things are closed down like this.

It's not like it comes as a shock to most people. If anything it builds up more of the hype for Black Friday.

I'd like to see it applied more forcefully to other national holidays in the state. Not for religious reasons (as I'm not religious) but because they are holidays.

Fundie and all that.