Merry Christmas Holiday

The Week in Review section in Sunday’s New York Times has an article on the debate over public recognition of Christmas that strikes an uncharacteristically moderate tone. True, it has the seemingly requisite references to “conservatives” who “say they have been emboldened by election results that they took as affirmation that most Americans share not only their faith but also their belief that the nation has lost bearings.” In the same vein,

Bill O’Reilly warned viewers that store clerks no longer saying “Merry Christmas” foretold the imminence of “a brave new progressive world” where gay marriage, partial birth abortion and legalized drugs run rampant.

Despite these obligatory references to the religiousright boogeymen, the article takes a more conciliatory, centrist line:

But the demands to bring back Christmas are not simply part of an age-old culture war, with the A.C.L.U. in one corner and evangelicals in the other. There is also a more moderate force, asking whether the country has gone too far in its quest to be inclusive of all faiths. Why, they ask, must a Christmas tree become a holiday tree? And is singing “We Wish You a Merry Christmas” in a school performance more offensive than singing “Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel”? “It’s political correctness run amok,” said Lynn Mistretta, who with another mother in Scarborough, Me., started BringBackChristmas.org. “I’m not for offending anyone, but we’re excluding everyone, and everyone feels rotten about it.”

The problem, as usual, revolves around inclusion and exclusion. How far should we go to make sure that no one feels “excluded.” And it is on this issue, I think, that the article is too pessimistic. Here is the conclusion:

But as the nation becomes more religiously diverse, it is also becoming more religiously divided, and some say neutrality may not be possible.

“Our constitutional system is to leave the government neutral and leave it to families and churches and synagogues,” Professor [Douglas] Laycock [of the Univ. of Texas Law School] said. But, he said, that can be hard in a society with many different faiths or no faith at all.

“All sides want the government on their side,” he said. “They don’t really want the government to be neutral.”

Who exactly are some of the “some” who “say neutrality may not be possible”? None are quoted. Who are some of the “they” who “don’t really want the government to be neutral”? None are quoted.

On the contrary, “some” believe that governmental neutrality is the only way to deal with religious diversity, and I’m happy to quote an example: me (and if that’s not enough, me).

Say What? (5)

  1. Laura December 19, 2004 at 3:37 pm | | Reply

    I love Christmas, and Christmas carols, and our church’s Advent and Christmas Eve services. And I’m OK with not making kids who are not Christians sing or listen to Christmas carols; if people want their kids to sing carols, they can take them to church.

    On the other hand, I do kind of like to see religious expression in the schools, as long as it’s not exclusive of any of the kids. For one thing, it irritates the ACLU (bad of me, I know) and for another it means they are not trying to turn the kids into aspiritual little animals.

  2. Tim Gannon December 20, 2004 at 10:21 am | | Reply

    Inclusion or exclusion at government schools. Just another example of how they cannot win, not matter what they decide.

    At some point in time we will figure out the real problem, government schools cannot survive in today’s legal environment. They cannot include and exclude at the same time. They will eventually be found unconstitutional under the first amendment.

  3. Andrew P. Connors December 20, 2004 at 11:09 pm | | Reply

    Here’s an interesting aside…

    At UVa the dining hall nearest to me (Runk Dining Hall) has various holiday displays setup in their lobby.

    It features a full Jewish display, with menorah, Star of David, and various other Hannukah perephinalia.

    It has a Kwanzaa display, for those people that support a marxist separatist movement.

    And it has a “Christmas” display, consisting of a tree and a big snow man. This is not a fair display of Christianity – as none of these symbols is Christian. That is not to knock a Christmas tree – which I love – but to ask something very important: where is Jesus?

    I could care less if they display a nativity scene. But if they are going to display a menorah and a Star of David, they ought to display a nativity scene and a cross.

    Now ask yourself, how many times have you seen this type of assymetric display in a public setting? Why is Christianity shunned while other religions are not?

  4. Laura December 21, 2004 at 8:01 pm | | Reply

    “THE OTHER NIGHT MY FATHER ARRIVED AT A

    Chinese restaurant on the Upper West Side and said, indignantly: ‘I want to start a movement called Jews for Christmas.’

    I laughed, then realized he was serious.”

    http://www.nypress.com/17/51/news&columns/celiafarber.cfm

    Pretty cool article.

  5. Jonathan Bean December 15, 2007 at 6:21 pm | | Reply

    See my column on the same subject, with links to the “do not celebrate ‘Christmas'” policy of my law school dean!

    http://tinyurl.com/24ryte

    Have a “Merry Government Holiday!”

    Jonathan Bean

Say What?