The "Christmas wars" seem to be based on two separate conflicts:
Tension between religious and political traditions.
Tension between religious exclusivism and inclusivism, aggravated by an
increase in religious diversity.
Conflict between religious tradition vs. political tradition:
The problem:
Christmas time has long been a time of singing Christmas carols, and
displays of manger scenes. Many traditionalists would like to see students
taught Christmas carols and the Christmas story from the Bible in public
schools. They would like to see crèches on display on municipal land. Any
restrictions may be regarded as infringement on their religious freedom to
live in a country that is predominately Christian and that emphasizes that
religion in commerce, school, municipal displays, etc. As
columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. of the Washington Post commented: "Some Christians see the broader culture as unremittingly hostile
to their faith and wonder why it's easier to celebrate Santa, Rudolph and
the Grinch than to sing praise to Jesus, Mary and Joseph. 1
One of the founding principles of the U.S. is the
principle of separation of church and state. This means that governments
and public schools cannot promote one religion over another, or a religious
lifestyle over a secular lifestyle, or a secular lifestyle over a religious
lifestyle. This means that there are restrictions on the teaching of
religious songs in public schools or the display of religious scenes in on
government land. Some analysts suggest that this principle is the main
reason why the U.S. and Canada have been able to avoid most of the
religiously motivated conflict and bloodshed seen elsewhere in the world,
in spite of the very diverse religious makeup of both countries.
The solution for public school conflicts:
There are two obvious solutions:
Teach the religious beliefs associated with Christmas as truth, and
create a Christian-only crèche on municipal land and await a lawsuit by the
American Civil Liberties Union.
Conform to the law and avoid legal expenses.
Representatives of many groups representing the full range of liberal and
conservative religious and civil rights organizations drafted a statement in
1995 titled: "Religion in the Public Schools: A Joint Statement of Current
Law." More recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts
have reinforced their interpretation. However, with the recent
addition of strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, the rules may change radically
in the near future.
The statement said, in part:
The Constitution permits much private religious activity in and about the
public schools. Unfortunately, this aspect of constitutional law is not as
well known as it should be. Some say that the Supreme Court has declared the
public schools 'religion-free zones' or that the law is so murky that
school officials cannot know what is legally permissible. The former claim
is simply wrong. And as to the latter, while there are some difficult
issues, much has been settled. It is also unfortunately true that public
school officials, due to their busy schedules, may not be as fully aware of
this as they could be. As a result, in some school districts some of these
rights are not being observed." 2
Under the topic of: "Religious Holidays" they wrote:
"14. Generally, public schools may teach about religious holidays,
and may celebrate the secular aspects of the holidays, and objectively teach
about their religious aspects. They may not observe the holidays as
religious events. Schools should generally excuse students who do not wish
to participate in holiday events. 2
"...a broad spectrum of religious and civil liberties groups"
published a pamphlet titled: "Religious Holidays in the Public schools:
Questions and Answers." On the topic of Christmas, it says:
"Decisions about what to do in December should begin with the
understanding that public schools may not sponsor religious devotions or
celebrations; study about religious holidays does not extend to religious
worship or practice. Does this mean that all seasonal activities must be
banned from the schools? Probably not, and in any event such an effort would
be unrealistic. The resolution would seem to lie in devising holiday
programs that serve an educational purpose for all students--programs that
make no students feel excluded or identified with a religion not their own.
Holiday concerts in December may appropriately include music related to
Christmas and Hanukkah, but religious music should not dominate. Any
dramatic productions should emphasize the cultural aspects of the holidays.
Nativity pageants or plays portraying the Hanukkah miracle are not
appropriate in the public school setting. In short, while recognizing the
holiday season, none of the school activities in December should have the
purpose, or effect, of promoting or inhibiting religion." 3
The solution for municipal displays:
Again, there are two obvious solutions:
Install a manger scene by itself on public land and await a lawsuit by
the American Civil Liberties Union.
Conform to the law and avoid legal expenses.
"In general, the courts have allowed either all religions or none to be practiced on public property. Once
Christmas, Hanukkah or other religious holiday displays are allowed in city
halls and town squares, all religions must be afforded similar access." 4
To avoid the appearance of promoting religion over secularism, it might be wise
for the municipality to create cultural displays at Christmas
time by adding secular themes to any religious presentations. Some courts
have used the "three reindeer" rule: that a cultural display containing
some religious themes and at least three secular symbols is constitutional.
Conflict between religious exclusivism vs. religious inclusivism:
Some folks feel that only one religion, Christianity, and only one holy
day, Christmas, should be acknowledged at this time of year. They want
retailers and the general public to wish each other "Merry Christmas."
Some groups feel so strongly that they are mounting economic boycotts of
business who do not conform.
Others feel that there many secular and religious celebrations at this
time of year, and that all are important. They would prefer that retailers
and the pubic discontinue the religiously exclusive "Merry Christmas"
and wish each other an inclusive greeting like "Happy Holidays."
As columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. of the Washington
Post commented: "Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and nonbelievers, meanwhile, insist
that government should not push the faith of the majority into the faces of
those who do not share it....." 1
The basic question here is whether Yeshua of Nazareth (a.k.a. Jesus Christ)
should be considered the reason for the season, or a reason for the season.
The root cause of the conflict is the increase both
of secularism and religious diversity. Both the U.S. and
Canada are experiencing rapid religious change. The percentage of adults who
identify
themselves as Christians is steadily dropping, by just under 1 percentage
point per year in both countries. The percentage of adults who
follow other religions, or who are non-religious, is increasing at the same rate.
Protestants are believed to have become a minority in the U.S. by late
2006. If the rate of decline of Christian affiliation in the U.S. continues at
its present rate, Christians themselves will become a minority by the 2030s.
Among the six largest religions 5 followed by visitors to this web site:
Christians celebrate Christmas on DEC-25 as Jesus' birthday.
Jews observe Hanukkah, an eight day Feast of
Lights, commemorating a fight for religious freedom. The date varies each year.
Muslims observed the holy lunar month of
Ramadan in the early years of this century which commemorated the gift of
the Qur'an to humanity. Between 2006 and 2008, they will celebrate Id al-Adha (a.k.a. the Feast of Sacrifice
or Day of Sacrifice).
There appear to be two religious/cultural movements in North America pushing
in opposite directions: one towards exclusivity; the
other towards diversity. Some folks in the U.S. and Canada -- primarily from conservative denominations
-- want to retain the end of December for the
exclusive celebration of Christmas. They would like to exclude recognition of other religious
and secular holidays at this time of year. The years 2004 and 2005 saw economic boycotts
of stores that use the generic term "Happy Holidays" in place of "Merry Christmas."
This may represent the wave of the future. It is driven by a desire to preserve
both religion and culture unchanged, in spite of religious and social
trends towards diversity. Other North Americans would like to make room for the followers of other
religions and secularists who assign different meanings to this time of year.
They would like December to become a celebration of religious and spiritual diversity --
where the traditions of many different religions and cultures are enjoyed.
Some Christians react negatively to any move towards religious inclusiveness,
by giving it the ultimate condemnation: "political correctness." Other
Christians, many secularists, and many members of non-Christian religions view religious
inclusiveness to be required by the Ethic of Reciprocity -- often called the
Golden Rule. This is an integral part of almost almost all religions' moral systems.
Conflict is inevitable.
It was particularly intense in 2004, perhaps because of the political
gains made by Evangelical Christians in the 2004-NOV elections.
The religious wars continued in 2005, perhaps influenced by an unusual
event: Christmas, the first days of Hanukkah
and the beginning of Kwanzaa all fall on DEC-25. A lot of anger was created by
conservative Christian boycotts of some stores.
The conflict appears to be just as strong in 2006. The Alliance
Defense Fund (ADF), a fundamentalist Christian legal defense group,
announced that it has over 950 attorneys available across the U.S. poised to
combat any censorship of Christmas celebrations in schools and on public
property. 6
References used:
E.J. Dionne Jr., "Peace on Earth? Not with this season's Christmas wars," Washington Post, 2004-NOV-21, at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
"Religion in the Public Schools: A Joint Statement of Current Law,"
Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, 1995-APR, at:
http://www.bjcpa.org/
"Religious Holidays in the Public Schools: Questions and Answers,"
Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty.
Clarence Page, "Bewitching logic: All religions or none should be tolerated on military bases," Salt
Lake Tribune, Salt Lake City, UT, 1999-JUN-17. See:
http://www.sltrib.com/
On this web site, we define the term "religion"
very broadly to include every belief system from Agnosticism to Zoroastrianism.
"More than 950 attorneys nationwide ready to combat attempts to censor
Christmas. Fourth annual Christmas Project declares, 'Merry Christmas. It's okay
to say it'," Alliance Defense Fund, 2006-NOV-15, at:
http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/