The war on Christmas by the ACLU!!

I've got to tell ya...while shopping here in So. Cal the other day - yep...one of the stores already has up VALENTINES decorations and sales!!!!!!!!! I am serious...!

VALENTINES DECORATIONS?!?!?!? Wow..................just wow...............

Yea - I was going to take a photo. But the crowds, the crowds....just insane.

We get annoyed at Christmas decorations being put up in October because of the blatant commercialism. Yet, that commercialism is just as blatant in December. Christmas has become a big, commercial bonanza. Perhaps the complaints of our non-Christian friends regarding ubiquitous secular symbols will help remove some of it to everyone's benefit.

Not being allowed to give out candy canes in school may be annoying, but we can give them out at home. None of these complaints will make Christmas go away; maybe just some of the crass commercialism, which we don't need anyway.

Soos, when I was a kid growing up we had our family tradition and we honored it year after year.

When Halloween came around we kids celebrated it at school, we never were allowed to do the trick or Treat stuff. After Halloween Thanksgiving was a huge and celebrated day for the family. We all gathered at the main family's house of the parents and we all brought food and celebrated together. After dinner, the men in the family would go out and bring back a Christmas tree, and then we all participated in decorating it and would sit and talk about the past, the present and the future of all our lies with one another.

After Christmas night is done and over with, we took down all the decorations and cleaned up the mess. We used brown paper bags back in the day, newspapers and event cloth to wrap gifts with. We were pretty much earth friendly before people started waking up and learning to become earth friendly.

My mom taught us not to waste and gifts do not come in the amount of dollar signs, but instead the meaning that the gift was given and received by.

As a kid, she loved the little wooden jewelry box that my two brothers and I made for her. As an adult, she cherished the presence of all of us being together once again at the family Thanksgiving table and Christmas dinners.

Just being together is a gift knowing that we are loved, respected, and cared for. There is no price tag you can put on that amount of family love. It comes naturally, and it is free, and the best gift one can offer to their parents, children, and siblings.

Happy Holidays Everyone :)

Now the ACLU is trying to prevent holdiay shopping and sink the economy?

Still waiting for you to provide any indication that the ACLU would seek to end Christmas, especially since they have on many occasions, some posted right here, where they sought to insist on its inclusion. That has been the premise you have put here and other than the fact that you seem to object to the existence of the ACLU, you have provided nothing to support the accusation that they are now somehow intent on tanking the economy. I don'[t believe I'm confused at all, you wrote it in a rather lucid sentence.

And apparently, the ACLU wants to put a stop to all this Christmas shopping! How ironic they should target the American economy when things are already bad enough for most of us.

Perhaps you might want to re-read your post.

Has there been a nerve struck?

Who cares? I do. You make the accusation that a non-profit organization that has existed for 90 years to do nothing but defend the bill of rights, even when the position is not popular, is now somehow seeking to end christmas in some machivellian bid to destroy the american economy, provide zero support for that accusation and because I have the gall to disagree with you, you would seek to dismiss me? Ha!

Say What You Mean, and Mean What You Say

Is this true for you or not?

Have merry and safe Christmas, seb.

Elaine: great article. Hope your Christmas is happy and safe.

detracking

I still care and believe people should be held accountable for the statements they make. When you present falsehoods you should be prepared to be called out on them. Elaine, the fact of the matter is that yoru article and nearly every post in supporting it is based on or provides false information. Now you have the right to believe what you wish, a right the ACLU would defend. The expectation though that no one else should be able to disagree with you is unenlightened at best. I do care when people intentionally attempt to mislead and obfuscate. i don't think the ACLU is perfect, nor do I support every position they have, but those disagreements are based on actual events and facts. This irrational argument of a 'war on christmas' would be laughable if it were not dangerous and sad.

This isn't opinion, there are no actual facts to support the claims made here. As I said, you want to be agaisnt the ACLU go right ahead, but at least pick something they have actually done.

always up for good discussion. however as far as the links, you only provided other bloggers that support yoru assertions. no actual facts. a court case, an actual event where the ACLU tried to cancel christmas.

Oh I read this, how is it a war on christmas? It isn't saying that public schools cannot celebrate christmas, it is saying they can't ONLY celebrate christmas, in response to people wanting the option. These are public schools, funded by taxpayer dollars and fall under the limits of government as described in the Constitution, the school cannot be seen as promoting a single holiday.

they are not threatening lawsuits over christmas, they are making sure that those people who do celebrate other holidays this time of year also are able to do so or at the least are not required to participate in a christian tradition if that is not thier faith.

As far as what christmas is about, it is a corruption of the winter solstice and other pagan celebrations. There is nothing in the bible that specifies December 25th as the birth date of Christ.

That aside, Yes, Christmas is about celebrating Christianity, this is why the Government cannot be in a position to be seen to be promoting it. This issue is not the holiday, the issue is the limited ways that the government can allow it in public spaces.

Christmas is about Jesus and is a Christian holiday.

Here Sebby, since you're swarming all over the comments here and are obviously confused. Let me help you......no more Christmas, no more Christmas shopping. See, that wasn't so hard.

Is Christmas about Jesus or is it about shopping?

can't it be about both?

For me it's about neither one- for Elaine I'm not sure. That's why I asked her.

I'm just trying to decide if Christians would appreciate the support this argument lends to leaving their religious holiday alone, or not. I see a march outside the White House with signs competing for attention:

"Christ is the reason for the season!" and "Stop cutting into Wal-Mart's profits!"

Are they on the same side?

I'm all for worshipping the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in my heart and can do that without the ACLU's permission.

That's the only thing in the article pertaining to "what Christmas means to you". I wanted to know more.

Dad's retired, Mom's still racing around in her Buick selling real estate. I don't think I've ever heard either of them say, "Happy Holidays"- it's always "Merry Christmas!" However, Mom's careful to write "Happy Holidays" on her business Christmas cards to avoid offending any clients.

So, Hallmark is still getting her business but SHE'S had to adjust................

I'm confused over your opinion on Christmas- I'm completely clear on my opinion. Please share.

I mentioned my Mom's cards because she's not confused at all about what to say or when to say it- she made an adjustment and it wasn't difficult. She also still gives Hallmark money. And she supports the ACLU. And she celebrates Christmas by buying gifts and cooking for the people she loves. And no one's tried to stop her.

Um, wow, okay! I asked because I wanted to know if you had further thoughts about Christmas beyond shopping or if it really was all about keeping merchants in business for you. I don't mind being in the minority and if you're unwilling to expand further so be it.

Peace and have a great Christmas!

Thanks, Elaine.

Again, Peace.

Elaine, it sounds like you decry the removal of secular aspects of Christmas from society. That actually wouldn't be such a bad idea, when you think about it. Much of it is just distraction. Plus, not everyone celebrates Christmas so if circumstances demand a greeting of some kind, I just say, "Have a nice holiday" to people I don't know.

It does annoy me when people look at what is obviously a Christmas item and try to rename it a 'holiday' item. It doesn't fool anybody or make anybody feel better. It is gratuitous and silly.

A = ANTI-AMERICAN

C = COMMUNIST

L = LIBERALISTIC

U = UGLINESS

really anti american. Defending the bill of rights is now anti-american? Where the heck do you people live?

Like any other organization, they pick cases they think that can win or further their cause. I don't see the NRA doing a lot of defense work for domestic terrorists and even militias. I think people should be able to own guns, I think they need to be able to do so responsibly. I have to demonstrate some level of knowldege of the applicable laws and compentency to drive a car, is it so difficult to have the same requirements to own a gun? that is off the topic. this is about thsi war on christmas that no one seems to be able to show ACLU involvment in, yet they appear to be getting all the blame for businesses taking it upon themselves to decide how they will present or not the present the holiday.

or further their cause

Exactly. I just don't think their "cause" is as benign as most people who support them do. I also think people use the ACLU for personal agendas and the ACLU chooses what cases they take so obviously they don't mind being used in such a way.

Examples of anti-"Christmas" actions taken by the ACLU:

http://slavenssays.wordpress.com/2010/12/13/aclu-wages-war-on-christmas/

excerpt:

This year, one such story comes from Tennessee, where the American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to 137 public school administrators, supposedly in response to complaints from families, reminding them not to focus on any one religious holiday.

In other words, don’t call Christmas parties “Christmas parties.” Call them winter celebrations, holiday galas, solstice shindigs, or any other creative misnomer that obfuscates their true purpose and creates a comfortable non-reality for the handful of unfortunate students whose malcontent parents are offended by the celebration of a holiday that is jointly religious and secular in nature.

And

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/alba/071130

excerpt:

Take the case of a special committee consensus in Ft. Collins, CO. They have decided what is appropriate for public expressions of Christmas. They have chosen 'white' lights to replace the supposed symbolic 'red and green' lights. 'Red and green' are 'too religious' for the city to sponsor goes the reasoning. [How little they know.]

Other examples:

Chattanooga, TN. An annual live Nativity exhibit has been eliminated. Pastor Seton Tomyn, whose First Baptist Church has performed the Nativity since the 1980s, was reportedly disappointed but accepts that the city includes diverse cultures.

After the hullabaloo at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport last year, officials have taken further steps to avoid any controversy by embracing a celebration of 'Winter." Travelers will not see one iota of Christmas — no Christmas trees; no carols; nothing that might denote the actual celebration. The nature display includes birch trees dusted with non-toxic snowfall along with foam birds, all to the sounds of wind chimes. [I'm sure it will be beautiful, but maybe missing something?]

Then there's the overzealous federal officials who told a Florida 85-year-old grandmother, because she lives in a Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) center, that she couldn't hang an angel on top of the Center's Christmas tree. The American Family Association stepped up to the plate on this one and HUD officials have backed off from claiming federal law prohibits an angel symbol.

Saginaw, Michigan. The "Dickens Christmas Festival" has been renamed the "Dickens Holiday Festival." Why? So the city organization may promote the festival in the schools. The school district already has descended to a "politically correct" policy; a list of words they can't use or even say out loud: Santa; Christmas; Nativity.

Berkley, Michigan. After last year's threat from the Michigan ACLU that the city could not display the Nativity on public property, the exhibit was turned over to the local clergy organization to display on church property. The citizen attempt to change it failed 55-45 on a Nov. 6th ballot as the 15,000 strong suburb is divided on this issue.

Lowe's. This retailer made the same mistake as WalMart, Target and others have done, renaming Christmas trees — family trees. But the hue and cry arose immediately so they rescinded and now are selling "Christmas" trees.

Is it not getting tiresome when one person complains and a whole organization, public school system, city or corporation jumps on the 'PC' bandwagon to avoid being sued by the ACLU? Have we gone so far down the road to inanity without reason that we can't find a way back?

Evidently only the ACLU gets excited by any individual's complaints against Christmas. To participate in the destruction of the traditions of our nation in the name of the "individual right" to not be offended skirts the edge of treason within our own country.

and

http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/aclu-against-free-speech-if-its/

excerpts:

One of the compromises that was suggested to the ACLU was the creation of a "free speech zone." This would be an area outside most government control where citizens could put up holiday displays of their own choosing. The ACLU was dead set against this idea. Their rationale? Citizens would use their free expression to support Christmas. The "defenders" of the Bill of Rights stood against free speech.

The First Amendment is clear, while establishing a state religion is illegal, so is prohibiting free expression of religion. The First Amendment requires institutional separation, not public atheism.

A diverse and pluralistic society doesn't seek to squelch cultures; it seeks to respect them all. The ACLU isn't interested in a diverse and pluralistic society.

and

http://www.christmaspresentsforconservatives.com/the-aclu-their-war-against-christmas-and-you/

excerpts:

The “Presidential Guidelines: Religious Expression in Public School,” issued in 1995, was drafted by the ACLU. Each right of religious expression outlined in the Guidelines contains an escape clause to permit anti-Christian, anti-Christmas, secular groups such as the ACLU to sue if they do not approve of what is being expressed. And, sue, they do.[1] What has that meant for you, so far?

The spread of the ACLU mentality regarding Christmas is like a cancer on the spirit of America. The ACLU, in their politically correct war on Christmas, defines diversity as including everyone except Christians.

Caving in to the ACLU’s invisible tyranny, retailers have avoided mention of the word, “Christmas,” in their advertising and displays: Best Buy, Dell, JCPenney, Kroger, Lowe’s, Office Max, Sears, Staples, Target, Walgreen, Wal-Mart,and others.[2] A few of these retailers have, lately, changed their policy.

Also in 2005, Jackson County, Georgia school officials, on warning from the ACLU, forbade the wearing of Christmas pins, angels, crosses, or clothing that might refer to Christmas. The ACLU sued a Louisiana elementary school for erecting a Nativity display on school grounds. Last year, they sued in Rhode Island for a Nativity scene being displayed in a city park.

I could post many many more examples..........do I need to?

and

first blog report, the letter was sent in response to complaints from families. While I don't care one way or the other, I can understand that a focus on one religious observance over others would not sit well with some people and the ACLU is a proper place to look for support.

In the 2nd rant there is only one mention of the ACLU in any of those actions until the berkley Mich story and no the government cannot be seen to promote a single religion above others.

the other 'events' were choices the individuals and companies made.

the free speech zones the ACLU objected to were the ones put forward by the Bush administration top prevent dissent at Bush events. the alleged christmas linked conclusions are entirely in the mind of the blogster.

the last link is the most laughable of all I found that reference to how evil the Presidential guidles were posted almost vebatim in dozens of anti ACLU blogs but you know what I didn't find, any actual quotes fromt he referenced document, so i went and found it. Please reprint any anti-religious, anti-christian sections. I seem to be unable to find them. The fact that the simplest answer would be to forbid any religious activity of any kind in public schools is not the route taken shows that the ACLU (if the did indeed draft this document) went to great lengths to try and allow as much religious activity as possible in the public school environment.

RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Student prayer and religious discussion: The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment does not prohibit purely private religious speech by students. Students therefore have the same right to engage in individual or group prayer and religious discussion during the school day as they do to engage in other comparable activity. For example, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable nondisruptive activities. Local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and other pedagogical restrictions on student activities, but they may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against religious activity or speech.

Generally, students may pray in a nondisruptive manner when not engaged in school activities or instruction, and subject to the rules that normally pertain in the applicable setting. Specifically, students in informal settings, such as cafeterias and hallways, may pray and discuss their religious views with each other, subject to the same rules of order as apply to other student activities and speech. Students may also speak to, and attempt to persuade, their peers about religious topics just as they do with regard to political topics. School officials, however, should intercede to stop student speech that constitutes harassment aimed at a student or a group of students.

Students may also participate in before or after school events with religious content, such as "see you at the flag pole" gatherings, on the same terms as they may participate in other noncurriculum activities on school premises. School officials may neither discourage nor encourage participation in such an event.

The right to engage in voluntary prayer or religious discussion free from discrimination does not include the right to have a captive audience listen, or to compel other students to participate. Teachers and school administrators should ensure that no student is in any way coerced to participate in religious activity.

Graduation prayer and baccalaureates: Under current Supreme Court decisions, school officials may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation, nor organize religious baccalaureate ceremonies. If a school generally opens its facilities to private groups, it must make its facilities available on the same terms to organizers of privately sponsored religious baccalaureate services. A school may not extend preferential treatment to baccalaureate ceremonies and may in some instances be obliged to disclaim official endorsement of such ceremonies.

Official neutrality regarding religious activity: Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those capacities, are representatives of the state and are prohibited by the establishment clause from soliciting or encouraging religious activity, and from participating in such activity with students. Teachers and administrators also are prohibited from discouraging activity because of its religious content, and from soliciting or encouraging antireligious activity.

Teaching about religion: Public schools may not provide religious instruction, but they may teach about religion, including the Bible or other scripture: the history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature, and the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries all are permissible public school subjects. Similarly, it is permissible to consider religious influences on art, music, literature, and social studies. Although public schools may teach about religious holidays, including their religious aspects, and may celebrate the secular aspects of holidays, schools may not observe holidays as religious events or promote such observance by students.

Student assignments: Students may express their beliefs about religion in the form of homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free of discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Such home and classroom work should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance, and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school.

Religious literature: Students have a right to distribute religious literature to their schoolmates on the same terms as they are permitted to distribute other literature that is unrelated to school curriculum or activities. Schools may impose the same reasonable time, place, and manner or other constitutional restrictions on distribution of religious literature as they do on nonschool literature generally, but they may not single out religious literature for special regulation.

Religious excusals: Subject to applicable State laws, schools enjoy substantial discretion to excuse individual students from lessons that are objectionable to the student or the students' parents on religious or other conscientious grounds. However, students generally do not have a Federal right to be excused from lessons that may be inconsistent with their religious beliefs or practices. School officials may neither encourage nor discourage students from availing themselves of an excusal option.

Released time: Subject to applicable State laws, schools have the discretion to dismiss students to off-premises religious instruction, provided that schools do not encourage or discourage participation or penalize those who do not attend. Schools may not allow religious instruction by outsiders on school premises during the school day.

Teaching values: Though schools must be neutral with respect to religion, they may play an active role with respect to teaching civic values and virtue, and the moral code that holds us together as a community. The fact that some of these values are held also by religions does not make it unlawful to teach them in school.

Student garb: Schools enjoy substantial discretion in adopting policies relating to student dress and school uniforms. Students generally have no Federal right to be exempted from religiously-neutral and generally applicable school dress rules based on their religious beliefs or practices; however, schools may not single out religious attire in general, or attire of a particular religion, for prohibition or regulation. Students may display religious messages on items of clothing to the same extent that they are permitted to display other comparable messages. Religious messages may not be singled out for suppression, but rather are subject to the same rules as generally apply to comparable messages.

Lots of lawsuits claimed, no lawsuits listed.

Just because you find it in a blog does not make it a fact.

Feel free to try to factually debunk the actual stories listed rather than the tired old "I don't like your sources" routine.

I debunked the two stories that actually were related to the ACLU. There is no debunking the opinions of bloggers. You have to bring facts in order to debate. You are asking for me to debunk stories used to show the ACLU war on christmas when the stories themselves show they are unrealated to the ACLU. You've done my debunking for me. The source of information is very relevant. You provide a bloggers oft repeated opinion based on an unquoted government document and I actually look up the document in the Dept of Ed archives provide it, showing that it does not state anything the supplied blogger claims, yet you don't consider that a debunking.

You have to bring facts in order to debate.

You've done my debunking for me.

These bear repeating.

Wow, really, Tired? You think your insurance agent actually gives a bleep about whether or not you have a Merry Christmas, Happy Birthday or Happy Anything? It's a card that businesses send out so you will think they give a flying fig. It's just more commercialism and fairly harmless. How can a business be expected to keep track of who celebrates and who doesn't? It's easier to wish everyone a nice holiday season.

Our insurance agent knows us, and wouldn't dream of sending us a 'Happy Holidays' card. If I see 'Happy holidays' on a gift card, I will not buy it for a gift, if the gift is to be given at CHRISTMAS TIME! If the gift is to be given in later autumn, fall, for the holiday season upcoming, I will. It isn't a matter of expecting a store, or a person to honor or uphold my views of whether or not Christmas is a religious event. It is a holiday, named CHRISTMAS, just like the 4th of July celebration is called INDEPENDENCE DAY, GROUND HOGS DAY is not called 'see your shadow' day, and HALLOWEEN is not called 'THE MOON DAY'...

IT is a NAME of a PARTICULAR holiday, and I enjoy CHRISTMAS, for all it represents, even if that is a gift exchange for some families- to draw closer together. If some choose to not engage themselves in that celebration, that particular holiday, called CHRISTMAS, fine with me. i do not celebrate all of the named holidays either!

I agree that changing the names of what are obviously Christmas items to holiday items is silly. No one is fooled.

When it comes to a greeting card, however, it is just that, a greeting card. Embracing the entire season is easier for businesses than separating one holiday from another. I'm not saying I like it, I'm just saying it is understandable.

I agree, TennisMom2, and yes, our insurance agent knows us, but we do have friends that send 'Happy Holidays', just because it IS safe, generic well wishes! Understandable, entirely. The thought matters.. 'Hi, how are you- thinking of you..", etc. But I do think it is absurd to change the name of some of this, like Christmas tree to 'holiday tree'. Anyway- have a good SEASON...!...

I send out Christmas cards to people I know for sure celebrate it. When I'm not sure, I send 'Season's Greetings' or something to that effect. I just want my friends to know I'm thinking about them at this time of year.

You have a good season too (and a Merry Christmas)! ;)

Thank you Elaine.....Merry XMas to you and yours.

That's a very interesting point, John, about people having extra time off for Christmas. Technically, we could just have off on Christmas and New Year's Day for the school kids and skip the week in between. I doubt anyone would be happy about that, though. ;)

It understandable that Christian parents get annoyed about PC in their kids' schools. OTOH, non-Christian parents have to explain to their kids why Santa doesn't come to their house and it isn't because they aren't 'good' children. I wouldn't want any kid to feel bad about that. So, my kids did their celebrating at home rather than at school.

Maybe when we ban all holidays

Sometimes I complain about all the work, the expense, that goes into planning, preparing, cleaning up, etc., despite the holiday. If you're hosting the event, whether a July 4th barbecue or a sit-down dinner for 20 at Christmas, it's work. But in the end, with family and friends around, good food, a few old traditions, Americans love their holidays! Ban them? Heck, we'll invent more, imo!

Merry Christmas to you and yours and here's to a healthy, prosperous New Year for all of us!

When I mentioned about ignoring the ALCU I meant the merchants (by decorating, saying "Merry Christmas"). I didn't mean to cofuse anybody.

If the ACLU wants to dictate what people can celebrate they are going to have one hell of a fight on thier hands.

Let them tell me what I can and can't say. My only response: "F*$k You" followed by a cheerful "Merry Christmas"

Okay, here's another take on this.

Imposing our holiday on those who don't observe it can be somewhat tyrannical. Yes, there are more of 'us' than there are of 'them'. But their right not to have Christmas brought home from school in the form of a gingerbread man ought to be respected.

When someone tells me that my creche is illegal or that my church can't light up for Christmas I will be up in arms. No one is doing that though, so we should try and keep it all in perspective.

FR accepted with great pleasure - thanks.

Your right, they won't stand down but I ignore them as much as I ignore the advertisments. We need to just listen to those hearts of ours more and heed their messages.

A most wonderful Christmas for you and your loved ones, A bright New Year for all of us is waiting. :)

Thanks - I took the long route, but I was supporting your debate. Valentine's day is the worst - my birthday follows...with that said, I have a very lonely birthday, being that I find V-day to be a shallow way of showing how much you care, "Here - have some fat and some dying flowers." T-day - celebrating our thanks for the free land day - an obvious insult to American (Indians) everywhere. Holidays are a means for our Gov employees to get paid for doing nothing (still). Do your parents own a store? I mean, does it matter that, just as we get caught up from one holiday, we get caught up in another? I celebrate three per year, and alternate between them based on how I feel. Call me an Aquarius, but never call me Bi-polar - that's for the crazy people born in all of the other months. Just to be fair, let me post my favorite tag (Satire)...

Just me. No time to be a pretender. The meaning here is that, no matter what is said and done, beliefs will remain. None today can say what it is like to truly be free from our constant changes towards a perfect society. Because someone gets their tights in an upward roar, there are groups with nothing more respectable to do, then make unimpressive changes. Children are removed from their homes every year - homes which aren't as bad as the homes they are placed into, yet stuff like, "Merry Christmas" and DADT take center stage every time. Have a happy Anything Crazier Left (to) Undermine(?) Year...

Merry Christmas and thanks for stopping by.

Merry Christmas to you and your family, Elaine.

The ACLU seems to speak out of both sides of their mouths ... Go figure!

Not really. It depends on the venue and individuals involved.

Heralding Christmas on the one hand, and threatening lawsuits over it on the other is two different messages.

The "messages" aren't pro-Christmas or anti-Christmas at all. The sole message is the ACLU's view of constitutionality.

"Depending on the venue and individuals involved" is speaking out of both sides of their mouths. Heralding Christmas on the one hand, and threatening lawsuits over it on the other is two different messages.

As Verbal said - it isn't 'pro' or 'anti.' They aren't promoting or denying Christmas. They're reacting and responding to issues involving rights (as they are a Civil Liberties legal advocacy group).

Although, I don't really understand where you're coming from anyway - as they are doing it "DEPENDING ON THE VENUE AND INDIVIDUALS." If I support a loud, raucous activity at a bar, or at a sporting event, but then not at a church or a child's nursery, I am not speaking out of both sides of my mouth - my reaction to the activity in question changes depending on the venue and people involved. I support driving 70 on the highway, but not in a school zone - that's not hypocritical - it is rationally looking at the situations.

Need a tissue?

In cognito:

I've personally always felt that the schools have enough teachers and classrooms to allow for those students whose parents do not want them celebrating any particular holiday for those students to be given fun activities, etc to do that are utterly neutral in all ways while those students who parents don't mind them participating in school activities surrounding any particular holiday, in this article it would be Christmas parties, etc) to do so. In this way NO student is in any way forced to or restricted from anything on all sides of the issue.

There's no reason to make this all about an all or none situation for any child...mine or other people's. They are, after all, children and they have no choice but to suffer through what ever drama-lama we adults attach to earth shattering things like....an afternoon Christmas party prior to the ending of classes on the last day of classes before an established winter break for a long recognized celebration.

For instance, if I was a Jewish parent who did not want my child to become confused buy such things within the classroom...assuming my child attended public schools....I would be all for a separate classroom and teacher being procured for the celebration of Hanukkah even if the timing was a bit off. If, I was an atheist parent who did want my child exposed to religiously based holiday activities, I wouldn't need to take a royal @!$%# on all the other's kids' fun but would only request that my child be put in with other children who parents do not celebrate any religious type holidays of the season in question where fun "winter break from school!" activities that are entirely neutral are being supplied.

That's called compromise. It means that I recognize that all people are not me and I am not the spokesman for all people. It means that I don't seek to rob the joy and meaning of any particular holiday from others simply because I myself do not practice it. My child will grow up in a rich country full of diversity of belief and cultures. I want them to be able to embrace and support everyone's rights to enjoy and celebrate their own beliefs and culture while they themselves do the same at the same time. Teaching my child that eliminating the obvious signs of diversity of belief and practice within a society is not only making for a very boring and homogeneous world but flies in the face of what it means to be a citizen of this wonderful country.

Just my thoughts and please forgive the editorializing. I guess I just want so badly for us all to stop trying to erase all the diversity or various beliefs, cultures, etc that are visible in our every day experiences that makes us a wonderful and unique country.

It is just Christmas displays or all wasteful Govt spending of yours and my tax dollars that you don't like?

I don't believe they used the word 'wasteful' - which ends up striking more of subjectivity than anything else.

It was more along the lines of using taxpayer dollars to push religion.