Even though the dried Christmas trees are lying by the curb, the Valentine's Day cards and chocolates have replaced Christmas ornaments in Hallmark stores and we are all gearing up for a new semester at the University, I would like to revisit the holiday season for just a brief moment. In recent years, especially this past Christmas, there has been a concerted effort by organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to secularize Christmas and expunge its religious meaning and significance from various public settings. Administrations of public school districts and universities and boards of town districts have also jumped on the bandwagon. This endeavor is by all means intolerant, inequitable and undemocratic. This past Yuletide season, it was evident that the politics of religion dominated and overshadowed the true meaning of Christmas.
One does not have to search very far to read or hear about several examples of the attack on the Christianity of Christmas. New York City public schools permit a Hanukkah menorah and the star and crescent of Islam on their grounds, but forbid the display of a Nativity scene. The justification? Somehow, the Jewish and Islamic symbols are historic, but only the Christian symbol is religious ("Christian References a No-No at Public Schools," Dec. 24, 2003, FoxNews.com).
Officials in the town of Palm Beach, Fla., have also decided not to allow a Nativity scene to be erected next to a menorah in a public park ("Town Says 'No' to Nativity Scene, 'Yes' to Menorah," Dec. 18, 2003, FoxNews.com).
The constitutionality of these two cases is currently being decided in the courts.
In several school districts, challenges to winter concerts that contain religious songs have been made. These include the Hanover Township district in New Jersey and a charter school in Elbert County, Colo. The challenges have been successfully countered by parents and the Alliance Defense Fund in court ("Foiling those evil Grinches," Dec. 21, 2003, townhall.com).
What is ironic in all of this is that despite the organized attempt to remove symbols such as the Nativity from displays across the country and prevent Christmas carols from being sung at school recitals, is that the celebration of the birth of Christ is, in modern times, most commonly associated with the holiday. Whether or not you believe in the spiritual implications of Christmas, I doubt many Americans would be celebrating the holiday if the religious connection to Christmas was completely absent.
Case law supports the permissibility of a Nativity display on public property. In Lynch v. Donnelly, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' decisions to permit a nativity scene sponsored by the city of Pawtucket, R.I. Reasons cited include: "The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any," and, "Our history is pervaded by official acknowledgment of the role of religion in American life, and equally pervasive is evidence of accommodation of all faiths and all forms of religious expression and hostility toward none." The case law states, "The display is sponsored by the city to celebrate the Holiday recognized by Congress and national tradition and to depict the origins of that Holiday" (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=465&invol=668).
Obviously all of the holidays should be recognized regardless of the quantity of the population that celebrates each event, but it is worth noting that while approximately 5 percent of the population celebrates Hanukkah and 2 percent celebrates Kwanza, the vast majority of Americans (96 percent) celebrate Christmas (some celebrate more than one holiday) ("Majority OK With Public Nativity Scenes," Dec. 9, FoxNews.com).
Doesn't the holiday that 96 percent of the population celebrates at least deserve a place at a public roadside display of the various holidays or incorporated into a medley of songs celebrating the other traditions at a winter concert?
Aside from the judicial branch, the American public is in favor of public Christmas displays. According to the same poll, conducted December 3-4, 2003, 87 percent answered "Yes" to the question, "What is your view -- should nativity scenes be allowed on public property, or not?" Those surveyed were provided with a brief description of the views of those opposed to and in support of the nativity scenes. Interestingly enough, broken down by political party, 84 percent of Democrats said "Yes," along with 94 percent of Republicans, and 82 percent of Independents. One has to wonder about the motives of the ACLU, the ADL and other groups in advocating such an unpopular and extremist viewpoint.
Tolerance of all holidays representing the various major religions is crucial in our nation. 61 percent of those polled agreed, "If Christmas symbols are displayed, other religions must also be recognized." The Nativity scene should not replace symbols like a menorah and the star and crescent of Islam or Kwanza symbols, but it should be included. All of the holidays should be equally represented in public exhibits. To leave out any one of them would deprive a portion of our population, no matter the size, from a celebration of their respective holiday.
(Whitney Blake's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at wblake@cavalierdaily.com.)