There was a concerted effort by some conservative organizations to get back to the traditional celebration and meaning of Christmas and away from the political correctness that has accompanied the holiday in recent years.
Those who led the charge included Moral Majority founder, Rev. Jerry Falwell, with his “Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign” and American Family Association, which launched a boycott against retailing giant Target Corporation. The main theme behind Falwell’s campaign was that “celebrating Christmas is constitutional.”
Falwell’s church took out newspaper ads promoting the campaign, which pointed out that celebrating Christmas is still legal in schools, on public property and in private businesses. The ads also offered free legal assistance by Liberty Counsel to individuals facing persecution for celebrating Christmas. Falwell noted, “We need to draw a line in the sand and resist bullying tactics by the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, American Atheists and other leftist organizations that intimidate school and government officials by spreading misinformation about Christmas.”
Liberty Counsel President and General Counsel, Matt Staver, added, “I am thrilled to see so many pastors and churches promoting the Christmas Campaign. For too many years we have remained silent while the ACLU and others like them have played the role of the Grinch. We will no longer remain silent. We have no intention of letting misinformation chase our religious liberty or our religious heritage from the public marketplace.”
Liberty Counsel has made available a seven-page legal memorandum spelling out the do’s and don’ts regarding public celebrations of Christmas.
It reads in part, “Publicly sponsored nativity scenes on public property are constitutional, so long as there is a secular symbol of the holiday in the general context. Privately sponsored nativity scenes or religious symbols are also permissible on public property that has been opened to the general public for expressive activity. No secular symbol is necessary. A sign indicating the private sponsorship may be helpful.
Public schools are not religion-free zones. Classroom discussion of the religious aspects of the holidays is permissible. A holiday display in the classroom may include a nativity scene or other religious imagery, so long as the context also includes secular symbols. A choral performance may include religious songs. Indeed, the majority of the songs may be religious, so long as the performance also includes secular holiday songs. If the students select their own songs, independent of the direction of school officials, then there is no requirement that the songs include secular numbers.
Students may distribute religious Christmas cards to their classmates during non-instructional time, before or after school or between classes. If the students are not required to dress in uniform, then they may wear clothing with religious words or symbols or don religious jewelry.”
The campaign first drew attention when Falwell threatened to have Liberty Counsel sue the city of Boston over its recent decision to change the long-standing name of its Christmas tree, to a “holiday” tree. The city subsequently reversed its decision.
Legal action threatened by Liberty Counsel also resolved several other disputes dealing with nativity displays, Christmas decorations and parties, and musical programs.
One such case of note involved Ridgeway Elementary School in Dodgeville, Wisconsin, where officials, under pressure, dropped “Cold in the Night” from its “winter program.” The traditional song, “Silent Night” was sung instead. Sung to the tune of “Silent Night,” the lyrics of “Cold in the Night” were entirely secular.
American Family Association ended its boycott of Target Corporation after just one week, because the company said it would include “Christmas” in its advertising and in-store promotions.
AFA Chairman Donald Wildmon said, they went after Target because it did not initially use or display the word “Christmas” anywhere; and because, for a second straight year, the company refused to allow Salvation Army Red Kettle bell ringers outside its stores. Wildmon said, nearly 700,000 people had signed up to join the Target boycott at AFA’s Web site.
Target, in its official statement, said, “Our advertising, marketing and merchandising will become more specific to the holiday that is approaching–referring directly to holidays like Christmas and Hanukkah. For example, you will see reference to Christmas in select television commercials, circulars and in-store signage.”
Wildmon said, the action taken by the AFA prompted other major retailers to take notice. Similar complaints resulted in companies like Wal-Mart, Lowe’s, Macy’s and Walgreens reversing their marketing decisions, and specifically referencing “Christmas” rather than “holiday” products.
Wildmon defended the boycott. “When you take away ‘Christmas’ and replace it with a very generic term like ‘holiday,’ you take away the very essence of what is being celebrated. Most people don’t buy holiday gifts, but they buy Christmas gifts. Most people don’t buy gifts for Thanksgiving or New Year’s, but for Christmas. The majority who celebrate Christmas find it offensive that the private sector is increasingly ‘banning’ the name of their holiday,” Wildmon said.
Even Congress and some Jewish leaders got involved in the flap over Christmas vs. the holidays.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert issued a directive renaming the so-called “Holiday Tree” on the west lawn of the U.S. Capitol, as the “Capitol Christmas Tree.” The Capitol Architect’s Office said, the annually decorated tree was renamed a “Holiday Tree” out of political correctness in the 1990s to include other holidays in December such as Kwanza and Hanukkah. A spokesman said, “the speaker believes a Christmas tree is a Christmas tree, and it is as simple as that.”
The recently formed group, Jews against Anti-Christian Defamation, argued that the substitution of “Happy Holidays” for “Merry Christmas” in stores and in schools is symbolic of moral decay in America.
Organization President, Dan Feder, said, “Christmas is being driven underground. And the war against Christmas is a war against Judeo-Christian values, which this country was founded on and depends on to survive. Because this is an overwhelmingly Christian nation, it’s a matter of simple courtesy to acknowledge a holiday celebrated by 96% of the American people. Would a Christian living in Israel be offended if someone wished them a Happy Hanukkah? Based on population, America is more Christian than Israel is Jewish. Religion–all religion which teaches God and morality–enriches our society instead of diminishing it,” Feder said.
That view is not shared by the American Jewish Congress, which took issue with House Resolution 579, which cleared Congress a week-and-a-half before Christmas by a vote of 401-22. The measure rebuffed “attempts to ban mention of Christmas” and expressed support for and recognized the “importance of the symbols and traditions of Christmas.”
AJC Executive Director, Neil Goldstein, stated, “To understand the pernicious nature of this resolution, one must first understand that no such ban or attempted ban against Christmas exists. Rather, what occurs each Christmas is that individual merchants exercise their own independent commercial, religious and personal judgments about whether they will celebrate or observe Christmas. Christians have the right as consumers to patronize, or refuse to patronize, stores that observe or decline to observe Christmas, display Christian symbols, follow Christmas traditions, and that celebrate the religious aspects of the holiday. Merchants have a right to decide how to respond to such consumer preferences. But, the government has no business of getting into the middle. Those who wish to marshal the power of government to tip the balance in favor of one side or the other do so in blatant disregard of our nation’s long established tradition of religious liberty. Government has no plac e establishing a set of favored religious symbols and traditions at the expense of other Americans.”
Likewise, Americans United for Separation of Church and State Executive Director, Rev. Barry Lynn, criticized Falwell’s “Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign,” in an open letter to the evangelists.
“I am deeply disappointed that you have chosen a time that Christians observe as a season of peace and good will and turned it into a time of religious divisiveness and community conflict. Neither Americans United, nor any other civil liberties organization that I know of, is waging any kind of war on Christmas. The First Amendment of our Constitution ensures every American’s right to observe religious holidays or to refrain from doing so. We can wish each other a “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays” and it’s really none of your business which term we choose. We can call our decorated tree a “Christmas tree” or a “holiday tree,” and that’s our right.
You want an America where there is no separation of church and state, and where your rather narrow interpretation of Christianity is forced on everyone. If you can convince Americans that their cherished Christmas traditions are under fire, you think maybe they will join your nefarious crusade to tear down the protective church-state wall that guarantees our freedoms,” Lynn said.
As for next Christmas, with regard to any threatened boycotts by AFA, Wildmon said, they will request that major retailers “make a promise to change for 2006 to use the term ‘Christmas’ during their promotions,” and that it will post all store responses that it receives. Wildmon added, “We think you will see a different approach” next Christmas on the part of retailers.
[Home] [Introducing UNI] [News Coverage] [Features Page][Publications]