Freedom from religion groups start lawsuits over Christmas, disagreements by school boards occur over whether children can sing songs about Christ in holiday programs. It happens every year.
Other religious winter holidays, such as the Jewish Hanukkah, aren't mentioned herein because of one simple reason: there are no organized lawsuits or challenges against them taking place. I'm not intending to show favoritism toward Christianity.
That said, government officials in two states so far have taken action to inform and assure their citizens that religious holiday observances, programs and music can still be displayed in public places. They don't violate the U.S. Constitution.
The city of Maryville, Tenn., has announced it will restore the story about the birth of Jesus, as told in the Bible's book of Luke, into the annual Christmas tree lighting ceremony. Last year, for the first time in 22 years, the story was omitted because the city's legal counsel advised that public reading of any portion of the Bible was a violation of the Constitution.
After citizen concern, further research and legal opinions, the reading of the story will take place once again this year.
In Virginia, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli took early steps in August by issuing a letter answering questions from the state's House of Delegates. They inquired whether upcoming public Christmas celebrations planned for Loudoun County would violate either the U.S. or Virginia Constitution.
Cuccinelli's decision included the following:
* According to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 2.2-505 of the Code of Virginia, a [local] governmental entity is never compelled to prohibit holiday displays, including religious symbols.
* Governmental bodies can exercise discretion in accommodating the religious expression of citizens for their seasonal holidays.
* These governments themselves can choose to participate in recognizing holidays as long as the various symbols of many religions as well as secular symbols are included.
(Cuccinelli's letter can be seen in .pdf format at this Liberty Counsel page by clicking on the highlighted words "opinion issued".)
But Cuccinelli didn't stop there. He concluded by saying the modern-day U.S. Supreme Court's jurisprudence leading to interpretations of the Establishment Clause are confused.
Anti-Christmas activists will often point out that, historically, the celebration of Christ's birth was originally added to other pagan rituals already taking place at that time of year; and that Jesus wasn't born in December. Indeed, if the Three Wise Men actually existed and followed a star to Bethlehem, some theologians and astronomers figure that Jesus' birth would have had to take place in September or October.
It doesn't matter. If Christians wish to celebrate Jesus' birth on Dec. 25, there is nothing according to the Constitution that says they can't do it in public. In fact -- if anything -- the First Amendment says the government can't prohibit it.
Liberty Counsel is a Christian legal organization that now runs a "Friend or Foe of Christmas" campaign because there have been so many lawsuits against the public acknowledgment of Christ in the holiday. Its press release about the Virginia decision states, "Refusing to acknowledge Christmas while honoring every other conceivable holiday may well violate the Constitution."
We're leaving someone out of the game by celebrating the "Holiday season" but not allowing people to freely acknowledge Christmas as being about Christ.
Published by Sheryl Young - Featured Contributor in Politics
Freelance writer since 1997; Featured Political Contributor for Yahoo!; Tampa Tribune Community Columnist/Blogger; Chicken Soup for the Soul; Amy Foundation National Writing Award; happy wife, proud step-mom... View profile
- Our Wonderful Bill of Rights: The First AmendmentThe First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was intended to protect our right to practice our religious faith freely; and yet, the Supreme Court has often invoked this amendment to justify decisions restricting our...
- Hair and Obscenity: First Amendment LawIn 2005, an anonymous group protested the performance of "Hair" at a local community college. The following was written in response, containing cites to the First Amendment law associated with any performance.
Obscenity, Internet Censorship and the First AmendmentPornography and other graphic materials existed before the Internet, but the technology's far-reaching capabilities have made this material more accessible and intrusive. Time w...- The Impact of the First Amendment of EducationThis article describes how the first amendment impacts education.
- Why I Love and Loathe the First AmendmentThe First Amendment, well known, loved by most, and a vital part of life in the United States of America. But seriously folks, some people use it in a way that really makes my blood boil.
- Christmas Shopping in North Dallas
- The Shadow of the Galilean: The Story of Jesus
- The First Amendment, Establishment Clause Debate Under Jefferson, Madison
- Dr. Laura Schlessinger Will Stop Doing Radio Talk Show - First Amendment Rights Th...
- When the First Amendment Crosses the Line, Online
- Tattoos, Tattoo Parlors, and the First Amendment
- Christine O'Donnell's First Amendment woes continue as she threatens to sue over i...





28 Comments
Post a CommentThe ungodly, includes those that like to force their will upon others.
While I understand the concern of others and their feelings, in all honesty, Christ was not born in December. In addition, he did not tell his first century followers they should observe his birth -- only his death.
I just wish we could all try to be accepting of everyones beliefs around the holidays and be understanding of all.
Let's keep it real.
I am re-visiting this to show my support and love for you wonderful right for what is right, who cares what is politically correct; if it is correct is more important. You're awesome my friend.
Such debates are so silly.
You did a good job covering this!
Another good article.
It seems at times as if the controversy has increased our sensitivity and acceptance of each others beliefs and rights not decreased it. Perhaps it is not a bad thing.
Great points, Tracie and everyone! thanks.