Outrage of Secular Humanists Over Public Displays of Christmas Being Matched by Yuletide Symbol Lovers

Brant McLaughlin
Secular humanists' angst and outrage over publicly displayed Christmas trees and Nativity scenes are being met with an equal and opposite reaction this holiday season-even by those who are not particularly religious.

Those who love the Yuletide traditions are getting fed up with the militant don't-make-me-see-that attitude of those who are taking the separation of church and state over bridges too far.

Secularists and humanists insist that the Religious Right is gaining the upper hand.

"It's more abrasive this year," says Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

But not everyone sees it as abrasive. Many see it as recognizing a longstanding, harmless, and lovely tradition, and many others say they have a right to put out public symbols of a religious holiday that, for whatever reason, is celebrated by about 95% of all Americans, especially when the vast majority of Americans still call themselves Christians.

Close by where this journalist is reporting from, the media in Green Bay, Wisconsin, are lit up with the fact that mayor Jim Schmitt has come under heavy fire and been threatened with lawsuits by the Freedom from Religion Foundation because of a decision to display a Christmas Nativity scene (sans the three wise men--who are of Iranian, or ancient Persian, derivation) at City Hall until December 26th.

Americans United weighs in by asserting that the inclusion of more secular Christmas symbols such as reindeer do not absolve the mayor and the city from marrying politics and religion, which they say is strictly prohibited at all times in American society.

Schmitt also publicly invited citizens who believe in other religious traditions to come to City Hall and display some of their chosen religious symbols. A pagan church did just that, putting up a Yuletide wreath in the image of an upright Pentagram, which they point out should not ever be confused with the upside-down Pentagram used by Satanists but is to them a sacred symbol of the unicorn, which represents "white" magic.

But very soon after it was hung above the Nativity, the wreath was torn down by a "vandal".

Schmitt has also indicated that there can be more inclusive use of non-Christian religious symbols during the holiday season at City Hall next year, but the city council has to draw up guidelines for what will be acceptable. The mayor says he is not pleased with the more "absurd" requests that he has received in response to his public invitation, like some people requesting that the city put up a plain metallic pole to represent the satirical religion "Festivus" that originated on a TV comedy show.

The public on the whole is quite indifferent to the controversy and is far more concerned with shopping, visiting, and celebrating.

Published by Brant McLaughlin

I am a Writer driven by endless curiosity and a deep desire to waste time creatively.  View profile

6 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Brant McLaughlin12/26/2007

    Hrm...Bruce, I don't have any religion at all.

  • Anne Bryant12/25/2007

    Bruce, I think that the problem is that there are many that will take offense at anything. Consider this... If you were in a Southern Town, chances are that the majority of people would be either Baptist or Catholic.The town that I live in has many other faiths including Islam, but they are not equally represented among the population and their buildings and land are out of town. The town is the county seat, so these people have the same right to representation as the others that are actually in town.. but they don't have any land in city limits. I think a perfect solution would be to have designated areas and to let people adopt them each holiday season. This way, no one is excluded. Am I wrong?? Good Article Brant.

  • Justice Lives Not12/24/2007

    "COME ON, GEORGE! IT'S TIME FOR THE FESTIVUS FEATS-OF-STRENGTH!"

  • Bruce in Orlando12/23/2007

    (continued)
    Or you can leave the religious displays to private and church property. I don't know about your city, but my city has ample private and church property.

  • Bruce in Orlando12/23/2007

    "The mayor says he is not pleased with the more "absurd" requests ... like ... "Festivus" "

    That really burns me.

    I believe your religion is absurd. You believe my religion is absurd. We both KNOW all the other guy's religions are absurd. But we are private citizens and that is freedom of thought. He is speaking in his role as a leader of the gov't.

    We don't pay the mayor to decide which beliefs are orthodox and which are absurd. Gov't should keep the peace, maintain the infrastructure, and butt out of religion. The mayor may participate in any absurd religion he wishes but when he is on the clock as a mayor, he should understand his role.

    If a gov't sanctions religious displays on the public square, all religions no matter how absurd, must be treated equally. The only conditions a gov't can set are objective guidelines such as size and safety. It cannot weigh in on the validity of the message. And be prepared to tolerate some really absurd stuff.

    Or you can lea

  • Peregrin12/23/2007

    I notice that you put "vandal" in quotation marks. Do you not think that this term applies to someone who destroys property that is not their own?

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.