The "Take Back Christmas" campaign

[velvetpage]

There was an article in our paper this morning about the campaign by a rather large number of people in the States to put the word "Christmas" back into the Holiday Season.

I'm of two minds about this.

First, I would be quite willing to celebrate other religious holidays as well. I would like to learn more about the various holidays celebrated by my students, particularly the Hindi and Islamic ones, because those are the bulk of my other-faith students. I would appreciate having access to the music of these cultures, so that I could teach elements of that music and culture in my arts classes. I have no problem with inclusiveness.

The only time I get annoyed is when a group (educational or political, usually) decides that any faith is allowed to display the greetings traditional to their faith, except mine. So, I cautiously support the lawsuit launched against two towns in Florida that permitted Happy Hannukah displays but not a Nativity scene. Sorry, guys, that's not inclusiveness; that's discrimination against a major religious group, precisely because it is a major religious group.

On the other hand, I understand that most cities don't have the money to be all-inclusive by specifically mentioning every faith, and therefore "Season's Greetings" is a safe and, to my mind, reasonable compromise.

So, my suggestion: if community groups are willing to set up and take down their public displays themselves, and incur all costs associated with them (or, alternatively, be granted the same amount for each religious group that asks, over the course of a year), and if there is space in areas normally reserved for such displays, go ahead and make them religious but inclusively so - that is, any faith group willing to take the time and energy to make the display has the right to space, etc, to set it up. Then the only group that has any reason to be upset is the group that doesn't want to celebrate anything, and I can't see how we could make them happy, too.

Any city that knowingly fails to provide equal space for holiday displays of multiple faiths is guilty of discrimination. (There does, of course, need to be a timeline for applying for that space, and a protocol for granting it, but most cities have protocols in place that could easily be adapted to this use.) These displays do not need to happen only in December, since there are other big festivals in other faiths at other times of the year.

If the city in question wishes to sponsor a sign saying "Season's Greetings," or something similar, after providing opportunities for faiths to set up their own displays, that is their choice and an inclusive option.

I don't want to force my faith down anyone's throat. I do want to be able to celebrate it publicly without being labelled politically incorrect or intolerant for doing so.

Thoughts, please?

Comments

[collie13.livejournal.com]

What an interesting post! I've found myself fascinatedly commenting twice already just on your commenters, and I'm only now getting to commenting on your thought-provoking original post. So! Questions, we have questions... ;)

Any city that knowingly fails to provide equal space for holiday displays of multiple faiths is guilty of discrimination.

Does this mean there must be space for religious displays, or can the city decide they don't want to bother with it, and provide none at all? If my religion has a holiday on a date where your religion does not, do you still get to put up a display for your religion? If you do so, is putting up your display considered truly religious, or simply religious advertising?

What about folks who have eschewed religion -- do they get space too, or are they just out of luck? If they don't get space, why not? What if they don't want to look at religious pageantry -- should the displays not be allowed within a certain space of public buildings? If they get space too, shouldn't all non-profits get space as well? I'd love to see a display on public grounds for the L5 Society, for example, or for Second Harvest.

I already seconded athelind's interesting question regarding which religions to allow, so I'll stop here. I look forward to your thoughts, and thank you for inviting commentary -- I so love interesting discussions like this! ;)

[stress-kitten.livejournal.com]

A good chunk of one of my papers ( http://www.livejournal.com/users/stress_kitten/87422.html ) was examining where morality comes from. People tend to use religion to push home the lessons, but so many other things affect it, like home life, culture and life experiences. I see morality of an internalised kind as coming largely from empathy, an ability to follow the golden rule of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" because you can actually place yourself in another's shoes and realise how that would feel to have that done to you.

I must admit that I hate seeing Christmas becoming Xmas. I may not be Christian, but it's gotta be annoying seeing the reason for your celebration being removed and replaced by rampant commercialism. I hate it, even though my focus at this time is family not faith. And I can understand people being annoyed by it all. However, if public spaces are going to be used to celebrate the holiday with religious iconage, I believe that Velvetpage's ideas should be implemented. I am more comfortable with the idea of religion being completely removed from the operation of state because, while as VP commented, it was not the initial intent, at the same time, there wasn't the diversity of faiths we live with today.

Damn, I hope that made sense. My brain is rambly.

[collie13.livejournal.com]

I agree re morality coming from a wide variety of sources, and not just from deific commandments; and also with a huge amount of it being strongly fueled by empathy, which is an emotion we don't seem to laud enough IMNSHO.

Regarding Christmas, I don't like the X either, even though I know it's supposed to signify the cross, and I loathe the commercialism. That's why I shorten it to C-mas if I'm going to shorten it. Also, there's a reason my favorite C-mas show is "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" rather than some puppet show where the most important goal is helping Santa deliver the loot on time.

Very interesting post you linked to -- I commented there. Also, yay for rambly brains! ;)

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

You're right about empathy being the root of morality, at least in modern times, but for the purposes of my thread with collie13, you need to go one step deeper to understand what I meant.

In order for empathy to provide a basis for moral action, one must hold certain values as - dare I say sacred? First, you must be of the belief that all human beings are in fact human, and that none is inherently more valuable than another. Second, you must believe that all humans have the right to have feelings and act on them, and that those feelings merit respect from other people including yourself. Third, you need a sense of responsibility for the impact that your actions can have on others. Fourth, you need a sense of fair play - that most people will reciprocate if you treat them well. Fifth, and last, you need a belief that even if they don't reciprocate, your actions are still an objective "right thing to do."

All of these beliefs constitute a philosophy of life that underpins empathic morality, and according to my earlier definition, they constitute a religious viewpoint whether or not there is a concept of God behind them.

[collie13.livejournal.com]

Ah! Thank you; this post has clarified things greatly for me. Yes, I can see this being called a set of "absolute truths" as well as being the basis for a religion or a philosophy.

[stress-kitten.livejournal.com]

Interesting. And I agree with everything up to the point where you define living by the golden rule (of which all 5 points you make are extensions if the person is resonably thoughtful and balanced) when there is no belief in a greater power behind it as religious. :-)

For me, religion will always require a greater power involved in order to make it a religion. I personally would include the requirement of a greater power in the concept of spirituality as well, although I'm shakier in my belief of my ability to justify that decision. :-D

[neosis.livejournal.com]

Um, the reason for the celebration of Christmas was expressly to eliminate native religions. It was deliberately placed at the same time as pagan ceremonies to replace them and turn those nasty pagans into good Christians whether they wanted to or not.

Christmas has never been a religious festival for me, the religious aspects have always been secondary. Good will to all mankind I can get behind. Celebrating a birth that occured in the middle of spring at the start of winter just doesn't work for me.