- The Washington Times - Saturday, December 16, 2006

The Christmas trees are back up at Seattle’s Sea-Tac Airport after their removal when a lawsuit was threatened. But that doesn’t mean the bah-humbug season is over.

Every Christmas, the politically correct and anti-religion crowd gets into Scrooge mode, trying to deprive the great majority of Americans from celebrating Christmas in traditional fashion. The American Civil Liberties Union files lawsuits demanding creches be removed from public property. School districts change Christmas vacations into winter breaks and ban carols from holiday assemblies. Even some retailers have gotten cold feet about mentioning the holiday, with Wal-Mart telling employees “Merry Christmas” should be replaced with “Happy Holidays.” It would be laughable if it weren’t so offensive.

This year’s “war on Christmas” story had an unlikely genesis. A Seattle rabbi simply asked Sea-Tac Airport to display a Menorah to celebrate Hanukkah, which begins at sundown this Friday. But the Port Authority, which runs the facility, got nervous, worrying that displaying the symbol that celebrates the Jewish victory over the Seleucid king of Syria in 200 B.C. would somehow be a government endorsement of religion.

Nonsense. The story of the Maccabees’ revolt against Antiochus IV — who persecuted the Jews and looted the Temple — is a cultural and historical as well as a religious celebration. The airport could easily have accommodated the rabbi’s request, but chose to panic and remove the Christmas trees, which are secular, not religious, symbols. The rabbi didn’t exactly help by threatening to sue if the 8-foot lighted candelabra wasn’t displayed.

Many of us grew up in a different time, when civic centers and public buildings routinely featured not just trees, snowmen and Santa Claus, but Nativity scenes that depicted Mary, Joseph, the Baby Jesus and the Three Wise Men. No one was asked to subscribe to belief in the divinity of Christ because of these displays, but it was an acknowledgement that the overwhelming majority of Americans celebrated the birth of this man.

Should non-Buddhists be offended when cities build pagoda structures with public money, since these buildings are simply replicas of shrines to honor Buddha? Should Christians, Jews and Muslims take offense when Chinese restaurants feature statues of Buddha at their entryways? Should public buildings be forced to remove any Persian rugs that feature the prayer rug design, for fear not doing so would somehow endorse Islam?

Should public museums remove any paintings that depict religious figures or themes? Should public orchestras and choruses be forbidden from playing “The Messiah” this year? Should corporations similarly worry they shouldn’t be making donations that would be used to promote cultural celebrations of religious themes, in fear they will antagonize nonbelievers or those of different religious faiths?

Some people, no doubt, would answer yes to all these questions. But imagine life in such a society. Instead of a nation that celebrates religious freedom, we would become Taliban-like, banning all expressions of religion in the public square.

Surely common sense should prevail here. The First Amendment, of course, guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

The Supreme Court bears much of the fault for taking us down this path over the last several decades. We have become such a litigious society that anyone who feels slighted in any way rushes to court to settle his grievances.

Thankfully, Sea-Tac came to its senses and put back the 14 trees it unwisely took down. And Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky withdrew his threat to sue, opting, wisely, to work with the airport to get the Menorah put up for next year’s Hanukkah celebration. Wal-Mart still encourages its employees to wish everyone Happy Holidays, but it fired a customer service representative who sent e-mails telling those who complained that Christmas has its roots in “Siberian shamanism.”

The United States may be increasingly religiously diverse, and we should be respectful of minority religions and of those who have no religious affiliations or beliefs. But those who do not share the religious views of the majority are not entitled to ban Christianity from the public square.

If they succeed, what will happen next? Remember the Taliban blowing up the ancient Buddhas of Bamiyan? Will we see the antireligion police roaming our museums and concert halls on some future crusade? This, not a few Christmas trees or even creches on public property, could become the true threat to the First Amendment.

Linda Chavez is a nationally syndicated columnist and author of “An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal.”

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide