groups

oh dear, I am a proud member in standing of the ACLU.....I am an agnostic with Buddhist leanings and I belief in peace and goodwill to everyone...Namaste

I likewise am a strong believer in the work of the ACLU. Civil liberties are not always popular, but essential to our American way of life. Btw, as an fyi, tomorrow night is the beginning of Chanukah.

Incidentally, there is a fascinating history of the Christmas tree in America. Here is a link and a fair use portion of the article. It might surprise some folks who have wrapped it all into a rigid sort of Christmas lore:

view link

The Follens and the Christmas Tree

By Randall Conrad

Celebrating Christmas didn’t come easily to Massachusetts.

As early as 1659, the colony declared it a crime to observe December 25th except in church. The Revolution came and went; the separation of church and state became a reality in Massachusetts in 1832; and still the Commonwealth held out, outlawing Christmas until the middle of the nineteenth century.

And as late as 1856, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow could still remark, “We are in a transition state about Christmas here in New England. The old Puritan feeling prevents it from being a cheerful hearty holiday; though every year makes it more so.”

Nevertheless, secular celebration did make inroads in the 1820s and 1830s. In Massachusetts, whether or not you celebrated a “cheerful, hearty” Christmas had mostly to do with which side of the Congregational and Unitarian fences your family lived on, and what generation you belonged to.

Take Concord, for example. Both lifestyles coexisted around 1830. Future senator George Hoar recalled, “Little account was made of Christmas. The fashion of Christmas presents was almost wholly unknown.”

In the same town, the Thoreau family represented a vanguard generation, primarily Unitarians of progressive beliefs, who practiced a joyful celebration of Christmas as a family tradition. Henry David Thoreau was a little boy when (according to his brother) the future philosopher and his siblings would hang their stockings at the fireplace, fully expecting Santa Claus to arrive by the chimney, leaving fruits and sweets. (Santa, by the way, was “a very good sort of sprite, who rode about in the air upon a broomstick.”)

Santa on a broomstick? Clearly, the secular Christmas of the 1830s was far from standardized. It was only in 1833 that Clement C. Moore dramatized Santa’s sleigh and reindeer in “A Visit from Saint Nicholas” (“The Night Before Christmas”). Thomas Nast’s cartoons, which finally standardized a roly-poly Santa, didn’t appear till 1884.

In a very engaging and spirited book, The Battle for Christmas, historian Stephen Nissenbaum traces the evolution of America’s traditional Christmas celebration. His chapter, Under the Christmas Tree: A Battle of Generations examines the Rev. Charles Follen’s legendary 1835 introduction of the candle-lit, gift-bearing tree – and places it in the broader cultural context of nineteenth-century social transitions. As it turns out, Rev. Follen’s anti-slavery activism played a part, too. From Nissenbaum’s book:
( rest may be found at the link)

While my heritage is Jewish, my family-of-origin celebrated Christmas . . . not as a religious holiday, but as a social occasion . . . complete with decorated tree, gifts, gathering, and traditional foods.

To this day, I refer to the decorated pine as a "Christmas tree."

But I, too, admire and support the work of the ACLU and could not conceive of doing anything to thwart it.

Let people call the tree what they will.

Funny how some still write Xmas instead of Christmas. Christmas, in my opinion, is the Mass of Christ and nothing more and nothing less. Everything else, again in my opinion, comes from folklore and myth. Christian holidays are celebrated more prominently in America than any other religious holidays; and they are more commercialized than the holidays of other religions as well. I think a lot of the offensiveness about Christmas comes from its’ commercialization and not its religious significance. But given the religious and spiritual diversity in our society, sooner or later there will come a time when other religious holidays will be given the same attention as Christmas. They too will most likely become overly commercialized. As far as the ACLU is concerned one person’s civil liberty is often another person’s insult, but I see no need to change Christmas traditions in order to accommodate others; still I‘m not inclined to wage a counter movement against the ACLU. Holidays are usually celebrated with family and friends but in truth their meaning is very personal and no amount of change on the outside should effect that.

>As they are working so very hard to get rid of the CHRISTMAS part of this holiday, we should all send them a nice, CHRISTIAN card to brighten up their dark, sad, little world.<

Uuhhhhh..........................no

Just one more point: As with most (perhaps all) things, an item means to you, precisely what it means to you. Does it really matter what it signifies to someone else . . . or what someone else calls it (as long as they're not being deliberately offensive)? Does another's terminology make it any less to you?

Although I call the decorated pine a "Christmas tree," to me it symbolizes coming together with family and friends, in the spirit of sharing. To you, it may mean something quite different.

No matter the terminology, every experience is deeply personal. And whether or not the same words are used, it shall remain personal.

just a thought regarding "xmas." X o course has long represented the cross, and it is not uncommon in Christian settings to call for silence by raising crossed fingers, making of course a sort of an "x". Sometimes I think people would be better served to find ways in which they can embrace other ways of doing things, finding our own meaningful symbolism rather than engaging in Bill O'Reilly sorts of culture wars. We really are such a divided people and perhaps it is time to find ways for us to begin to heal the rifts?

I support the work of the ACLU. They take stands on all kinds of issues the cross any and all issues that limit civil liberties. As far as Christmas goes, which is part of my tradition, I don't need any government recognition or special separate holidays for me to appreciate and celebrate occasions that are meaningful to me. In fact, I appreciate the traditions of everyone, and am happy when I am invited to share in their celebrations.

I think the growing recognition of many different religious holidays in December might best be shared by having one or more consecutive holidays that includes all. This as far as the government is concerned. As for prohibitions on working on certain holidays, from the institutions involved, perhaps they should rethink what is accomplished by remaining separate as a symbol. Nobody prohibits the individual expression of their beliefs when all are respected. If one must take a certain time off from work for religious reasons, then plan the vacation time to cover it. If there is no prohibition from one's religion, then celebrate in spite of working. It is a matter of commitment, not requiring the government to sanction the practice of any particular religion.

I think part of the difficulty some Christians have stems form centuries of being dominant in relations to religious practices. Why should that continue? The fact that things have changed, that there are many other ways to express faith, and the efforts to equalize, makes people think they are being deprived. No so, it is always an individual choice to worship.

If Christmas means Santa and getting gifts, then we don't need a "Christmas" designation.

Bravo to the ACLU for seeking justice and protecting our Constitutional civil rights. Perhaps it is best to send a note of appreciation.

Labrys3, thank you for the explanation regarding Xmas, but I do find it somewhat controversial; because while I know that the cross is the most prominent symbol in Christianity I fail to understand why the cross would be introduced at a time reserved for celebrating the birth of Jesus. Easter I understand because that is the acknowledgement of his death and resurrection but Christmas is another matter.

I am not a Christian so my views are not coming from that of a practitioner; still I do understand that there is disagreement on the symbolism of the cross within Christianity itself; i.e. Catholics display Jesus on the cross while most Protestant denominations do not. They usually display and empty cross with the Latin inscription above “He Has Risen.”

From what I know of Christianity it appears that Christ gave more in his death than he did in his life; no disrespect intended. In my own way I do celebrate Christmas as the life of a great light that came into this world; I believe that at the heart of Christianity is unconditional love, and I find the journey of Christianity fascinating. One question I’ve often pondered was what would Christianity be like today if Jesus had not died on the cross? I mean it is widely accepted that Buddha was in his 80’s when he died and Krishna was at least 90, some believe that Krishna lived here on earth for more than 100 years.

"I think part of the difficulty some Christians have stems form centuries of being dominant in relations to religious practices."

I've come to that same conclusion, peacewithin.