I vaguely remember some Christmas-related controversy in the UK some years back, during which some person came out and said (paraphrasing) “It’s not just a Christian holiday. It’s also a British holiday.” Swap British for American in this instance. It’s really not much of a religious holiday. At least, for many it’s not. Interestingly, there’s no federal holiday for Easter.
If there’s a federal holiday to do away with, it’s Columbus Day.
I agree that Christmas is also a secular holiday, and that’s reason enough to allow it’s observance as a federal holiday. But even if it weren’t, I’m okay with it, honestly.
This is probably a trite phrase coined by people I’d like to slap, but it’s true: it’s freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. The Constitution protects our freedom to practice, or not practice, any religion we like (with some limitations to prevent abuses we don’t like). It protects us from a state mandated religion or religious practices. It does not promise to make our country free from religion. Just free from religious observance mandated by the government.
I don’t see how a day off is forcing Christianity on anyone, even if that day is a religious observance for Christians. It’s not like the federal government is saying, “Have the day off, and bring us a program to prove you went to Mass”.
I’m a lot more pissed off by the prayer before Congress and the “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance than I am by them having Christmas off.
It’s not a claim, it’s documented fact. Of course, Charles I was a suspected Catholic sympathiser and his wife was Catholic, so it may be a double whammy.
Wouldn’t bother me. Just another day. Besides, many people do work on Christmas day.
And I say make it more secular. The one thing I really don’t understand is why the religious need to have their special, sacred holy day mixed into the orgy of consumerism the holidays have become.
I feel that the holidays should be called something generic like Winter Holidays while those that celebrate Christmas, or any of the others special days, call it what they want amongst themselves and at their events. After all, I don’t think I’ve ever had a member of another faith wish me a happy (whatever) day.
That is what I thought but his link takes one to Maryland. I have always been mildly titillated by the fact that my state was named after a queen’s alleged sexual status. If only the state had been named after Catherine the Great’s alleged sexual habits. Something like Bullfuckeronia maybe.
I don’t have any problem with Christmas being a government holiday. If I don’t want to celebrate the birth of Christ, and I don’t, then I can celebrate the contributions that Christians have made to the county. That is what most of the other government holidays are about.
I disagree entirely with this line of reasoning. It’s not wishing for “freedom from religion” to want the government to keep its hands out of it.
I’m a non-Christian and an atheist and I would not be for eliminating Christmas as a general holiday. I’d be all for changing the name to something secular, at least for government purposes. In private settings, people can call it whatever they want. But at the very least, an official government work calendar should have a neutral name.
Make it a full week holiday called ‘Yuletide’ spanning from Christmas Day to New Years Day. To make up the extra 3 days of productivity, drop the “gimme days” that everybody expects before and after the holidays, and make Thanksgiving a 3-day weekend that starts on Friday, not Thursday, and make the Superbowl on Saturday so that everyone doesn’t have to spend the following Monday pretending like they aren’t hung over.
Also, on an unrelated note, MLK day is now in February, as it should be, because nobody needs a goddamned holiday 3 weeks after New Years. And Spring Fling becomes a holiday in April to cover that godawful dead spot between MLK day and Memorial Day. And every holiday shall fall on a Friday so we don’t have people feeling like they need to take a half week every time a holiday rolls around.
Put me in charge of calendars forever and I will make your lives wonderful!
Your ideas intrigue me, and I’d like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Others have piled on the B.S. claim from that website you quoted. But let me point out that the entire page is based on a false premise. The framers of the Constitution, or at least some of them, very much did intend on separating church and state. See this page for a list of decent quotes from Thomas Jefferson: http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/qjeffson.htm.
There are few topics on which a basic ignorance of history due more to harm a group’s cause then modern day christian evangelicals insistence that the founders of this country did not want a separation of church and state. Even a basic understanding of the historical context of early America would point out the fear that many would have had when government got involved in religion. Remember even the uptight pilgrims were running away from religious persecution in England. The colonists came from an England and Europe where religion was dictated by the government in power. They wanted protection from the new government they forming to ever have that power again. They wanted to keep government out of the church. Its a two-way street, once you start having the church dictate government policy, then you get government dictating religion.
As to the OP, eh. If everybody is going to take the day off, call it like it is. This country could use more holidays not less. Real holidays where non-essential business is closed and people actually spend time with family or doing whatever they want.
New Year’s Day: birth of the year
Birthday of Martin Luther King Jr.: birth of Martin Luther King Jr.
Washington’s Birthday: birth of George Washington
Memorial Day: death of US soldiers in war
Independence Day: birth of the United States
Christmas Day: birth of Jesus Christ
Except for Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, and Thanksgiving Day, all US federal holidays either observe birth or observe death.
If the founders were so insistent on such a separation, why did this dictate get ignored until the last half of the last century?
In other words, here we are in 1790. We have a new Constitution and Bill of Rights, which, according to you, was indeed intended to create a wall of separation between church and state.
Yet no one though to complain about paid chaplains for Congress, and Congress opening its sessions with prayer. these were the selfsame men that according to wished to eschew conduct like this, and here they are not only allowing to happen elsewhere, but paying for it to happen in their own chambers!
Maryland permitted taxation for support of the Christian religion and limited civil office to Christians until 1818. The Constitution of North Carolina forbid office holders to deny the truth of the Protestant religion. How could these kinds of things exist, given the opinion you ascribe to our founders?
Here’s the truth: there were many “founders,” but in general, to the them as a whole, “establishment” meant connoted sponsorship, financial support, and substantial, active involvement of the government in religious worship. As Justice Buurger observed in Walz v. Tax Commission, 397 U.S. 664 (1970):
Over the years, the meaning has tightened up considerably.
Not a Christian, don’t care, it’s not a Christian holiday.
ETA: Bricker, that just goes to prove what I’ve always said: that the intent of the founders is irrelevant. Nobody thinks interpretation of the First Amendment should take the Alien and Sedition Acts into account. I’m quite sure even Jerry Falwell would have looked at you funny if you suggested imposing a tax to promote Christianity.
How does a page of quotes from Thomas Jefferson prove anything about the framers of the Consitution? Thomas Jefferson was not a framer of the Constitution. He was serving as America’s ambassador to France when the Constitution was written.
There are few topics on which a basic ignorance of history due more to harm a group’s cause then modern day christian evangelicals insistence that the founders of this country did not want a separation of church and state. Even a basic understanding of the historical context of early America would point out the fear that many would have had when government got involved in religion. Remember even the uptight pilgrims were running away from religious persecution in England. The colonists came from an England and Europe where religion was dictated by the government in power. They wanted protection from the new government they forming to ever have that power again. They wanted to keep government out of the church. Its a two-way street, once you start having the church dictate government policy, then you get government dictating religion.
I also share Bricker’s questions regarding your beliefs about the founding fathers. If they wanted separation of church and state, why did most of the states in their time give money directly to one or more churches, and why didn’t the founding fathers intervene to stop this?
It’s somewhat wandering from the topic, but don’t judges up to this very day frequently use the words of the framers and arguments about their intentions when writing their decisions?
My school district gave us both holidays off, and IIRC, it was also because many of the teachers were Jewish.
Incidentally, my husband’s school district gave students off the first day of deer hunting season.
Thomas Jefferson had nothing to do with the Constitution.
Some of them, yes. The further back in history you go, though, the less likely they are to do it.
I think some of you have the cause and effect backwards. We don’t take off of work because it’s a federal holiday. It’s a federal holiday because take off of work. If you know that no one is actually going to show up to work, why bother remaining open? If 70% of your workforce demanded to have a certain day off, whatever the reason, and state that they’re going to take it off no matter what, why would you deny them the day off?
It’s worth noting that Christmas Day has only been a federal holiday since 1870.