Promoting a religion is an actual harm, according the First Amendment.
But you’ve assumed that what is happening is that religion is being promoted. And you’re ignoring the actual arguments that it isn’t. I agree that In God We Trust, One Nation Under God, nativity scenes on public property, crosses as memorials on public lands, the congressional chaplain and other so-called ceremonial deism-izations do promote religion, arguably in trivial or non-trivial ways. But speaking as a non-Christian, an atheist, a secularist, and a believer in strict separation of church and state, I simply don’t believe that “known as Christmas Day” promotes religion in any way whatsoever.
Well, since you are such a stickler for terminology, let’s not lose sight that what the First Amendment bars is establishing religion …
It’s not known as “Christmas Day” to me, to Muslims, to Jews, to many others, other than inasfar as we are being compelled to follow a Christian calender. That is the standard, by law, and the law needs to be changed. We are being made to perceive outselves as inferior, and outside of the norms of American life, by the designation “known as Christmas Day” and I don’t believe we are inferior to Christians, and I don’t think the Constitution intends for us to feel inferior, just the way this statute is written. Your argument is similar to “It’s the same damn water in the ‘Colored’ fountain as the ‘white’ fountain. Just drink from your own fountain and shut up about what the fountains are labelled.”
I think you should stop at nothing less than a full discarding of the religious-based days and months, and go whole hog: French Revolutionary Calendar.
While you’re at it, maybe you’ll convince the US to go metric in general… 
Seriously, dude, I’m an Atheist and a Jew, and I don’t give a shit about what a Federal Holiday is called… It’s The Solstice Feast, and I don’t care if they call it Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanza, Boxing Day Eve or The Day of the Sun’s Return. In the end, “(known as Christmas)” is actually better in many respects than just saying “December 25th is a holiday” – it’s actually saying “This is what most people call it, but because of the First Amendment we’re not giving this as the reason for the day off. But just so you know what most people call it…” It’s an AKA, not an Establishment.
Or in other words – choose your battles.
And the seats in the back of the bus are just as comfortable as the ones in the front. You people, fighting battles that don’t need to be fought, always making a big deal out of absolutely nothing…
What does the government require citizens to do on December 25th (known as Christmas Day) that has the effect of establishing a religion?
Hurt feelings are irrelevant.
Actually, that’s not even a little bit true. If someone tells you that something is happening on Christmas Day, do you know what day it’s going to be happening, then you “know” that Dec. 25 is Christmas Day and it is “known as” so far as you are concerned.
The parenthetical “known as Christmas Day” is nothing but a statement of fact. It doesn’t even say what proportion of the public know it as Christmas Day. It doesn’t say “known by all as Christmas Day,” or even “known by most as Christmas Day.” It certainly doesn’t say anything like “celebrated by all as the day of the birth of our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ.”
The calendar needs to be changed? You realize that the bulk of the calendar is based on pre-Christian references, right?
This has got to be some kind of satire.
Should we change Thanksgiving, too, since it it means “giving thanks”?
(I have a feeling I know the answer)
Ah yes, because allowing dudes to celebrate a holiday is SO much like racist segregation.:rolleyes: I suppose next you’re going to compare your side to the Jews in the Nazi Concentration camps?:dubious:
Absolutely! We can’t, under any circumstances, try to fix civil rights issues until they’re at least as bad as the Holocaust! :rolleyes:
Having Christmas be a federal holiday is a civil rights issue now?
Lollerskates…
You ain’t Rosa Parks.
Just to add another perspective… This thread is kind of eye-opening to me - Christmas has always been a very religious holiday in my mind. I’m surprised that atheists celebrate it!
I’m an athiest, raised Jewish and have never celebrated it (nor do I celebrate Hannukah any more). I always thought Santa (St. Nick), midnight mass, the tree, nativity scenes & “praise Jesus” in all the Christmas songs meant that the holiday was religious. Thus, the fact that it’s a national holiday and the inconveniences the holiday has placed on my life have always been a sore spot with me.
To hear so many non-Christians chime in to say they celebrate it makes me re-think this, somewhat, but I’m still instinctively annoyed. Did you all celebrate it as kids, or something? Was it fueled by religious motivations, then?
When I was a kid it was mostly about the presents, a bit about the family and religion as the background. I remember when I was a kid a proper Christmas for me was one where my pile of presents was bigger than I was when I was sitting down…
I celebrated it as a child, but it definitely had nothing to do with religion in my family. My father is a Jewish atheist; my mother is agnostic. My dad, as I recall, told me they briefly considered going with Hanukah instead of Christmas, since that’s what he grew up with, but it was obvious to him as a child that it was just an ersatz Christmas (they had a Christmas tree but called it a “Hanukah bush”). And in fact, it’s easier to celebrate a non-religious Christmas than a non-religious Hanukah. You can have Christmas with Santa and presents and a tree but no mention of Jesus, but it’s hard to have Hanukah without some mention of the Miracle of the Oil.
I don’t remember when I found out that Christmas had to do with the birth of Jesus, but I think it had to do with asking what a “round yon virgin” was.
I linked to the top Christmas songs, you don’t hit any with a mention of Jesus until #9, The Little Drummer boy, and I don’t know of any which have “Praise Jesus” in them, or at least any that are on any common playlists. So, you’re certainly wrong there, and I can’t believe that even if you don’t observe Christmas you haven’t been bombarded with Holiday Music, :dubious:of which very little is religous at all:
St Nicholas is indeed a real Christian Saint, but he bears almost no resemblance to Santa Claus. If you squint really hard you can see that perhaps tales of the IRL saint may have started Santa Claus, but the two are no longer connected, at least in America. The Saint didn’t live at the North Pole, not fat nor jolly, no reindeer to be seen, no elves, no toy making, no chimney, no milk & cookies- nothing. He was known for handing out coins, which sounds more like Hanukkah gelt than presents under the tree.
Now, I am agnostic, but I have no problem at all of celebrating Christmas, even as the birth of a great but mortal man named Yeshua ben Joseph, about whom many myths and legends have sprung up. Just like I have no problems celebrating Geo. Washington’s birthday= *a great but mortal man about whom many myths and legends have sprung up.
*
But to me Christmas is all about the Holiday spirit of giving.
The Tree is a Pagan rite, not Christian.
The gift giving, singing and rhyming is also Pagan.
Santa Claus is also Pagan in origin. Being none other than the God Wodan/Odin.
The Christians just slapped a “Saint-sticker” on him, just as they did with several other gods and their feasts, because they couldn’t eradicate the old customs.
The feast of St Nicholas is still celebrated in the Netherlands and parts of Germany on the 5th of december. It is this feast of ‘Sinterklaas’, celebrated by Dutch immigrants in the US, that was the example for the popular ‘Santa Claus’ creation by Clement Clarke Moore, in 1823, and illustrated by Nash.
This is when he became a jolly fat man and when the reindeer were invented. Sinterklaas rides a horse that can walk on the roofs (Wodan rode a flying horse). This is also when the Elves were invented, Sinterklaas has Black Pete as his helper(or servant, rather).
The ‘modern’ image, dressed in red and white, is thanks to Coca-Cola advertising department, red-white being their colours. Coca-cola’s painter artist, Sundblom, was directly inspired by Moore and Nash.
My recent Middle Ages professor would disagree a bit there. This passage was taken from A CHRISTMAS CHRONICLE by Aloysius Horn, Newman Press, 2001.
You sure about that? Because my entire argument rests on my actually being Rosa Parks, without which nothing I say makes any sense…