Keep the ‘Christ’ in Christmas

Well, it’s that time of year again. It’s time for us to build up our arms and fortify our defenses in preparation for the “war on Christmas.”

But I should not have to tell you because you should already be aware of the perceived threat against Jesus and his pal Santa, as it has apparently been gaining strength for the past decade. It’s every store that holds a “holiday sale” instead of a “Christmas sale” and every town that refuses to have a nativity scene on public property. And it’s deemed highly newsworthy on every major media outlet for the entire month of December, every single year. 

Which, to me, is completely ridiculous because there has to be something more pressing than the naming of a “holiday tree” in some town I’ve never heard of. However, I might be part of the problem because I’m currently writing on the same inane topic. Yet, despite my apparent hypocrisy, I believe that the hypocrisy of the many Americans who currently think that Christmas is under siege by political correctness is much more problematic. 

In reality, it’s the members of the religious right, scrutinizing the removal of Christ from Christmas in the public sphere, who undermine the religious freedom on which this country was founded.

Sarah Palin is a prime example. As the de facto general of the National Christmas Defense Force, Palin wrote in her book on the topic: “The war on Christmas is the tip of the spear in a larger battle to secularize our culture and make true religious freedom a thing of America’s past.” Palin and many of her conservative cohorts are genuinely concerned that formally acknowledging that holidays other than Christmas occur during this time will forcibly undermine the religious freedom of the practicing Christian population in America. 

Perhaps Palin is right, and the removal of some Christian iconography from the public domain is indeed an effort to secularize our government. The question is, however, do they have a right to do so?

Maybe a better question would be: Do they have a right not to do so? “True religious freedom” in America exclusively protects the individual’s right to practice what and how he wishes. And it gives him a right to his personal convictions, no matter how intolerant they may be — even the Westboro Baptist Church has a right to practice prejudice — simply because we highly value individual autonomy in this country, and freedom of religion is a huge facet of this value. 

However, our interest in living autonomously relies heavily on a government that protects this interest. And the only way the government can protect freedom of religion is through religious indifference. Meaning that, ideally, the government cannot promote any specific religious belief if it is committed to religious tolerance and can only intervene if the rights of the individual — as mentioned above — are being threatened by another group. By this  I mean that the government can only act if your right to personal privacy, not your convictions, is threatened by another. As Thomas Jefferson put it, “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

This might be difficult for some to accept; however, “true religious freedom” grants diversity in our society. Therefore, if you were to truly say that you value freedom of religion, you have to be willing to live in a religiously plural society. Even if you fundamentally disagree with another religious group, you still share a society with that group, a society that is committed to egalitarianism. So you may have a right to believe that your religion is the right one, but your elected officials do not have a right to promote it as such, even though a lot of politicians currently do just that.

So if we believe in equality, we would naturally have to believe in freedom of religion for all, which means that we would have to accept the complete separation of church and state and the religious diversity that is bound to come with this.

Going back to the perceived war on Christmas, a sign declaring “Happy Holidays!” by no means undermines the value one might personally place on Christmas. Rather, it recognizes the religious diversity in our country, which is the result of our freedom of religion. And if anything, promoting religious plurality only strengthens one’s right to privately practice what one believes. 

I’ll end with another tidbit from Jefferson: “Religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God … [and] the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions.” 

Write Nick at njv10@pitt.edu.