One interesting issue in the debate over where the line between the secular and the religious involves the Christmas holiday. Many Americans look forward to getting a day off on December 25, a day which has traditionally (and almost certainly erroneously) been celebrated as the birth day of Christ. What’s wrong with that? Nothing, really — except possibly the fact that it is a holiday which is legally recognized/mandated by our government.
It appears as though our government is officially endorsing a holy day of one particular religion and that would be unacceptable. Privileging one religion cannot survive even superficial scrutiny under the principle of church/state separation. There is one recourse for those who wish to maintain the status quo: declare Christmas to be a secular holiday.
If Christmas is a religious rather than a secular holiday, our government should treat it like holidays in every other religion. Christians may not like the idea of not automatically having Christmas off from work, being faced with the prospect of actually having to use one of their own vacation or personal days in order to be home with their families, but that this is exactly the situation which has always faced the members of other religions.
The state has traditionally privileged Christians at the expense of other religions — and since that has persisted for so long, many Christians now expect it as their right. A similar situation has existed with other cases of Christianity losing its special, officially sanctioned status: school prayer, bible reading in school, etc.
What if our courts declare Christmas to be a secular and not religious holiday? If Christmas is declared a secular holiday, to whom will that be binding? To society? the courts? Christians? I have seen signs at Christmas declaring “Jesus is the Reason for the Season” — these people won’t agree that Christmas is secular, and if they don’t, why should anyone else? Why not let them have it as their holiday? Why should the rest of society co-opt it and decide that it is no longer religious?
Reality isn't quite so simple, though. Christmas has been celebrated for so long and in such an official capacity in America that it is now common for non-Christians to celebrate it. Thus, we have to admit that Christmas has secular significance alongside its religious significance. If it can be treated as both secular and religious, can our court system arbitrarily declare that it is secular, thus effectively excluding those who think it is religious? Evangelical Christians have complained — usually without justification — that our secular society has become anti-Christian. In this instance, if Christmas were declared to be “secular,” they might actually have a point.
Christmas as a secular holiday would put one more nail in the coffin of the pretentious and presumptuous assertion that America is a Christian nation, based upon Christian values and celebrating a Christian life. Most have begun to realize that this is the case, but many refuse to face facts and hope instead to keep America in a perpetual state of 1950s idealism.
If Christmas is declared a religious holiday, then fundamentalists lose because their holiday will be treated just like any other religious holiday. If Christmas is declared a secular holiday, then fundamentalists lose again because our courts will grant recognition to the fact that American society has moved beyond our history of Protestant Christian domination to a more multicultural and multireligious society where holidays which are celebrated on a national level are secular in nature.
A final, but not minor, example of this trend may be the progenitor of it all: religious displays on government property during the Christmas holidays. Such displays have been common in American history, but only because America has traditionally been dominated by American Protestants who would never have challenged government support of their religious beliefs.
There have been increasing efforts to justify religious symbols by including them with secular symbols — thus “secularizing” the entire display. But does anyone really buy that? Does anyone believe that a crèche, depicting the manger setting with Mary, Joseph, and baby Jesus, suddenly becomes “secular” because a statue of Frosty the Snowman stands nearby? Many Christians find that idea ludicrous, but it is part and parcel of the increasing effort to justify religious expression as “actually” being secular in nature.
Are they so desperate to have the government support their religion they are willing to castrate their beliefs, eliminating their religious essence? Instead, they should stand up and proudly declare that their symbols are profoundly religious. They should also stand up and accept the consequences of the religious nature of their symbols: that the government of everyone cannot provide support or privilege to the religion or religious symbols of some.
