Faith, Facts, and Federal Holidays

Evanston's Depot Square, Christmas trees and tractor complete with a flying pig. (Photo: Jonathan Lange)

Imagine a celebration of Independence Day without displaying Old Glory. Imagine if we disallowed any public reading of the Declaration of Independence because it offended someone. That would be crazy, utterly absurd!

But here in our town, and in towns all across the country, Christmas decorations on the square and courthouse lawn have zero depictions of Christ. And we all know how the ACLU would have a fit if somebody hauled out a bible in history class and actually read the account of Jesus' birth. Is that any less absurd?

Someone might object to the comparison by saying that Independence Day is a federal holiday, but Christmas Day is a religious holiday. False. Both days are officially recognized federal holidays. But of the eleven listed holidays, Christmas is the only one where there can be no public recognition of the actual event that it celebrates.

It is, of course, true that the birth of Jesus has religious significance for millions of Americans. But it is also true that it has cultural significance for all Americans. The achievements of Western civilization are, in very large part, traceable to the teachings of Jesus and the impact that his followers had on the world. Hospitals, public welfare, human rights, and a thousand other things that we hold dear were unheard of in the pre-Christian world.

On Columbus Day school children learn about Christopher Columbus and the impact that he had on our culture. On Martin Luther King Jr. Day we see pictures of the man, and children hear about his dream and his letters from a Birmingham jail. But on Christ's birthday, our public celebration can neither show his picture or talk about his life and impact.

How did we arrive at this absurd place? Who passed the laws against celebrating Christ's birthday on the national holiday that names him? Nobody. Did you ever stop to think about that? There is not one single piece of federal legislation which prohibits nativity scenes on public property or the public telling of the life of the man celebrated on Christmas.

As with most of the madness in the war against western civilization, the "laws" against Christmas are not laws at all. Rather, they are recent judicial precedents set in various circuit courts around the country. If you are more than thirty years old, you lived at a time when manger scenes were found on courthouse lawns all over the country.

The ACLU only began challenging them in the early 80s. The first case to rise to the level of the US Supreme Court was Lynch v. Donnelly in 1984. And this case did not make manger scenes on public property illegal. Quite the opposite, it upheld the right of Pawtucket, Rhode Island to have one as part of their public decorations.  

Five years later, the ACLU sued the County of Allegheny over two displays in Pittsburgh. In this case, the court ruled that religious celebrations on public property did not necessarily violate the establishment clause. They did, however, order the removal of one courthouse display because of the words, "Glory to God for the birth of Jesus Christ.” Let that sink in. As recently as 27 years ago a major city in America thought nothing of putting those words on public display.

Given these two victories at the Supreme Court, why have  we removed the manger scene from our own town? Why do we no longer celebrate this federal holiday by talking about the actual event that it celebrates?

The answer has mostly to do with money. Take, for example, the case of Knightstown, Indiana. This small town (pop. 2100) recently announced that it would remove the cross from the town Christmas tree -- a decoration that had been in place unopposed for years.

Knightstown Christmas tree, before the cross was removed,
Dec. 11, 2016. (Photo: Provided by Mike Fender)

What was the reason for removing the cross? After all, it's not like there is any controversy about whether Jesus was a real, historical person. Nor is there any question that he was killed by crucifixion on a Roman cross.

We have more historical proof of these two events than we do of any other event in ancient history. I admit that it would, in fact, violate the establishment clause if the government would make the strictly religious claim that this Jesus is the Creator of the Universe. But if somebody is offended by the historical fact that Jesus was born and was crucified, there's not much we can do about that.

No, the reason for the removal of the cross was not because it was against any law. Nor was it because it is a strictly religious symbol. Rather, the town of Knightstown simply did not have enough money to battle the gargantuan resources of the ACLU in court. It's just cheaper to back down than it is to fight.

It's a perfectly reasonable position. One which town councils, guided by the well-meaning advice of their attorneys, have made all over the land. In fact, I would bet that it's the same reason Evanston chose to decorate Depot Square with deer, and trains, and a Christmas tree. But I'm wondering if that is still the wisest choice.

As defenders of the Second Amendment regularly remind us: a right not exercised is a right soon lost. The same is true when it comes to the First Amendment. In a mere three decades, without any law, or Supreme Court decision, America's public consciousness of the history of Christmas has been scrubbed clean of any reference to Christ.

It has been scrubbed clean by the bullying litigation of the ACLU, and against the wishes of the vast majority of her citizens. We have simply silenced ourselves due to fear, intimidation, and misinformation. Perhaps it is time to reverse our self-imposed censorship. It would be a perfectly legal thing to do.

The Supreme Court has spoken loud and clear that there are two legitimate ways to display a manger scene on public property. One way is if the town simply designates the property as a location for private displays which can be used by any group that obtains a permit. A second way is for the manger scene to be placed as one decoration among others.

It seems to me that we already have plenty of other non-religious decorations. To place a manger scene next to the lighted reindeer, or by the train full of toys would be in perfect compliance with Supreme Court precedence.

Doing so would have more than a religious significance. It would be a public declaration that we are no longer going to be intimidated into rewriting world history. Facts are facts. Events are events. And nobody, Christian or non-Christian, should be hesitant to give credit where credit is due.

The birth of a man changed the world. Like it or not, that is the truth. The fact that large numbers of Americans also worship this man as God should have no bearing on whether Americans of all religions can name his name and remember how things were different before he came.

George Washington, Martin Luther King Jr., Christopher Columbus, and Jesus of Nazareth are all recognized with a federal holiday for the way they have contributed to our civilization. If we name the first three, surely we can name the fourth.

Further Reading:
Wyoming Tribune Eagle: Relating Faith, Facts, and Federal Holidays
NTV: Nativity at the Nebrask State Capitol
American Center for Law and Justice, Informational Letter
Public Discourse: Christmas and Western Civilization