In December at the ACLU of Mississippi we usually receive a few cards or letters complaining that the ACLU is "anti-Christmas". Those cards are, unfortunately, usually sent anonymously. Were a return address included, the ACLU-MS could respond with a gentle explanation that, in truth, the ACLU isn't anti-Christmas (or anti anything for that matter), it's pro Constitutional freedom. That includes religious freedom, which is enshrined in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
Those cards and letters always bring to mind this wonderful editorial by Jeremy Gunn. If the ACLU-MS could respond to the anonymous critics who say the ACLU is anti-Christmas, perhaps this editorial would be included with the response--along with an invitation to join the ACLU of Mississippi, which leads the fight to protect religious liberty in our state year 'round.
A fictional 'war on Christmas'By T. Jeremy Gunn
Last December, a group called Public Advocate for the United States (which claims to defend America's traditional family values) sent some Christmas carolers over to sing in front of the ACLU offices in Washington.
Carrying signs reading "Merry Christmas" and "Please Don't Sue Us!" — they also seem to have carried with them some rather strange imaginings about an assault on Christmas.
I don't know what the carolers thought might happen.
To tell the truth, the ACLU is not often serenaded by Christmas carolers. So it was with some excitement that the staff went outside and joined in the singing. They brought with them cookies and warm drinks to share. One staff member, who is an ordained Baptist minister, did a little witnessing about his faith to some astonished proponents of family values.
Fox News did broadcast the event (as a part of its "war against Christmas" campaign). Although the visiting singers were shown, the cameras failed to include any footage showing that everyone had participated in the caroling. Rather than reporting the facts, the anchor preferred the propaganda: "We believe the ACLU heard the message loud and clear, but they don't care."
The battle cries
This year, several groups are once again introducing the Christmas season with some heated and misleading military rhetoric. Some declare, "There is a war against Christmas!" One group launched a "Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign." One particularly bizarre charge is that there is "a thorough and virulent anti-Christmas campaign." Without a shred of evidence, they pretend that there is an effort afoot to remove "God" from the Declaration of Independence. Two groups even announced that they have assembled hundreds of lawyers to protect Christmas against this imaginary threat.
Make no mistake about it. These warrior-lawyers are not asking us to love our neighbors (and certainly not our enemies), nor to turn the other cheek, nor to be peacemakers, nor to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.
Nor is this a joyful effort to encourage the Christmas spirit in the millions of places where it can be promoted without any conflict: in people's hearts, in their homes, with families, in churches, or with friend and neighbors.
No, this is a campaign of military-infused rhetoric demanding that everyone accept one politically correct version of "Christmas."
For example, this year in Boston — the same city where Puritans once prohibited the pagan-inspired "Christmas tree" — the new Puritans now demand that the city call its evergreen spruce a "Christmas tree," and they threatened a lawsuit if the city didn't comply.
Another group charges that there is a "campaign of fear, intimidation, and disinformation" against seasonal symbols in Raleigh, N.C. — and they offer to provide a defense for the city against any threatened lawsuit. Yet they give no evidence that anyone is threatening a lawsuit. Before accusing others of engaging in "disinformation," perhaps these Christmas warriors should first take a look in the mirror.
Why this desire to manufacture controversy — about Christmas?
Guidelines already exist
Rather than engaging in propaganda about a "war on Christmas," all who want to promote the spirit of Christmas should remember a couple of simple guidelines.
First, Christmas displays — including nativity scenes — are perfectly acceptable at homes and churches. This religious expression is a valued and protected part of the First Amendment rights guaranteed to all citizens.
Second, governments should not be in the business of endorsing religious displays. Religion does best when government stays out of the business of deciding which holidays and religions to promote. Religion belongs where it prospers best: with individuals, families and religious communities.
And finally, as a seasonal greeting to all Christians: Merry Christmas from the ACLU! And for believers in all other traditions: Thank you for enriching our world!
T. Jeremy Gunn is director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief.
