The Establishment Clause, Christmas, and Me

I was reading, in a book about Thurgood Marshall, about some cases regarding holiday displays on government facilities. It's a fairly natural part of the sequence of issues regarding the Establishment Clause. Prayer in schools is unconstitutional. Displaying the Ten Commandments in schools is unconstitutional. Displaying a manger scene in front of City Hall is unconstitutional. Maybe putting up Christmas trees or menorahs is also prohibited? Well, here's the thing: I'm someone who is generally a bit of a radical about the Establishment Clause. I think that "in god we trust" on the money is unconstitutional, that "one nation under god" in the Pledge of Allegiance is probably unconstitutional, and, hell, there might even be problems with the fact that Sunday is the weekend all the time. But Christmas trees don't bother me, and neither do menorahs. Why? Because I like them, that's why! Christmas trees are nice! They're pretty! So are menorahs.

And here's the thing: especially with the tree, it just doesn't strike me as a religion thing. I recognize that this isn't true of the menorah, which is supposed to represent a certain miracle in the history of the Jewish people (although honestly, as a certain Jon Stewart-Stephen Colbert musical duet points out, it's a pretty weak miracle, right?), but the Christmas tree is just not a Christian thing. It's a pagan thing. And since, last I checked, pre-Christian paganism isn't terribly prominent in American society, I really don't think that putting Christmas trees up is a religious thing. It's a secular thing. Christmas is not one of the most important days of the year from the perspective of religious Christianity. Hanukkah is not very high on the list of Jewish holidays. But they're by far the most culturally prominent holidays of their respective religions. Why? Because you celebrate them by putting up trees, lighting candles, giving presents, spinning dreidels, and above all else, eating lots of chocolate! They're fun holidays, and they coincide neatly with the onset of real winter, the solstice, cold weather that makes everything feel really cozy, etc. When the government puts up a Christmas tree, it has nothing to do with the Christian faith, and everything to do with a secular tradition that's been banned by aggressively Christian regimes in the past. I think it's a similar story with menorahs.

I think that a religious person ought to be the one who wants to find these holiday displays unconstitutional. (At least, that is, if they accept the 'neutrality principle' often thought to underlie the Establishment Clause.) The previous paragraph was an effort by me to claim Christmas and Hanukkah as secular events. A religious person ought to mind that. And the logical conclusion of their minding that has got to be a desire to find these displays unconstitutional. Preventing municipalities from putting up Christmas trees will not impair the celebration of Christmas. But allowing those displays only serves to emphasize how much Christmas really isn't about religion anymore. So, Mr. O'Reilly, how would you like to lose your supposed War on Christmas? Oppression, or assimilation?

(Incidentally, the case of Christmas trees is highly singular. Most things that could be called religious displays are in fact religious displays, like crosses or Ten Commandments signs, and any attempt by religious people to argue that they are secular is just bad-faith BS. You know it's bad faith because, as I say above, isn't it really offensive to Christians to say that a cross isn't about Christian religious faith, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ?)