Darleen's Place

« Of tears and the immorality and indecency of the Adopt-A-Murderer Club | Main | A reminder about race »

December 02, 2005

Yes, Virginia, the USPS does believe in Christmas Stamps

There's a passage in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged where the character, Cherryl describes the horror of having nothing solid to grab hold when trying to deal with certain people:

I can't explain what it feels like, I can't catch hold of it -- and that's part of the terror, that you can't catch hold of anything -- it's as if the whole world were suddenly destroyed, but not by an explosion -- an explosion is something hard and solid -- but destroyed by ... by some horrible kind of softening ... as if nothing were solid, nothing held any shape at all, and you could poke your finger through stone walls and the stone would give, like jelly, and mountains would slither, and buildings would switch their shapes like clouds -- and that would be the end of the world, not fire and brimstone, but goo.

It wasn't terror, but this past week in trying to take what few moments I had to try and get some definitive answers on the "overtly religious" stamp question was like trying to wrestle of whole vat of marshmellows. A person at the customer service line wouldn't discuss the issue. One local PO counter person "heard" about the discontinuance but then immediately assured me that the 2006 stamp would go forward. Another one, when I asked to purchase Christmas stamps kept saying "Don't you want the cookie ones? Are you SURE you don't want the cookie ones?" I then asked "Are they going to have a new Madonna&Child in 2006?" "Think so," she then pushed the stamps across the counter at me. I said, "Well, have a Merry Christmas." Her reply was a grunt. Hey, maybe she was just having a lousy day.

So I was happy that late this afternoon I was alerted that reporter Dennis Roddy of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had found a few USPS higher-ups to make solid statements that next years' Madonna&Child Stamp is still on deck

But patrons looking for a new religiously themed stamp this year are getting leftover Madonna printings from last year, touching off a wave of reports that the Postal Service was planning to discontinue religiously themed Christmas stamps.

"It's absolutely not true," said Diana Svoboda, spokeswoman for the Pittsburgh district. Next year's printing will include a new Madonna and the price stamped over her left shoulder will explain why a new one wasn't printed this year: Rates are going up to 39 cents per letter Jan. 8.

Roddy also cites the story I had here about my mother's encounter at a Southern California Post Office, where it wasn't a matter of confusion between mom and the employee, but one where the employee himself had heard about the discontinuation of "too religious" stamps. Roddy also writes

The encounter also has the clerk informing Darleen's mom that he is not permitted to say "Merry Christmas." Darleen did not respond to an e-mail requesting more details.

He did send me an email, 1 pm Dec 1st. Unfortunately, yesterday evening I did not go through my domain email and missed his deadline. I would have been quite happy to give him the exact PO location and/or put him directly in touch with mom.

As I wrote Roddy, I'm too familiar with the way government bureacracy works and it isn't unknown for potential policies to be "floated", and if reaction is universally negative, such policy promptly "disappears" and higher-ups will strike a stance of sheer innocence. What, you took that seriously?

Whatever the reason, the end result is that the USPS is publicly onboard for new issues of stamps even with "overtly" religious themes.

BTW, as the article shows, the worry about USPS was not about rumor. Be it my mom, Rev. Murphy or the numerous readers who have written to Michelle Malkin about their direct experiences, the problem lies within the USPS bureaucracy itself and maybe a few of its employees.

Posted by Darleen at December 2, 2005 05:29 PM

Comments

"Be it my mom, Rev. Murphy or the numerous readers who have written to Michelle Malkin about their direct experiences, the problem lies within the USPS bureaucracy itself and maybe a few of its employees."

Or maybe the reports were like UFO sightings - made up.

I'll grant your mom the benefit of the doubt, but perhaps she was talking to a USPS employee who was having a little fun with her. Or, perhaps the employee was making up answers without knowing the facts. Perhaps the employee is a fellow Christian with an unjustified persecution complex who leapt to a conclusion about the stamps.

Posted by: Jon H at December 2, 2005 08:30 PM

Jon

Can you explain what you mean by "fellow Christian"?

Neither my parents nor I are members of any church.

Indeed, my husband is more athiest than agnostic and he certainly doesn't scoff at the idea of a PC government bureacracy.

He's not an anti-JudeoChristian bigot either, seeing a Vast Religious Right Conspiracy when ever people point out the Bowdlerization of America's religious heritage.

Posted by: Darleen at December 2, 2005 08:47 PM

Which religious heritage is that, exactly, Darleen? The one that prohibited celebrations of Christmas in Boston in the late 17th century? Or the one that didn't care enough about Christmas to even make it a federal holiday for most of the country's first century of existence? Or maybe you mean America's Jewish heritage, which goes back to Colonial times, even before the establishment of the first synagogue in the Americas in Newport, Rhode Island in 1658? I'm pretty sure the Native Americans weren't really into Christmas either, though their religious traditions were undoubtedly important to them.

Posted by: Dan Someone at December 2, 2005 10:21 PM

Could be the religious heritage that said "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Or the religious heritage that drove the abolitionist movement and the civil rights movement. The diverse religious heritages that have contributed to a culture rich in traditions...from festivals to charity. I grew up comfortable celebrating Hanukkha with Jewish friends, attending midnight mass with my Catholic friends. As part of a group of multi-denominational friends, we would go caroling, singing Jingle Bells or Silent Night with the same cheer and enthusiasm. We might celebrate differently be we didn't celebrate SEPARATELY.

Saying "Merry Christmas" or having Christmas lights on the house or Christmas trees in the mall is not disrespectful of other traditions, regardless of the blatherings of AUSCS. A cross symbolizing the Mission history of California on the county seal of Los Angeles is not an "establishment" of religion, regardless of the bigotry of the ACLU (ironicly, the ACLU didn't object to the prominent person in the seal, the goddess Pomona).

Posted by: Darleen at December 2, 2005 10:59 PM

I totally never gave a damn whether people said "Merry Christmas" or something neutral, before. But, being an ornery sort, I'm fed up with this absurd FOX-created "War On Christmas" crap, and now I'm going to complain if any stores display religious themes, or wish me a merry Christmas. NOW I'm going to act offended. I'll be lying, but it'll be fun.

The real problem is this: "Political Correctness" is just an unpleasant term for MANNERS, for COURTESY. I'll look around and see if any stores I shop at need to be reminded.

Posted by: JDCasteleiro at December 2, 2005 11:37 PM

Let's get this straight. Darleen is going to let us practice any religion we want, even be atheists, but we MUST worship our "Judeo-Christian culture" as a fixed entity that can never change, grow, adapt or evolve. As we have all observed, Christmas has its roots in a "pagan" or pre-religious tradition wherein people of a particular geography worshipped the departing sun and begged for its return, equating its infinite rebirth with the birth of a human infant. Christianity melded its traditions to this preceeding tradition, and the holiday took on other dimensions. Now in our hyper-commercial American culture, Christmas has become a powerfully secular celebration - a touch of church mixed with a ton of partying, feasting, gifting, lights, decoration and sharing of good will. Our wonderful secular culture has saved Christmas from a fate of religious segregation and converted it into a holiday of truly openhearted humanitarian joy.

Why on earth right wing bigots - even those with NO religiosity like Darlene - have latched onto this most beloved and well celebrated holiday to fuel their need for victimization is a subject ripe for satire. In fact, it would make a gloriously funny subject for book or movie.

Merry Christmas, wingnuts! May you occasionally remember the pure and sweet teachings of the beautiful child who was born that day, and stop using him as a bludgeon against those of less fanatical bent.

Posted by: Tallulah at December 3, 2005 08:14 AM

Uh, Tallulah? It appears to be the progressive, tolerant, liberal minded sorts who are assuming the mantle of victimization in the current Christmas battles.

By the way---having worked in a government agency, yes, they do sometimes try to "float" certain policies, to get a feel for the public's reaction, before they actually start putting them into place. I can well believe that the guy Darleen's mother encountered might have been trying that.

Keep on this story, Darleen.

Posted by: TalkinKamel at December 3, 2005 02:08 PM

Could be the religious heritage that said "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Oooh, good quote, Darleen. Now explain where in that language it says that we have to acknowledge Jesus Christ, or his birthday, and that if we say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas," we're trying to disenfranchise or destroy Christianity?

And how about this one: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." That's actually from the document that founded the country. You might disagree with the ACLU's interpretation of that first clause -- sometimes so do I -- but trying to enforce that clause is not the same as trying to destroy Christianity.

Posted by: Dan Someone at December 3, 2005 02:31 PM

Whoa whoa whoa, it's the tolerant, liberal-minded sorts that are getting offended over Christmas now?!?! I can't say I've ever heard Bill O' Reilly and Jerry Falwell described that way, TK.

I do, however, agree that you should keep on this story Darleen. There's no bigger news this holiday season than some idiots working at the post office spewing BS. You might also want to check up on rumors that your phone company's "customer service[sic] agents" don't actualy care if you have a nice day.

Posted by: Jrod at December 3, 2005 05:09 PM

Jrod---read some of the comments Darleen has gotten on this, and the other threads, where she talks about this incident; all the tolerant, liberal types (including, presumably, yourself) saying stuff like, "HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT THE POLITICALLY CORRECT ARE TRYING TO GET RID OF CHIRSTMAS? YOU'RE SOOOOO INTOLERANT FOR SAYING THAT!"

And, frankly, yeah, if those idiots working at the Post Office are spouting BS, I want to know about it, as I would about any governmental agencies handing us BS for "our own good" (which is, of course, always the reason given for their handing us such stuff.)

Keep on it, Darleen! You've got them upset, you've got them angry, that means you've hit a nerve, and you're on to something.

Posted by: TalkinKamel at December 3, 2005 05:24 PM

I guess if "spouting so much inanity that people feel compelled to point out the wrongheadedness of it all" is the same as "striking a nerve," then you may have a point, Kamel. But I don't see anybody threatening boycotts or mass mailing campaigns to keep store clerks from saying "Merry Christmas," so it's hard to see how the "tolerant, liberal types" are claiming any sort of victim status.

By the way, what exactly is wrong with a store deciding to have its clerks say "Happy holidays" or "Season's greetings" instead of "Merry Christmas"?

Posted by: Dan Someone at December 4, 2005 07:27 AM

Dan Someone, read the comments Darleen has gotten on all these Christmas stamp threads, absolutely furious that she would dare---DARE to state such things about the noble postal service! Read as they froth at the mouth about how much more inclusive "Happy Holidays" is, and how UNCOMFORTABLE they are with Christmas, which is not only a Christian holiday, but a pagan one, originally instituted by the Druids, blah, blah, blah. I'd say Darleen's hit a nerve alright; I can't believe liberals are waxing this indignant because they care that much about the Post Office.

As for the "Happy Holidays" greeting---well, Christmas is a supposedly Christian holiday. Stores like making money off of people who celebrate Christmas. If they like making the money, they shouldn't be too squeamish about naming the holiday that brings them the bucks. It's kind've like saying, "We expect you Christians, and anybody who celebrates Christmas, to buy lotsa stuff from us---but don't expect us to acknowledge your awful holiday, which we find---yeeeeech!---to be completely exclusionary, and politically incorrect! But come spend your bigoted, right-wing evangelical dollars at our overpriced stores, from which we've banned the Salvation Army bell ringers."

On the other hand, it's a free country. Stores can tell their clerks to greet customers any way they wish, including, "Happy Festivus," or even, "Kiss my A****!" And, since it is a free country, I, and many others who don't like the "Happy Holidays" nonsense, can choose to shop elsewhere.

Posted by: TalkinKamel at December 4, 2005 05:37 PM

Kamel, a couple of things:

(1) It's hilarious that you accuse liberals of "waxing indignant" when Bill O'Reilly and his ilk have coined the term "war on Christmas" and seem to have thrown on the mantle of victimhood (because we all know how oppressed Christians are in this country, having to hide their faith and meet only in secret lest the secular overlords throw them in jail or worse).

(2) I think the main reason people jumped on Darleen about this USPS story was that her facts were wrong. Either she or her mother or the clerk at the PO or any combination of the three of them misunderstood or misheard something, and BAM! Suddenly we have a huge to-do over the USPS's supposed suppression of Christianity, when nothing of the sort is true.

(3) Stores like making money off of people who celebrate Christmas. You should have cut that short after the word "money." Stores like making money, period. And since not all customers of a store are Christians, even at this time of year, and since Christians don't usually wear signs that say "I am a Christian, wish me a 'Merry Christmas,'" it makes sense for stores to be more inclusive in their approach to their customers. More inclusive means welcoming everybody's money, and not assuming that if I am spending money at Christmas, I am a Christian.

(4) Speaking of which, why would anyone be offended by a more inclusive greeting? Is there something about Christianity or Christmas that demands extra special attention from merchants? It's not the most holy day in the Christian calendar. It's generally acknowledged by historians not to be Jesus's actual birthday. It's not celebrated the same way by all Christian denominations. (When is Greek Orthodox Christmas again?) It's certainly not treated as especially holy by the hordes of shoppers and merchants anyway -- where in the Gospels is the story of Santa Claus, Rudolph and Macy's again?

(5) We live in a pluralistic nation, whether you like it or not. You are certainly welcome to refuse to shop at a store if you don't like the way their clerks express their appreciation for your custom or the wording of their seasonal greeting. But don't try to make this into some kind of massive conspiracy to eradicate Christmas.

Posted by: Dan Someone at December 4, 2005 10:15 PM

Dan Someone

Man, Darleen really did hit a nerve with you, didn't she?

Given the evidence that she presents, and that Michelle Malkin goes into on her blog, what makes you so very sure that the Post Office wasn't "floating" a new policy? (i.e., trying something out, then backing away from it when they realized that people didn't like it?) Government agencies do that all the time; remember, their motto is "Cover your A***!" Essentially, the story is that the guy Darleen's mother met at the Post Office was acting quite, ah, strange about the Christmas stamps. (I suspect he was the one chosen, or self-selected, to "float" the anti-Christian stamp policy there.) Darleen finds this worrisome, especially in light of the fact that nobody seems to be getting squeamish about the Islamic End of Eid stamps, which are quite blatantly religious, and the fact that the powers that be, such as the ACLU, are busily trying to eradicate all evidence of Christianity from public life, even as we speak.

And, of course, the reaction has been, "OH, DARLEEN, YOU TERRIBLE LIAR, YOU! HOW CAN YOU SAY SUCH A THING! YOU'RE LYING, LYING!" And then, come the other execuses: "CHRISTMAS IS JUST A PAGAN HOLIDAY ANYWAY! WE LIVE IN AN INCLUSIVE COUNTRY! CHRISTMAS ISN'T INCLUSIVE! HEY, IT'S NOT EVEN THE MOST IMPORTANT CHRISTIAN HOLIDAY ANYWAY! (Meaning Christians shouldn't celebrate it at all? And what are we supposed to do when it's decided that celebrating Easter is somehow "un-inclusive"?)

The points usually come down to these:

1. DARLEEN'S STORY WAS ALL A LIE! (How do you know? Where you there? Did you talk to the same guy her mother did? Are you aware of the inner workings of the Post Office? Yes, it's nice they're re-issuing the old Christmas stamps; still doesn't mean they're not up to something.)

2. CHRISTMAS ISN'T THAT IMPORTANT ANYWAY! AND, ANYWAY, IT'S ALL JUST PAGAN MUMBO-JUMBO, AND MACY'S AND SANTA CLAUS! (Granted that there are many Christmas traditions, and different churches celebrate it different ways---so what? As you said, we live in an inclusive society. So why shouldn't society include religious Christmas motifs as well as non-religious ones? You celebrate, or don't celebrate, Christmas as you see fit, and let others celebrate it the way they want to. And, for centuries, the celebration has been called "Christmas" by Christians, Jews, unbelievers alike---not "Holiday". Wishing somebody "Happy Holidays" is meaningless PC talk. Everybody knows what the holiday being celebrated in December is. If you find "Merry Christmas" offensive, and not pluralistic enough, you need to grow a thicker skin.)

And now, I'm going to turn your own question on its head---given that we do live in a pluralistic society, why do you find Christmas so threatening? Are you really that shocked that other Americans have different beliefs from yours? Do you really see somebody wishing you a "Merry Christmas"---or "Happy Hannukah", or "Happy Divali" as somehow excluding you from the body politic, or forcing you to worship something you don't believe in? If you see rabbis dancing about with the Holy Scrolls on Simchat Torah, or the Hari Krishnans dancing down a city street, do you really think this is somehow threatening to your own beliefs, or lack thereof?

Posted by: TalkinKamel at December 5, 2005 08:13 AM

You're the one who needs to grow a thicker skin, Dan. Your protests on your last post, about feeling "over included" really say it all. You really find it that offensive to be wished "Merry Christmas?"

And what other winter holidays are usually celebrated in the USA, aside from Christmas and Hannukah, in December? Ramadan and December don't usually coincide. Divali is celebrated in some Hindu communities here. But Christmas, at least in the gift-giving, celebrating sense, is pretty much universally celebrated in the US (with Hannukah coming up close behind.) There's kwanzaa, but it's never made much of a dent in the public consciousness. And Valentine's Day isn't until February (though you might think otherwise, considering how the stores put the V-Day decoarations up in Mid-December!) So what other winter holidays are we supposed to be aware of in the United States, around December 25th or thereabouts?

Heh, heh, I do tend to see conspiracies in government agencies---having worked in one once. Sorry, Darleen's story, backed up by Michelle Malkin and some other bloggers I've read have convinced me that they were 1. Trying a bit of social engineering (hey, beats working!) 2. People started complaining about it, and so. . . 3. They pretended it all never really happened. Hey, when you work for a government, you can get away with that stuff!

Many government agencies are so terrified of the ACLU by the way, that they will go through any sort of back-flips to avoid a lawsuit! One explanation of Darleen's mother's story might be that somebody complained about the Christmas stamps at this particular Post Office (uninclusive, too Christian, gummint funded, whatever). So, the guys in charge, in typical government fashion, started tying themselves in knots to show they really are inclusive and tolerant, and, uh, c'mon, lady, wouldn't you like some nice cookie stamps instead of those religious ones (which somebody might complain abou, and then we'll all get sued and lose our jobs!)

So, yeah, I'll rate the ACLU among "The Powers that be." Any entity that can intimidate government agencies gets my vote as powerful. And why are they so obsessed with, say, eliminating Christmas pageants, and crosses (including veterans memorials) from public lands? Aren't there any REAL wrongoings they can address?

I don't know if there is an actual war against Christmas, with blueprints and maps drawn up; I do know that, given the current climate; lawsuits against nativity scenes, dropping "Merry Christmas" in favor of "Happy Holidays" (as if "Christmas" were a dirty word one mustn't use in public) and installing a general feeling of nervousness about the whole thing: (Am I being inclusive enough? Will somebody be offended if "Merry Christmas" just slips out of my mouth without my meaning it? Will the Post Office get upset if I ask for Madonna stamps? Will somebody get upset if I send them a card with a Madonna stamp on it? Should I send a card, or give out any gifts?) will, sooner or later, kill Christmas, just as surely as if somebody planned it! And nobody will gain by that---except, of course, the giant coporations, who will probably create a new holiday called "Buyonics", where we show our love for society by going and buying useless trash on December 25th.

Posted by: TalkinKamel at December 5, 2005 11:51 AM

Dan Someone Man, Darleen really did hit a nerve with you, didn't she?

I think Dan covered this allready Kamel, but seeing something that is egregiously, factually wrong, and attempting to correct it via intelligent debate isn't the same as "hitting a nerve". I'm pretty sure Dan isn't pounding his keyboard in furious anger over this issue, in fact i'm willing to bet he's laughing at this tangled thread of logic you seem to be having trouble following even yourself.
Just the thought that any of you have taken time out of your day to be outraged that the post office didn't make brand spanking new stamps this year of your favorite religious figures, fills me with uncontrollable laughter, as does the idea that Christmas is somehow "under attack" by evil secular forces. Seriously, how can you even come to that conclusion without huffing glue first?

And just for the record, the ACLU aren't the big, bad, Christ haters you make them out to be, they are all about free expression and unfettered right to free speech, if you bothered to do any research, you'd know that the ACLU has filed briefs in support of the church numerous times, they've brought suits to defend the rights of students to hand out candy canes with bible messages on them in school, hell they even defended Rush Limbaugh's right to be the odious blowhard that he is.
Keep up this rediculous witchhunt if you like, but for the non tinfoil hat crowd, this is just plain silly.

Posted by: Timmah420 at December 5, 2005 12:20 PM

And nobody will gain by that---except, of course, the giant coporations, who will probably create a new holiday called "Buyonics", where we show our love for society by going and buying useless trash on December 25th.

Hahahahaha... sorry I missed that one, it's a beauty. I can't believe you think christmas could somehow become more commercialized. Jesus, every aspect of christmas from back to front involves the consumption, or more often than not the overconsumption of various goods and services. Every single aspect, from those 5 dollar plastic made in China nativity scenes to the retarded singing bass that will probably sitting under the tree come the 25th.

That kind of thinking involves denial so powerful, I'm not even sure I read it right.

Posted by: Timmah420 at December 5, 2005 01:08 PM

Kamel, you're not showing much in the way of reading comprehension here. I explicitly said I don't object to someone saying "Merry Christmas" to me. I do think it shows that the person doesn't know me and has made some assumptions about me, but it's no big deal.

On the ACLU, you might, as Timmah says, want to do some research. Here is a 2002 press release about the Massachusetts (!) ACLU filing suit against the MBTA for refusing ads from a church that complained about the secularization of Christmas. Oh, those wily ACLUers! Obviously trying to throw everyone off the track, right? (By the way, the ACLU won that case in 2004. Those bastards!)

And why are they so obsessed with, say, eliminating Christmas pageants, and crosses (including veterans memorials) from public lands? You'll have to provide a reference to the ACLU objecting to veterans' memorials including crosses. I don't believe they've done any such thing. But the ACLU does object to religious displays on government property, usually when a local citizen complains about it. And that's a First Amendment (Establishment Clause) issue, on which reasonable people may disagree. But note that the ACLU objects as much to public Hanukkah displays as it does to public Nativity scenes.

Aren't there any REAL wrongoings they can address? What makes you think they don't? I don't have the figures handy, but I'd wager that more of the ACLU's resources go to protecting the Fourth Amendment than the First, simply because the Fourth is arguably more threatened today than the First.

I do know that, given the current climate; lawsuits against nativity scenes, dropping "Merry Christmas" in favor of "Happy Holidays" (as if "Christmas" were a dirty word one mustn't use in public) and installing a general feeling of nervousness about the whole thing... One thing you need to learn to do is distinguish between government behavior and private behavior. The ACLU doesn't say a damn thing about people wishing each other "Merry Christmas," not even government employees. If a merchant decides to implement a policy of "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas," that's an entirely private decision and has nothing to do with the ACLU. (As for the "current climate," the ACLU has been working to remove government religious displays for decades. There's nothing new about it.) Finally, if you're nervous about Christmas, I can't help you; that's something you'll have to work out on your own.

As for this: And what other winter holidays are usually celebrated in the USA, aside from Christmas and Hannukah, in December? Hmm... Well let's see... You dismiss Kwanzaa, but I've seen estimates that as many as 20-30 million people in the U.S. will celebrate it this year. That ain't peanuts -- in fact, it's a lot more folks than there are Jews in the country to celebrate Hanukkah. (Many of those who celebrate Kwanzaa will also celebrate Christmas, of course. Why shouldn't we wish for BOTH holidays to be happy for them?) And of course there are groups of Wiccans and other neopagans who celebrate the Solstice, as do many Native Americans, and there's Greek Orthodox Christmas in January, etc., etc. But there is another holiday that pretty much everybody in the USA celebrates in the winter. Can you guess what it is? Maybe you'll remember when your head is pounding as you watch the Rose Bowl on January 1.

P.S. -- It's funny that you ask So what other winter holidays are we supposed to be aware of in the United States, around December 25th or thereabouts? As if "December 25" is a critical limiting factor in this discussion. Because of course, we're expected to begin "celebrating" (i.e., shopping and otherwise preparing for) Christmas on or before Thanksgiving. Or do your advent calendars not start on December 1?

Posted by: Dan Someone at December 5, 2005 02:09 PM

Actually, Dan, my advent calendar begins on December 14th. And my head doesn't pound on January 1st, cuz I don't celebrate the New Year by drinking, heh, heh. (And, anyway, other than watching the big ball drop in Times Square, and getting plastered. . . nobody really celebrates New Year's, except by the above mentioned method of getting plastered---kinda like a winter-time version of St. Patrick's Day.) They don't even buy funny hats anymore, or toot horns! Emotionally, January 1st isn't much of a holiday. And the majority of American Christians, including some Orthodox denominations, celebrate Christmas on December 25th. The Greeks and other denominations who don't are considered unique enough that the local papers run stories about their celebrations every January.

I actually know quite a few Wiccans. Their big holiday is Samhain (Halloween) not Yule, which they consider to be a rather second-rate holiday at best. They just don't celebrate it with the verve Christians and Jews celebrate Christmas and Hannukah. And Kwaanza, as I've said, hasn't penetrated the American consciousness to much of an extent, or traveled much outside the black community; given its socialist underpinnings, and blatantly made-up nature, I doubt that it ever will.

(And, if you know people who are celebrating it---why not wish them a "Happy Kwaanza"? Why bother with "Happy Holidays" double-speak? Using my own Christmas example, are Hannukah and Kwaanza words considered so shocking that one must shuffle them away under "Happy Holidays", lest delicate souls take offense? It's like calling manhole covers "Person hole covers.")

You and I will just have to agree to disagree about the trustworthiness of the ACLU, or, in a litigatious society like ours, how long that separation between, say, religious expressions in public vs. religious in private will hold up, now that the door has been opened for those who are offended by religious displays to sue. Is a private church holding a live nativity scene on its front lawn infringing on the public domain? Are Wiccans dancing around a tree, on the front lawn of a private residence infringing on the public domain? What if somebody is offended by seeing their Yule celebration, and decides to sue, not the Wiccans, but the city, for permitting them to caper about in public, where everyone can see them? Trust me, these are all questions that are going to come up (if somebody isn't filing a brief on them already), and, as they get fought out in the courts, they're gonna make all the holidays a lot less merry!

I'm afraid it's just a matter of time before somebody gets upset over their neighbor's front-yard nativity scene, claiming severe emotional damages from it. Or a local mosque is offended by a private Christmas display, or a giant menorah displayed on somebody's private property, and sues over that, charging that the owners of said property are displaying "Islamophobia" by displaying such things so close to the mosque. All the congregants of the mosque will claim severe emotional damages (which can only be assuaged by the state awarding them large sums of money), and the ACLU, or some other legal group, will jump in to get their share of the pickings.

So, yeah, I confess. . . I'm nervous about, not only Christmas, but the future of any holiday that involves anything other than buying useless gadgets, drinking too much alcohol and wishing each other a happy, politically correct, non-denominational holiday or one kind or another---until the day comes (and it will) when somebody gets offended by the suggestion that they actually celebrate anything at all, and sues to have such holiday well-wishings outlawed.

As for yourself. . . well, whatever holidays you do celebrate, may you enjoy them. Avoid the booze on December 31 however; a hangover is no way to meet the New Year!

Posted by: TalkinKamel at December 6, 2005 08:41 AM

Kamel, all those examples you provide, involving religious celebrations on private property, have no implications for the First Amendment, and I am confident that the ACLU will not be trying to shut them down. In fact, I would bet American cash money that if some neighbor tried to get the city to shut down a private religious celebration, the ACLU would be in there defending the celebrators against government action.

My point about New Year was (a) an answer to your question, but also (b) intended to point out that "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" can refer -- and to lots of people does refer -- to the overall winter celebration centered around Christmas and New Year.

Using my own Christmas example, are Hannukah and Kwaanza words considered so shocking that one must shuffle them away under "Happy Holidays", lest delicate souls take offense? It's like calling manhole covers "Person hole covers." No it's not. It's simply saying, as you yourself said at the end of your post, "Whatever holidays you do celebrate, may you enjoy them."

Posted by: Dan Someone at December 6, 2005 10:13 AM

Happy Holidays is a nice way of including my holiday and yours and New Year's, I don't see why people get so upset about some people saying it. You'd never know I was Jewish to look at me, I'd never know you were Christian so rather than assuming we just say Happy Holidays to convey a feeling of warmth.

My son is one of only two Jewish kids in his preschool (how that happened in LA is beyond me, but that's another story) and EVERYTHING they are doing is about Christmas all month long. They made Christmas trees in art class, they made Santas, and it just goes on and on. I don't normally care much about that, it is the holiday of the majority, but I'd rather the focus be on winter or giving or peace on earth than all the symbols of Santa’s Christmas. They never mention Jesus - it’s all about Santa. I’d almost rather that it was about the birth of Jesus than about the culture of consumption and Santa, that way I could talk about it in terms he’d understand. Right now I am hearing about how he wishes he wasn’t Jewish because he wants Santa to come to his house and bring all the presents. Is that really the lesson of Christmas? The saddest part of this whole debate is that somehow the spirit of Christmas of giving and peace has been lost. In my Dutch family we also had Sinter Klaas, who came on Dec 6th and had NOTHING to do with the birth of Jesus. He was a great and wonderful man who rewarded children with chocolates and small treats for being good and taught us through his example that sharing what you have, being kind and generous to those with less than we is the only way to live.

Posted by: Mieke at December 6, 2005 09:57 PM

You know, I think USPS may be responding to the public. This You know, I think USPS may be responding to the public. This http://www.usps.com/communications/news/stamps/2005/sr05_054.htm press release that confirms the Christmas: Madonna and Child stamp release for 2006 uses the word "Christmas" in the title of the stamp. The current catalog styles the 2004 Madonna and Child stamp as "Holiday Traditional". I think this is a change by USPS, adding Christmas to the stamp name. What has been galling (and inconsistent) about USPS stamp listings has been their names. The current list:

Holiday Contemporary (Santas, ornaments, etc,)
Holiday Traditional (Madonna and Child)
Holiday Kwanzaa
Holiday Hanukkah
Holiday Eid
Holiday Easter

"Christmas" was the only holiday name that was not spelled out! But "Easter"? No prob. Anyway, the referenced press link indicates to me that the USPS is coming around to a common sense approach.

All the best, your reader, Steve Barton

Posted by: Steve Barton at December 8, 2005 08:29 AM