Christmas Tree Controversy

[RedEarth]

December 15, 2004


BELLEVUE - You can't miss the Christmas tree in Bellevue City Hall.
"It's decorated with gold balls and gold ribbon," described a city worker.

They don't actually call it a Christmas tree. "We call it the giving tree because it's meant as a season of giving and that's what it's for," explained Patrice Cole, who just made a donation.

The tree is adorned with requests for gifts from needy families. It generates nearly $25,000 dollars worth of donations.

So, you might be surprised that Sidney Stock would look at this tree and say, "I resent it." Sidney and Jennifer Stock are atheists.

They asked the city council to remove the tree because it represents Christmas which is a Christian holiday.

http://www.komotv.com/stories/34416.htm

[demnan]

1. Oh, fuck them

Makes me ashamed to be an atheist the way these people act.

[jeff30997]

4. Yep. The way they want to impose their views...

Is no better than the Christians extremists.

[JI7]

7. like Christian Fundamentalists they are Atheist Fundamentalist

[jeff30997]

24. Exactly.

[Book Lover]

2. As an atheist, I'm of two minds

The city has made an effort to divorce the symbol from the holiday, and is doing good with it. On the other hand, is it an effective good-faith effort? I don't see signs around offering to sell me "Giving Trees"; they want to sell me Christmas Trees. Plus, the article makes the point that it is a Christmas Tree and that the city changed the name to try and avoid this issue; obviously they failed. I think that if they're paying for it with tax money from every citizen, then the city has crossed the line to endorsing a religious practice.

[eallen]

8. But what is Christian about the Christmas tree?

[Book Lover]

12. In my view

an object called a Christmas Tree is linked to a religious figure. In my own view, the fact that it was a pagan symbol appropriated by the Christians is not relevant; it's what the symbol means now that matters.

As a hard atheist, I also disbelieve in the pagan gods, and do not want to endorse their religious practices either.

[eallen]

35. It's impossible to eliminate religious etymology...

Our language is soaked in words that have a religious origin. The days of the week are named after pagan gods: the Moon's day, Tiw's day, Woden's day, Thor's day, Freya's day. When you end a conversation, you say "good-bye," what once was a contraction for "god be with ye." When you call someone a thug, you're referring to a Hindu sect, the thuggees. Most English Christians likely don't realize that the name "Easter" derives from a fertility goddess, Astarte. (In Romance languages, this Christian holiday has a more Christian name: Pascual, or passover.)

As an atheist, the religious origin of words doesn't bother me in the least. The notion that words carry a kind of magic, that by saying a word one somehow invokes the gods of its origin, is a religious idea. I don't recognize a mythical Christ when I call something a Christmas tree, or use "Christmas" as a name for our winter holiday. That Christians still imbue it with religious overtone is entirely irrelevant.

[Sequoia]

19. Some Christians "Hate" trees and nature

Too pagan, against the corporate giants, (check out the tree wars up in Eureka, someone there told me she "hated those Redwoods and I wish they cut them all down") and incidently, the logging company is based out of...you guessed it...TEXAS.

[tx_dem41]

9. Stick with your "first" mind.....

You're overanalyzing the issue with your second mind.

How, specifically, is the city endorsing a religious practice?

[Book Lover]

15. Please see post #8 (nm)

[tx_dem41]

16. I'm not sure how that answers my question....

especially since they aren't calling it a "Christmas" tree (which is a secular or even a pagan symbol anyway, IMO). The city has made every effort to make this non-controversial AND is doing a good thing in the process....pick your battles. This isn't one of them, IMO.

[Book Lover]

25. Perhaps the basis for disagreement

is that I do not see this as a secular symbol - it used to be used for pagan purposes (one religion) and is now used for christian purposes (another religion). At any rate, and as I said before, the city has made a real effort to divorce the object from its religious meaning, and they are using it to raise funds and goods for charitable purposes, which is of course not a religious act per se. Your point about picking your battles is well taken. We truly do have bigger fish to fry.

[A Simple Game]

37. The city is not endorsing a religious practice.

The Christmas tree, no matter what the Christians say, has become a corporate symbol. If you don't believe corporate America has taken over Christmas, open your eyes.

The city is helping a charity, nothing wrong with that, but it is not their only purpose. When a city decorates for Christmas, they are trying to draw people to the area to shop. They don't just do it to get people to say "Wow look at all of the decorations". More shoppers equals more taxes collected.

As an agnostic, none of this bothers me.

[bryant69]

10. I'm not sure

Should the standard be that a reasonable person would take offense, or that anybody would take offense? I mean sure a Christmas tree has long been a symbol of a religious holiday--it has also been a symbol of a secular holiday. Good faith efforts have been made to ensure that it doesn't represent a religious symbol.

ALso I'm sure those who recieve the charity this Christmas tree represents will have an opinion on these two for trying and possibly succeeding in getting it down.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Book Lover]

18. Then perhaps

public funds should be spent instead on helping the less fortunate directly, or spent on some other means that does not utilize religious or quasi-religious symbols to induce citizens to give generously at this time of year. Then again, would that be as effective?

Please note that I am not saying that this tree needs to come down immediately. I am undecided about this.

[barackmyworld]

3. Some atheists ruin it for everyone else

christmas is about the birth of santa. The tree is associated with christmas, but it's not like Jesus was born under it or anything. Sheesh. CHRISTMAS IS ALSO A SECULAR HOLIDAY!

[jeff30997]

6. I agree a 100%.

[Cats Against Frist]

33. LOL

"christmas is about the birth of santa"

[Turn CO Blue]

I don't agree w Stocks - greenery symbolic of winter solstice

This practice of decorating with greenery or evergreen during winter solstice goes back millenia. Apparently, as with every other "Christmas" tradition, the practice is based on tradition or paganism.

(snip)
The Egyptians were part of a long line of cultures that treasured and worshipped evergreens. When the winter solstice arrive, they brought green date palm leaves into their homes to symbolize life's triumph over death.

The Romans celebrated the winter solstice with a fest called Saturnalia in honor of Saturnus, the god of agriculture. They decorated their houses with greens and lights and exchanged gifts. They gave coins for prosperity, pastries for happiness, and lamps to light one's journey through life.

Centuries ago in Great Britain, woods priests called Druids used evergreens during mysterious winter solstice rituals. The Druids used holly and mistletoe as symbols of eternal life, and place evergreen branches over doors to keep away evil spirits.

<http://www.christmas-tree.com/where.html>

Edited for clarity

[Turn CO Blue]

13. Isn't it weird my reply didn't receive a number?

[immoderate]

22. If your post coincides with another, you don't get a number.

Check the times on some other posts.

--IMM

[eallen]

5. The dumb thing about this: the Christmas tree isn't Christian!

It's a hold-over from older celebrations of the solstice. In fact, there's very little about Christmas that is specifically Christian, not the egg nog, nor the mistle toe, nor the holly, nor the gift-giving, nor the feasting. The early Church purposely coopted pagan solstice celebrations and turned them into Christmas. That's why the puritans in the 17th century banned the celebration of Christmas, in both England and Massachussetts. It was, in their view, papery and pagan. The Jehovah's Witnesses still ban their followers from its celebration.

Today, Christmas is primarily a cultural holiday. Most atheists I know have no problem celebrating it. :party: We don't attend midnight mass, of course. :evilgrin:

[bloom]

20. I agree that much of "Christmas" is pagan and/or cultural, but

I also agree with people who would be happier about the whole thing with a different word other than Christmas. Which in this case they tried to do and it would be nice if people could be happy about it.

Some consensus on a term would be nice. Winter-fest or just calling it all the New Year Fest or something. The 12 days of the New Year (from the solstice to New Years Day)... with the acknowledgement of course that many have various religions and or secular traditions that are not at all unified. And unfortuately Hannukah doesn't fit in to that time slot - though Kwanza does. And I assume nearly everyone celebrates the New Year.


Not having commonality is creating problems.

[Cleita]

11. Some atheists can be as dogmatic in their beliefs as

fundamentalists of all religions. I always looked upon my atheism as having an open mind to new ideas. You never know when the next scientific fact will come along to blow away all your preconcieved notions about the universe and life in general.

Decorating evergreen trees at the Winter Solstice predates Christianity by thousands of years. Why don't they call it a Yule tree? Yule basically means midwinter festival. Since the Christians have pasted their traditions on it, everyone should be happy.

[RoyGBiv]

14. Christmas Trees

They are pagan symbols, not Christian. Some Christians have adopted their use, and they are of course popular, but the basis for this complaint is non-existent.

I'm getting rather sick of activists who do nothing but try to tear things down just to say they did.

[DrWeird]

17. Crazy Americans ruin it for everybody.

Seperation of church and state? What kind of crazy bullshit is that?

[arwalden]

21. Hooray For Them!! It's *Still* A Christmas Tree!!

Right... it's a "giving tree" (wink-wink). --- If I were to punch someone in the nose and call it a "hug", would that make it okay?

The line must be drawn SOMEWHERE!

I wonder what euphamism they might use for next year's nativity scene.

[Sabriel]

26. I wanted to say that, arwalden, but yours was funnier

Just because you call it a cow doesn't mean it isn't still a duck, if it still quacks and wears gold balls and ribbons. It's a fucking Christmas tree, which I don't see adorning too many of my non-Christian neighbors' houses.

[pop goes the weasel]

23. oh bugger

Nearly every atheist I know, including me, puts up a holiday tree. It has nothing to do with Christianity or the Christian version of the winter holiday. It's just an old pagan tradition that people have continued to mark the season of the winter solstice. In the USSR, the trees were used, officially, to mark New Year's Day. People just like the trees.

But I see in the article that they are actually protesting on behalf of an immigrant city worker who feels uncomfortable with the tree. I think a better course would be to introduce the worker, and perhaps other immigrants, to the many non-Christians who put up trees. All the pagans I have ever known put them up. Most atheists I've known put them up. Many Jews I've known put them up. And I know there are plenty of Christians who absolutely refuse to put up trees on the grounds that they aren't really Christian symbols.

Around these parts, construction workers at all times of year tie evergreens to the highest point of the contruction. It's an old good luck charm evoking a wish for continued health, life, and good fortune. In December, we put one on the ground and decorate it again because of our wish for continued health, life, and good fortune. And that's all the durn thing represents. Aside from being pretty.

[arwalden]

27. Yes... They Are Pretty. I Put One Up Myself...

it makes the house feel warm, cozy and nostalgic. But my house isn't a state house. The issue isn't whether or not the trees are pretty... it's the continualy creeping-in and blurring of the line between church and state. At what point should we actually draw the line? How much intrusion is too much?

[bloom]

29. Issues

"Nearly every atheist I know, including me, puts up a holiday tree. It has nothing to do with Christianity or the Christian version of the winter holiday. "

"The issue isn't whether or not the trees are pretty... it's the continualy creeping-in and blurring of the line between church and state."

I don't know - I think if enough atheists admitting putting up "new years trees" it would go a long way in helping people see that it is secular or generically festive or what have you.

I think that is exactly the issue. And I think it would be a positive thing for the culture of the country as a whole.

More magazines and newspapers should do articles on atheist festivities.

[pop goes the weasel]

31. that's a great idea!

I would love to read an article about atheist holiday celebrations. While I'm planning on doing the bulk of my gifting on Xmas, when the bulk of my family will do it, I have decided this year to make a point of having my daughter over on the solstice, to give her a gift, and to do engage in some holiday cheer. She is an apatheist, and loves the idea of directly commemorating solstice. And I'm so pumped about it that I wish I had thought to do it earlier. Next year, I plan to figure out some specific solstice activity that will be both educational and fun. Maybe something involving calendars and planet-charting that can be repeated at mid-summer. It would be easier to think of things if there were articles on what other people do.

[arwalden]

32. If If If

>> I don't know - I think if enough atheists admitting putting up "new years trees" it would go a long way in helping people see that it is secular or generically festive or what have you. <<

Take a look at the actual numbers of Christians vs everyone else. That's not going to make a lick of difference if every atheist or non-Christian suddenly proclaimed that they put up trees too, and that their trees are NOT not to celebrate Christ.

Diluting the religious symbolism is an interesting idea, but not very practical in the immediate. And if we don't take action IMMEDIATELY against the constant encroachment of religion into our government, when will we? Where should the line be drawn? How many inches should we give? How much encroachment is too much?

All the "if's" in the world aren't going to change the reality that when government property is used for religious displays, it's an endorsement of that religion.

[CarbonDate]

28. This is getting a little tiresome

Some people need to choose their battles. Christmas is an officially sanctioned government holiday. Using secular symbols such as a tree to celibrate it is fair, in my opinion.

If these atheists have a problem with Christmas being an officially sanctioned government holiday, then they need to take up that issue. See how far they get trying to take away everybody's day off to spend time with their family.

Fundies are fundies, whether they're Christian or atheists. I'm a pagan and have no problem with them co-opting our traditions as their own. I am somewhat amused at the Christians who have no idea where the traditions stem from, but I let them have their fun.

Some people just need things to be angry about in order to function.

[arwalden]

30. "Officially sanctioned"?? Did you mean "officially recognized"?

>> If these atheists have a problem with Christmas being an officially sanctioned government holiday, then they need to take up that issue. <<

Yes, that's EXACTLY what I have a problem with. A state display like that is an endorsement. That's pretty much "sanctioning" it.

That's quite a bit different than a government merely *acknowledging* the fact that so many people celebrate the holiday it might as well give everyone the day off.


>> Fundies are fundies, whether they're Christian or atheists. <<

OMG! Too funny! LMAO! --- Yeah! It's time for me to get back to basics... where's my Atheist Bible! Where did I put those fundamental Atheist Scriptures? I need to start going to Atheist Church more often.

>> I am somewhat amused at the Christians who have no idea where the traditions stem from, but I let them have their fun. <<

I find that to be amusing too. I have to chuckle whenever I hear Christians complain that they want to "return" to the "original" meaning of the holiday.

[pantouflard]

34. We should do away with xmas trees altogether.

Regardless of whether or not it is a religious symbol, cutting down a tree for two weeks of entertainment just doesn't seem right.


"In 1997, Americans cut down 33 million real trees to put up in their homes, enough to cover the state of Rhode Island. In doing so, they spent somewhere between $600 million to $1.1 billion. Our population explosion has reached the point where we now need 1 million acres of land for Christmas tree farms."

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/NoChristmas.html

[quaoar]

36. Oh yes, let's make this official Democratic Party policy

Take Christ out of Christmas and call it the Winter Solstice festival or some such shit.

We'll be lucky if we carry the District of Columbia in 2008.

Forget about all the outrages of the Bush crime family, we'll draw the line in the sand over the Baby Jesus.

We need to pick our battles and this one is a major loser.