2 of 67

Yes

Write now Article Tools

I would answer most definitely YES. The Christmas symbol debate has become one of the more contentious issues facing local governments. It frequently bitterly divides communities that otherwise live together throughout the rest of the year. It stems from a wider movement to "sanitize" religion out of the public sector across the country. This would include changing our money, removing the Ten Commandments from courthouses, changing the Pledge of Allegiance, and removing Christmas displays.

Much of this is done under the banner of "separation of Church and State." The Constitution prohibits the promotion of religion by the government. This would mean the active and forceful proselytizing of new recruits to a specific religion or denomination. I do not believe, however, that it means the complete elimination of any reference to religion throughout our government. In fact, to completely remove any religious reference, in itself, is promotion of the belief of atheism.

Secondly, much of the religious overtone found in our country comes from the fact that the founders were Christian men as was most of the population. It would not, therefore, occur to them that they were promoting anything more than a common belief. As our society has become more secular, many of these practices have lost their religious significance but have become traditional. The Christmas symbols on the city hall front lawn is a prime example. Whether the town tree has Christmas lights on it or not does not effect whether I go to Christmas Eve service or not, but I will fight for them because they have been there since I can remember and I see no reason to stop now. That is a tradition that holds a great deal of meaning to much of the population. It is something that binds a large part of the community and brings the comfort of familiarity. For that reason alone, it should continue.

That being said, it should also be noted that there is no reason that the display of symbols of Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Ramadan, or any other religious holiday should be prohibited should it be desired by a large part of the local population. The job of the government is to serve the wishes of the majority. That is the premise under which we elect our government.

That brings us to the third point which is the argument that "it is not fair" to use tax money to support religious displays because the local Muslim does not benefit from the Christmas display. That argument is invalid as soon as it is uttered. There are many things the government pays for that I don't support and some that I actively disapprove of. Nonetheless, the duty of the government is to use my tax dollars in the manner that it believes does the most good for the most people, regardless of the beliefs of the individual. To do anything else would paralyze the government and render it incapable of acting.

I would agree that it is an argument that, while not created by the media, is fanned and spread by the media to the detriment of the community. By making it the annual column or political story, the local newspaper creates conflict and disharmony for no other reason than to sell newspapers. Unfortunately, we buy into it and keep the story fresh.

Learn more about this author, Kirk W. Johnson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should city and town governments be allowed to display Christmas symbols??
We want to hear your view. Write now!