In recent years the Christmas wars have subsided, though each year there are some ugly incidents. This year we got involved in what could have been a legal showdown, but ended mostly on our terms.

On December 12, we were contacted by a Catholic League member who sought to have a nativity scene displayed in the lobby of his cooperative building in Larchmont, New York, a town in Westchester.

The lobby had a Christmas tree and a menorah. His request was denied. When he was told that the nativity scene was a religious symbol and could not be displayed, he pointed out that the menorah was also a religious symbol. He was told they didn’t see it that way.

That same day, Bill Donohue wrote a letter to the Property Manager, sending a copy to the president of the board of directors and a Catholic League attorney (see p. 4). The letter was sent priority mail, UPS, and was delivered by 10:00 a.m. on December 13.

They were given until December 17 to answer. We heard from their lawyers that day. The board of directors of the Coop decided to pull the Christmas tree and the menorah from the lobby, thus making the charge of religious discrimination moot.

There are three ways they could have ruled on this issue: allow the nativity scene; pull the menorah; or keep the menorah and prohibit the nativity scene. The first two options are declarations of neutrality, treating the Christian and the Jewish symbols equally. The latter would have triggered a lawsuit.

We hasten to add that the two neutral decisions are not morally equal. To allow both religious symbols would be an expression of tolerance. To deny both is an expression of intolerance. They chose the intolerant route.

They would rather deny Jews their rights before extending equal rights to Christians. Telling.

Atheist organizations and Satanic groups were busy in other parts of the country.

Atheists in Rhode Island tried to compete with a traditional Christmas display by featuring an array of silly secular symbols in the state capitol. A pagan ministry sought to march in a Christmas parade in Parkersburg, West Virginia, backed by an atheist group.

Satanists in Iowa hosted the “Satanic Holiday Joy at the Iowa State Capitol,” and another band of Satanists installed a demonic idol in the plaza across from the New Hampshire state house in Concord.

These people are full of hate, which is the opposite of what Christmas is—a demonstration of love.

We were happy to have played a role in sending these folks a message—Christians will not shy from defending themselves.

In December, the Catholic League was inundated with complaints across the country that public school teachers have been diluting the meaning of Christmas while simultaneously trumpeting the meaning of Hanukkah and Kwanzaa. It has become commonplace for public schools to teach about Hanukkah but not about Christmas, to display menorahs but not nativity scenes, and to celebrate the meaning of Kwanzaa but not Christmas.

The Catholic League issued the following comment to the press about this subject:

“In 1995, President Clinton sent a memo to Attorney General Janet Reno and Secretary of Education Richard Riley outlining the religious liberty rights of students in public schools. As he said, `nothing in the First Amendment converts our public schools into religion-free zones or requires all religious expression to be left behind at the schoolhouse door.’

“President Clinton was explicit about this matter: it is legal for teachers to teach about religion, for students to express their religious beliefs in their assignments, for students to distribute religious literature and to wear religious garb. Yet these rights are still being summarily ignored in certain school districts.

“In addition, it is now common practice for schools to display menorahs but not nativity scenes. Instead, the Christmas tree, which is not a religious symbol, is being displayed as though it were one. It must also be said that the sensitivity that many school districts are showing for Kwanzaa, which was literally invented in 1966, is in stark contrast to the way in which Christmas is being celebrated.

“While it is true that there is no law that requires public schools to display nativity scenes or teach about Christmas, it is also true that there is no law that prohibits them from doing so. In the interest of fairness, then, it behooves school authorities to accommodate Christian students as much as they do Jewish and African-American students. That is why the Catholic League will continue to press for equitable treatment.”

This edition of Catalyst discusses only some of the cases that it took regarding this mattter.

A few weeks before Christmas, residents at a Newhall, California senior citizens’ apartment complex were told to remove their Christmas tree. The company in charge of the complex, JB Partners Group Inc., told staff at The Willows residence that the Christmas tree was a religious symbol and must be taken down.

Because this is a private venue, there was no role for government involvement. But there was a moral issue, and it needed to be addressed. The residents, including those who are not Christian, wanted the Christmas tree. Moreover, the tree is not a religious symbol.

We suggested that everyone on our e-mail list contact the tyrants who were attempting to shove their secular agenda down the throats of these senior citizens. We provided the e-mail address for the Human Resources department at JB Partners and, as usual, our members did not disappoint.

After our news release was issued, the company was bombarded with thousands of e-mails. The good news is that within hours of our news release, the senior citizens were told they could get their Christmas tree back.

Many thanks to all those who protested. It goes to show that while cable TV commentators may opine on the War on Christmas, it takes an organized effort by a national civil rights organization to bring about real change.

Catholic League president William Donohue spoke today on the way diversity specialists in the corporate world are responding to Christmas:

“The Diversity Despots are once again seeking to gut Christmas from the workplace.  Fraser Nelson, executive director of the Disability Law Center in Salt Lake City, Utah, is against any religious holiday in the workplace.  Nelson, who is Jewish, says she is ‘personally offended’ when she sees a Christmas tree in the rotunda of the Utah State Capitol.  Ergo, she censors Christmas for her employees.

“Susan Dunn is known as an internationally recognized Emotional Intelligence Coach.  Though we have no idea what this is, what matters is that she warns against linking December with Christmas, counseling not to forget about Bodhi Day (for those with a low Multicultural IQ, this is a Buddhist holiday, a.k.a. Rohatsu).  She also advises that in a true multicultural holiday party, employees should be encouraged to bring various ethnic foods: ‘But remember,’ she wisely observes, ‘it’s counterproductive to ask the Hungarian to bring goulash, etc.’

“Myrna Marofsky is perhaps the nation’s foremost Diversity Despot.  She runs ProGroup, a diversity firm in Minneapolis.  Like the ADL, she speaks of the ‘December Dilemma.’  Having herself created the dilemma for the rest of us, she is ever so kind to fix it for us.  ‘Consider scheduling celebrations or sending cards before or after the holiday season,’ she says.  She adds that ‘Santa Claus can be surprisingly divisive,’ and suggests that employers ‘invite a magician instead.’  The recommended tune to sing is ‘Frosty the Snowman.’  Why?  ‘There’s a lot of nice Christmas songs that don’t have anything to do with Baby Jesus.’  So that’s what this is all about—censoring Jesus.  Her honesty is much appreciated.

“We’re thinking about sending Marofsky a Happy Hanukkah card, but not until the Fourth of July.  For a Hanukkah treat, we’ll send her some corned beef and cabbage, with a side of meatballs and spaghetti.  And for holiday music, we’ll send her a CD by Marilyn Manson.”

In Wisconsin, for the first time in years, they reverted back to calling the Capitol Rotunda Christmas tree a Christmas tree: it was called a Christmas tree for 70 years until it was renamed a Holiday tree in the mid-1980s.

In Rhode Island, Governor Lincoln Chafee decided to continue the politics of intolerance by calling the Capitol Rotunda Christmas tree a Holiday tree.

Annie Laurie Gaylor of the Madison, Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation explained why the Christmas tree in Wisconsin was rebranded the Holiday tree: “Calling it a Holiday tree was meant to be inclusive.” Ironically, it has proven to be divisive—the uproar was in Rhode Island, not Wisconsin.

According to the Providence Journal, 87 percent of the people in Rhode Island prefer to call the Christmas tree a Christmas tree; only 8 percent think it should be called a Holiday tree. In Wisconsin, there is no discord: calling the Christmas tree a Christmas tree has brought people together. Which is why Rhode Island should learn a lesson in civility and community by calling its Christmas tree a Christmas tree.

By the way, what holiday does the Holiday tree represent?

Catholic League president Bill Donohue explained why the Catholic League’s dispute with Lands’ End has been resolved:

“On December 1, we issued a news release expressing our displeasure with Lands’ End for contributing to the dumbing-down of Christmas.  We did not so much object to the company’s preference for using the term ‘holiday’ over ‘Christmas’ (and indeed Christmas items could be found at Lands’ End); rather, our beef was with a remark made by Merlin W. Gorsline in the company’s Customer Relations Department.

“Gorsline said that the company’s emphasis on the use of the term ‘holiday’ was ‘a way to comply with one of the basic freedoms granted to all Americans: freedom of religion.’  We then got the following lecture:  ‘We recognize that Christmas is a Christian holiday, and one of the foremost teachings of the Christian faith is a love for one’s fellowman—no matter what his race, religion or creed.’  In conclusion, Gorsline wrote that ‘If we knew which customers feel as you do, we would be delighted to send them catalogs with ‘Merry Christmas’ splashed throughout its pages.  However, we don’t.’

“Our response was to call Gorsline’s bluff, so we asked our members to request a ‘Merry Christmas’ catalog.  After being pounded for several days by disgruntled customers who said they would never buy from the company again, Lands’ End sent us a statement repudiating Gorsline’s objectionable comment.

“Jackie Schutty from Lands’ End told us that ‘the information that was recently shared by one of our Lands’ End representatives does not accurately reflect our company’s position.’  She also said, ‘We apologize for any confusion and appreciate the opportunity to clarify our position.’

 “We are satisfied with this statement and consider this matter closed.”

In yesterday’s New York Times, there was an article about White House social secretary Desirée Rogers. In it, reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg wrote: “When former social secretaries gave a luncheon to welcome Ms. Rogers earlier this year, one participant said, she surprised them by suggesting the Obamas were planning a ‘non-religious Christmas….’”

This same participant said that “the Obamas did not intend to put the manger scene on display” (this was confirmed by the White House). Indeed, as Stolberg wrote, “there had been internal discussions about making Christmas more inclusive and whether to display the crèche.”

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addressed this issue today:

Unlike almost all Americans—including atheists—the Obamas do not give their children Christmas gifts. We know this because Barack bragged about this last year to People magazine. So it should come as no big surprise that he and his wife would like to neuter Christmas in the White House. That’s their natural step—to ban the public display of Christian symbols. Have any doubts? Last April, Georgetown University was ordered to put a drape over the name of Jesus as a condition of the president speaking there.

If the Obamas want to deprive their children of celebrating Christmas, that is their business. It is the business of the public to hold them accountable for the way they celebrate Christmas in the White House. We know one thing for sure: no other administration ever  entertained internal discussions on whether to display a nativity scene in the White  House.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue talks about the way Christmas foes navigate the holiday:

This is a tricky season for those who delight in warring on Christmas. Consider what is happening in Waterbury, Connecticut.

Erik Brown is the principal of Walsh Elementary in the Waterbury School District. His staff is under strict orders not to employ secular, as well as religious, Christmas symbols when they enjoy their “winter celebration” on December 21. Yet Christmas carols will be sung at the event, as well as Hanukkah songs. And students will be given gifts.

Is there a law against the display of secular holiday symbols in Connecticut schools? No. So why the ban? Brown says, “It is state law that a public school can’t knowingly exclude children.” He is, of course, wrong: there is no such law. If there were, then his school would be open on April 2, 2010. But there is no school that day, and that is because the Waterbury School District Calendar marks April 2nd as “Good Friday.”

Why are Christmas carols and Hanukkah songs allowed to be sung on “winter celebration” day? Don’t they exclude Buddhists? And if those songs are okay, why are teachers forbidden from displaying Frosty the Snowman, never mind Baby Jesus? Moreover, why is it okay to sing “Santa Claus Is Coming to Town,” but it is not okay to display a poster of Santa?

Come to think of it, why are they having a “winter celebration” at all? To be exact, there is no “summer celebration” scheduled for Monday, June 21, 2010. So why the discrimination? Aren’t there students who would like to sing “Those Lazy, Hazy, Crazy Days of Summer” and receive another round of gifts? How can they be legally excluded under Connecticut law?

Seems to us that Mr. Brown has sat through one too many multicultural workshops. Give him a call at (203) 574-8164, and wish him a Merry Christmas.