Both are religous symobols. This is not tolerance but promotes preferential treatment. BTW the Christmas tree is not a religous symbol so please don't equate it with a Nativity.
This question is in responce to http://www.spokesmanreview.com/breaking/story.asp?ID=8212
2006-12-21 07:56:56 · 17 answers · asked by starfish 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Actually, the Christmas tree *IS* a religious symbol, used in both the religions that celebrated Saturnalia and the birth of Mithras. It was also used in many northern european pagan customs.
And I'm with you. If the tree and nativity go (as they should), so should the menorah.
2006-12-21 08:00:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
The Menorah is a Jewish symbol traditionally lit during Hannakuh.
The creche, or Nativity scene is a Christian symbol.
A christmas tree actually isn't a religious symbol at all, except maybe to some pagans who are still outraged that Christians call it a Christmas tree instead of whatever it was called before Christians borrowed it for their celebrations.
Now, I, personally, have no problems with my tax money going to support the displays of other people's religious symbols...our tax money is supposed to benefit everyone. But I do object that tax money is being used for one religion over another. If a Manorah is OK (and I see no reason why it shouldn't be), then a Creche ought to be OK as well.
Why is it Christian symbols ONLY that are objected to?
2006-12-21 08:23:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not sure, though did you read the whole thing? It took them over a year to allow the Menorah next to Christmas Trees and at first he was turned down as well. The Menorah isn't so much as religious as the Nativity scene though.... it's about the Jews making it through a war with only so much oil and God making the oil last several nights when it should have only lasted one (this is greatly paraphrased and leaves out many details, but is the basics of the story).
Personally, I don't care if they show the Nativity Scene or Christmas Trees... but I think if they're going to allow those, then they should allow symbols of ALL of the religions who have holidays at this time - or show none at all.
And I beg to differ - a Christmas Tree is a religious symbol, just not one to Christianity. *Wink*
2006-12-21 08:05:20 · answer #3 · answered by Kithy 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I see a double standard here. The second a christmas tree or the ten commandments are posted, people shout religious oppression and want it taken down, yet a menorah can be set up and nobody says pop-squat. Though I hate political correctness, isn't this religious intolerance? Athiests demand religious symbols be removed from government property because it offends them, but what if a Christian like myself, who pays taxes same as they do, wants to see a christmas tree at the post office or a display of the ten commandments? Where's my representation? Maybe the athiests should put a sign next to them saying, "There is no God" so they'll have their say as well.
2006-12-21 08:20:00 · answer #4 · answered by Danny H 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree.
As the article says:
"Steve Valandra, a spokesman for the Department of General Administration, officials were concerned that in comparison with a tree or menorah, a Nativity scene might carry a stronger impression of government endorsement of religion."
I suppose this is possibly correct, just because life-like sculpture probably makes a stronger impression. But these symbols and depictions can cause different reaction in different people.
I am not religious, but I like menorahs and nativity scenes, just not on government property. I think trees are judged to be OK even on govt property, because they are not part of a particular religion.
2006-12-21 08:07:11 · answer #5 · answered by HarryTikos 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree that if you aren't going to allow one religious symbol, you can't allow any. It would be okay if all religions were invited to add to a holiday display, but you can't say yes to a Menorah and no to a nativity scene. I can understand in this case if they said they would consider it for next year and ask that all possible displays be submitted by a certain date. I would have told them no for this year, but okay for next year, just because it's kinda late.
As for the tree, it is a religious symbol, but it is also a symbol of the secular Christmas celebration. I think a tree would be acceptable, if it was intended as a secular holiday decoration. I think a distinction can be made there.
2006-12-21 08:04:34 · answer #6 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are absolutely correct. There is no difference between displaying a menorah on public property and displaying a nativity scene, in my opinion. As for the Christmas tree--it could be argued that Christmas is a federal holiday and not considered a religious holiday by many, and the Christmas tree is more part of the secular celebration than the religious, but I don't consider that a convincing argument.
It's important to people of all faiths that the government remain neutral in matters of religion. It doesn't diminish either holiday for government offices to not display religious symbols on their grounds. Symbols and decorations can still be seen on churches, synagogues, and private residences. It's not as though anyone is suggesting that private citizens cannot put up nativity scenes or menorahs on private property.
2006-12-21 08:01:12 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
It is my understanding, from other posting in this section, that Hanukkah is not a RELIGIOUS celebration in the way Christmas is. Hanukkah (forgive me if I've oversimplified this, dear Jewish posters, because I'm sure I have) is to celebrate the rebuilding of a very significant temple - I forget which - as opposed to something celebrating the birth of a messiah. Unless you're willing to admit that the birth of the messiah is only as significant as rebuilding a building.
As for the tree, it is very much a religious symbols to we Pagans and Wiccans who celebrate Yule/the Winter Solstice. Trees were originally brought inside to give earth spirits safe harbor during the cold winter. So you might want to brush up on where Christmas symbols came from.
Blessed Yule.
)O(
2006-12-21 08:01:41 · answer #8 · answered by thelittlemerriemaid 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
If you study the history of the holiday, Hannukah, you will find it is not a particularly religious holiday, certainly not as Christmas was intended to be. Yom Kippor (Day of Atonement) and others are much more religious holidays than Hannukah.
It does celebarate a miracle and occurs on the 25th of Kislev on the Jewish lunar calendar. It generally coincides with Christmas, but no always.
Please refer to sources below for more info.
Alas, the nativity. This is clearly upsetting to many that other solstice symbols are displayed and the nativity of is not allowed.
Since we have religoius freedom as a constitutional guarantee, which includes freedom from it, perhaps none should be placed on overnment property. That to me, seems the best of all solutions.
It's sort of like this, I'll not park my broken car in your yard and please don't put yours in mine. I wouldn't even put mine in my yard and I certainly would not expect to leave it on city or public property.
I do display Christmas decorations in my yard and my neighbor decorates for Hannukah. I convey that which I desire as does he. Neither of us decorate the park, however. We get along perfectly well.
Just some thoughts.
2006-12-21 08:28:10 · answer #9 · answered by rumbler_12 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends on who's actually displaying the nativity/menorah. I can't imagine the government displaying either. To allow non-governmental entities to display either is not endorsing anything except our freedom. For the government to tell us we can't display either of these symbols would be taking away the very freedoms the constitution allows us.
2006-12-21 08:01:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋