Sunday, January 29, 2006


Without exception, readers who responded to the question of whether it is appropriate to use the word "Christmas" as the official description of the trees and other decorations that adorn public places agreed with Elinor Stein of Cypress, Calif., who called the whole argument "rather silly."

"A Christmas tree is a Christmas tree," writes Veronica Ross of Garden Grove, Calif. "In order to please everyone, the government would have to remove every holiday from the calendars, tell the unions that they would have to renegotiate all contracts to remove all holidays and, in effect, tell the nation that they can't celebrate anything that can't be celebrated with everyone. Pish posh!"

As for the possibility of offending those of other religions, Adam Karp of Irvine, Calif., doesn't see a problem there. "As a Jewish person, I do not have a problem with the term `Christmas tree' being used," Karp writes. "If the capitol put up a `Holiday menorah, 'the Jews would be livid -- it's a `Hannukah menorah' -- and it's aChristmas tree."

Stephanie White of Fountain Valley, Calif., doesn't see the Christmas tree as offensive to anybody. "It is a universal sign of goodness and sharing to everyone," she writes, "except those Scrooges of the world."

Remarkable response given all the brouhaha this past holiday season. Surely, some of you come down squarely on the de-Christmas-ing side of the argument. Post your thoughts here -- whether you disagree with these folks or echo their sentiments.

No comments: