
There was a so-called “war on Christmas” long before Bill O'Reilly and friends went mainstream with it a few years ago. I should know. I worked in the ACLU’s Philadelphia office in the mid-1990’s, and it was my job to open the hate mail. Most of it arrived during the month of December in the form of Christmas cards. Nice picture of Mary and the Baby Jesus on the cover. Scrawled scathing message encouraging us to burn in hell or die painfully on the inside. Joy to the world, indeed.
It was all because of that pesky First Amendment. “Separation of church and state” typically meant your courthouse couldn’t have a crèche on its front lawn. (Unless you go this route.) Our lawyers were much busier with other pursuits -- helping the woman who'd been evicted over her boyfriend's race or the man with Down syndrome who wasn't allowed to ride a merry-go-round at a local amusement park. Crèche-busting typically required a few phone calls in the middle of a hectic afternoon, then they’d move on. But that’s what gained us the most notoriety.
Our lawyers didn’t mind the hate mail. Some of them thrived on it, in fact. These were people who loved a good fight; being told to burn in hell just meant they were doing their job. I didn’t take it personally either. But it did make me think. I’d just be sitting there at my cluttered desk in my little hippie skirt making my little $20K a year and listening to my little mix tape, wondering what sort of Christian would think I deserved endless pain just for showing up and doing my little support staff job that day.
And what a job it was. Our office of ten people served all of Pennsylvania. There were two or three lawyers in Philly, another one in Pittsburgh. Phones rang all day long. Mail poured in. I did everything from photocopying to event planning to producing a newsletter. There were some exciting days, being in the midst of important cases and press conferences. There were downright degrading days, dealing with big egos and unkind words from our superstar freedom fighters. But there were plenty of slow, peaceful days, too.
That’s how it was right before Christmas Eve that year. My major projects were finished for the time being. No fires to put out. My mom was coming that night to take me out to dinner and give me a lift home for the holidays. I was clearing up some of the months-old clutter on my desk when I heard some bustling in the foyer area.
I saw Frank, our long-time senior citizen volunteer receptionist, sitting at his desk and speaking earnestly with a young man wrapped in a coat while two small children, a boy and a girl, squirmed in our uncomfortable waiting-room chairs. Each child was holding a gorgeous oversized mesh plastic “stocking” stuffed with toys, clearly yearning to open them but showing remarkable restraint.
Except for the children, it was a familiar scene. All sorts of folks dropped in on our office from time to time, seeking help. Frank would listen patiently to every word of their stories before he would purposefully explain, in his Jim-Ignatowski-meets-Grandpa-Simpson manner, that the ACLU does not handle such cases and refer them to an agency that did. Sometimes they’d get angry, but Frank took the verbal abuse stoically, patiently listening again before restating his position. And listening. And restating. Eventually they’d move on.
But this family was different. From what I was overhearing, this was clearly not a situation the ACLU could help with in an official capacity. But Frank didn’t give him the speech. He kept listening. He kept asking questions. The children got antsier and louder as the conversation continued. Some of us came into the waiting area and tried to keep them entertained with whatever random toys we had on our desks. Stress balls. A Marge Simpson doll. Finally, their dad gave them the go-ahead to open the stockings, and merry chaos broke out.
In the midst of all that, our Legal Director and chief crèche-buster came blustering out of his office on some unrelated matter. He asked Frank what was going on, and Frank discreetly explained. This family had nowhere to sleep tonight. They’d been staying with a friend of the dad, but they couldn’t go back there now. The friend molested the little girl. The lawyer’s tone shifted in a way I’d never heard before, from busy and important to sincere kindness and concern. He invited the young dad into his office.
Which left the babysitting to the rest of us. But no one seemed to mind. Children rarely made an appearance in our office, and they lightened the mood considerably. They pulled crayons and containers of Play Doh from their stockings, and we all got creative together. We made up games and let them run up and down the long hallway.
The meeting went on for most of an hour. Our Legal Director was on and off the phone, networking with his colleagues in social services, tracking down a place for this family to stay. Finally, he was able to line something up. We helped the children gather up their stockings, got them into their coats, and off they went into the Philadelphia winter dusk. I tried to swallow the lump in my throat as I picked the squished Play Doh bits from our waiting-room carpet. Sweet little girl. Who knew what was going to happen to her? It broke my heart just to think about it. But at least she had somewhere safe to go on Christmas Eve.
The “Very Special Christmas Episode” message here is probably pretty obvious, but it bears repeating: The ACLU may have caused the relocation of a few plaster Mary-and-Josephs that year. But an ACLU lawyer also found this real-life unfortunate family some room at the Inn. And with all due respect to Mr. Schulz, I’d like to suggest that that’s what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown.
Dedicated to the memories of Stefan Presser, Larry Frankel, and Frank Kent.
A version of this post originally appeared on my personal blog: http://www.floorpie05.blogspot.com/


Salon.com
Comments
I think my favorite Christmas cartoon is the desk clerk at the inn waiting on the three kings. "No we don't have any rooms, but there are some Jews staying out back. If you like I'll throw them out for you!
I will point out that the first amendment does not say separation of church and state nor the idea that people of faith do not have a voice in the political and social arena. The phrase "separation of church and state" is from a private correspondence from Jefferson to a group who feared a national religion comparable to the church of England was being created. The context from my understanding was Jefferson was saying the wall was to keep the state out not remove faith or belief from society. Many people are surprised that the term is not found in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
Do not get me wrong I agree with Jefferson's view that the government is to be neutral and stay out of private matters of faith. The first amendment is two fold. The government is to not establish a religion and the government is not to impede the free exercise of religion. Maintaining this balance is not always an easy thing and sometimes both ideas are violated.
I do not believe there is a war on Christmas and the idea of saying merry Christmas has become a superficial loyalty oath reminiscent of the communist witch hunts of the 50s. All said and done people can celebrate Christmas or not celebrate anyway they want. If someones faith and holiday is dependent on what happens at the mall or what kind of Christmas displays are put up then in my opinion their faith is on pretty shaky ground.
I disagree with the ACLU that religious displays are a violation since in my view that only show the historical culture of the majority of the nation who celebrates Christmas. The display is not proselytizing or prohibiting others from their faith or lack of it. There is a 138 year old historical precedence of celebrating Christmas as a nation which has maintained a pretty good balance between both parts of the First amendment.
It, in fact, reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1)
After you've read it, re-read it. Does it really say that public buildings can't display a cross or a creche? Shakespeare was right. (Henry the Sixth)
"After you've read it, re-read it. Does it really say that public buildings can't display a cross or a creche? Shakespeare was right. (Henry the Sixth)"
what if they want to put up a sign like this?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28072481/
oh right, it gets stolen. right on, christians!
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Yes, the First Amendment does not use the phrase “Separation of Church and State”. The phase was taken from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to a Baptist congregation in Connecticut. He was responding to their fears that their state legislature would view their form of Christianity as a privilege and not a right and therefore would at their leisure restrict their right to worship as they wished. The mentioned passage of Jefferson letter is below. It is important to understand that Jefferson in crafting his response was only referring to the fact that Federal Governments could not abridge someone’s right to worship as they wish. Why? Because the Bill of Rights were only limits on the Federal Government. States at this time were free to restrict any of the rights that we as American hold so dearly. It was not until after the end of the Civil War with the passage of the 14th Amendment that the Bill of Rights protections were extended to citizens from States encroachment. Of course this was never truly enforced until a series of decision made by the Warren Court about 90 years later.
“I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State..."
Thomas Jefferson, 1802
So why do we have the Separation Clause? Simple, judges look at legislative intent in framing a law or in this case an amendment to the Constitution. In this, Jefferson’s letter provides the intent that our founding fathers had in the creation of the First Amendment. We can see further evidence of the intent of the First Amendment below. Madison also saw the danger of any religion gaining a hold within a government. I believe that they and the Supreme Court are correct in keeping a church any church as far away from the State as possible. No one’s right to worship is infringed. In fact, it has the opposite effect. When the rights of the tiniest of minorities are protected so are all of our rights.
"Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history."
President James Madison, 1810
This is way an organization like the American Civil Liberty Union is so important. They are one of a handful of organizations that will represent some very unpopular views to ensure that all of our rights are protected. It is also why I contribute to their efforts on our behalf every year. Toby, thank you for your post and your work with the ACLU. Rated.
Granted when the founding fathers began this country it was for the most part Christian and the respect of other faiths was sort of a moot point. I think the work of the ACLU is in most part sound and important. And I do not feel they are anti Christian or religion. But, I also think they pick some pretty weak arguments such as removing religious symbols throughout the community.
My personal opinion is allowing communities to express their religious heritage is not endorsing or proselytising. I find it hard to believe that someone is going to drop the ground and accept Jesus for seeing a manger or convert to Judaism from viewing a menorah. The season being celebrated is Christmas for 99.9% of the people. It has a historical context for this nation since 1870 and is a national holiday. For some it is overtly religious and for others it is secular holiday, but to act like it is some no named generic holiday is historically incorrect.