It’s Christmas season.

Family time, gift-giving, cold weather, and delicious food. It seems we’re also faithfully observing another annual tradition: That of **fighting over the season’s name**.

The Globe and Mail serves up [this year's main installment](http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20051125.wtreeptr1125/BNStory/Front/):

“Regarding the Christmas tree generously donated by Nova Scotia, I hope we can all celebrate it. Nonetheless, this tree is on public property and supported largely by tax dollars from many who vehemently support the separation of church and state,” said another in an e-mail.

I get nervous seeing a statement like this. It seems to follow the form of “I don’t necessarily feel X, but there’s a possibility that a member of group Y might, therefore Z.”

It states a possible viewpoint of an imaginary individual. *It’s an impenetrable argument!*

How do I even go about rebutting it? Make up more fictitious people with opinions and tastes that I can state without having to defend or take responsibility for? Discuss whether calling the tree “Christmas” really infringes upon the agnosticism of the state? It’s like a debate-club disaster.

No one wants to exclude the silent minority, fine. But does any other culture on earth make policy decisions on this kind of basis?
“Seasons Greetings” may sound pretentious and silly, but it *is* somewhat more understandable for corporate and political America; various celebrations are held around the winter solstice. But to call a [Christmas tree](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_tree) a “Holiday Tree” is _factually incorrect_. And anyone who busts out the “pagan traditions” argument can call it a Yule Tree or Life Tree, in celebration of those traditions.

Maybe as a 170 lb middle-class white Christian male, I’m just a little jealous. But let’s call a duck a duck this Christmas.

And have a merry one,

Mike

← Earlier Later → Posted at 9:19 pm to Christianity, Musings.