Christmas Trees Return to Seattle Airport

By Jeralyn, Section Civil Liberties
Posted on Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 10:36:49 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The threat of a lawsuit has been removed and the Christmas trees have been restored to the Sea-Tac airport.

At Chabad-Lubavitch in Seattle, the Jewish Orthodox educational group that had asked the airport to add the menorah, hate messages soon flooded e-mail inboxes. The group, which had never asked for the trees to be removed, was accused by some of trying to steal Christmas. It quickly dropped its talk of a lawsuit and joined those asking the airport to bring back the trees. That, the airport said, freed it to put them back up.

“By no means did we want to take away any religious symbols or trees from any other culture,” said Elazar Bogomilsky, the Chabad rabbi who is listed as the lead plaintiff on a draft lawsuit that has not been filed....Mr. Reis said, “The rabbi never said, ‘We want to take the trees down.’ That was purely our reaction when we felt we’d been put in an untenable position.”

Don't blame the rabbi. Blame the Port of Seattle for the fiasco.

"This has been an unfortunate situation for all of us in Seattle," Port of Seattle Commission President Pat Davis said in a statement. "The rabbi never asked us to remove the trees; it was the Port's decision based on what we knew at the time. We very much appreciate the rabbi's willingness to work with us as we move forward."

< Immigration Raids: 1,000 ICE Agents Hit Greeley, CO | Sad and Correct >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Christmas Trees Return to Seattle Airport | 34 comments (34 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Victory for Christmas!!! (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by Slado on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 08:02:31 AM EST

Seriously this appears to be a big misunderstanding and the media typically turned the story into what they wanted it to be about instead of what it was about.

You can't deny that some in this country are over run with PC feelings when they force school plays to change the words to christmas songs and big corporations turn their season slogans to Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas etc...

However, if christians are so offended that the overblown overdone holiday that is Christmas is being turned into even more of a pagan ritual then it already is I always think to myself....when did they start noticing?

Christmas is about the birth of Christ. That it has become a national holiday that starts in November (I refuse to put up my lights until December 1st) only shows that its already out of control and to start complaining now that Wal-Mart or JC Penny isn't saying Merry Christmas when they push cheap goods on us seems to miss the point.

Is their attack on the comercialized Christmas. Yes. Has there been an attack on the real Christmas from Christians, non Christians and America as a whole since god knows when? Yes.

I don't mean to preach because I'm as guilty as the next guy but when you skip your church service to make sure you have time to open presents in the morning I find it quite hypocritical to then complain about an attack on Christmas.

: PC? BS! (none / 0) (#27)
by LarryE on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 07:13:06 PM EST

they force school plays to change the words to christmas songs
Sorry, Slado, that was just another myth perpetrated by brain-dead wingnuts and their new God, Bill O'Reilly.
The real story is that a Christian minister wrote a Christmas play intended for, and to be acted by, children. He used Christmas carols for melodies for the songs he wrote for the play because he figured the children would already know those melodies, making the songs easier to learn and perform.

actually, blame the lawyer (none / 0) (#1)
by lsumbc on Tue Dec 12, 2006 at 11:01:44 PM EST

It was the lawyer that threatened the lawsuit, without the explicit consent of his client. I can't say he (or she) acted wrongly, either; just a strategic miscalculation. (And as a result, his client got hate mail.) So kick it into damage control mode, and no harm done.

so................. (none / 0) (#2)
by cpinva on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 02:40:23 AM EST

are they putting a menorah up as well, which was the point of the whole thing?

also, blame the media, who wasn't able to get a simple thing like distinguishing between the rabbi's very reasonable request (place symbols representing all current religious holidays, on public property, or none at all), and a lawyer disconnected from his client.

religious vs. cultural (none / 0) (#3)
by roy on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 07:59:51 AM EST

Christmas trees are often considered cultural symbols, not religious symbols. So the port had "none at all" in place previously. The rabbi or his lawyer didn't realize that (understandably, it's a fine line and not everybody agrees) and threatened to sue, and the port overreacted.

The menorah, however, is a religious symbol. Just like a nativity scene. So adding a menorah would have crossed the line from "none" to "one".

(This is top of the head stuff, I could easily be missing something about this particular incident)


: Christmas a "cultural" holiday??? (none / 0) (#25)
by squeaky on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 06:06:14 PM EST

Christmas trees are often considered cultural symbols,
You have to be joking. Maybe before Christ was born, Christmas trees were just pagan trees, but not now, not in this country.
Roy, the tip off is that they are called "Christmas " trees.

Great article (none / 0) (#5)
by hanukkah on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 08:55:47 AM EST

There is a great article from Chabad regarding this at http://www.chabad.org/455712

slado (none / 0) (#6)
by cpinva on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 09:45:54 AM EST

that "pc" crap is a bill "i am in desperate need of ratings" o'reilly fantasy. stores are private enterprises, they can say/do pretty much whatever they want. if they choose "merry christmas" or not, that's their decision, not the court's or aclu's. businesses do what they think is best for their bottom line, bill o'reilly be damned.

as for publicly funded activities, the establishment clause rules.

myself, i've yet to see any signs of a "war on christmas". if there is one, it's being pretty damn low key.

roy, in this country, the christmas tree is exactly that, and always has been; a symbol of the christian celebration of christmas. yeah, i know, some people leave them up year-round, but they're the exception to the rule. to argue otherwise is to defy reality.

I must be unique then..... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by kdog on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 10:32:56 AM EST

I put up a Christmas Tree every year, but I ain't no Christian. The family gets together to exchange gifts...the beer and wine flows and the smoke rises...we feast on a big pork roast. God or Jesus or Christianity ain't got nothing to do with it.

I don't think me and my family are the only ones celebrating the secular version of Christmas. I mean, who sees a Christmas Tree and thinks of Jesus? Not me, I think of Santa and Rudolph and Frosty...and I think most other people do too, except for the real holy-rollers.


: You're not unique (none / 0) (#9)
by roy on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 10:39:31 AM EST

I'm an atheist -- and kind of obnoxious about it -- and I still love Christmas trees. Christmas is about family, food, and keeping retail stores in the black. Marking the wrong date of birth of somebody I don't believe in is not a priority.

: Me too. (none / 0) (#13)
by aw on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 12:16:38 PM EST

We've come full circle, from those pagan roots, then Roman Catholic, than Protestant, and now, back to paganism again. It suits me just fine.
God Jul!

Damn things should not be there at all (none / 0) (#7)
by DavidDvorkin on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 10:03:05 AM EST

No matter what the Supreme Court or anyone else says, a Christmas tree is a religious symbol and does not belong on public property. The same applies to lights.

"It's just the holiday season." What holiday is that? A Christian holiday.

"It's all pagan in origin, anyway." So paganism isn't a religion?

: I disagree..... (none / 0) (#10)
by kdog on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 10:43:24 AM EST

The Christmas Tree is a secular cultural symbol with religous origins, be they pagan or christian.
I know Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and Atheists who put up Christmas trees and celebrate it as a secular holiday.
Granted, none of these people are fundamentalists or extremists.

: Establishment Clause (none / 0) (#11)
by Gabriel Malor on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 10:48:06 AM EST

The Constitution does not ban religious symbols on public property. It only prevents the government from establishing a religion.
Now, your personal feelings may be different. I know there is a certain kind of athiest who wants to ban all public displays of religion. Thankfully, the Constitution protects us from that type of person.
Also, the "same applies" to lights? If there's some doubt about whether trees are a religious symbol (as opposed to creche scenes and menoras which are clearly religious in nature), I'd think that'd go double for lights strung up during the holiday season.

Alright (none / 0) (#12)
by peacrevol on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 12:09:20 PM EST

Is anybody really offended when they see a Christmas tree? If so, are they offended when they see pumpkins on Halloween? What about Easter Bunnies on Easter? Flags on the 4th of July? Turkeys or those cone shaped things filled with fruit on Thanksgiving? Holidays have symbols and the symbol for Christmas is a tree with lights and ornaments.

You know, now that I think about it, the word 'holiday' comes from the old english word holidai - or holy day. Holy relates to religion. I propose that we strike the word 'holiday' from the English language.

Personally, I couldnt really care less if they put up a Christmas tree on public property or not. Furthermore, I couldnt care less if they put up a menorah either. And I think most people are alright with that.

I think Slado is right about the media blowing this thing out of proportion. That seems to happen a lot these days.

Well said p..... (none / 0) (#14)
by kdog on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 12:34:41 PM EST

If we striken from the cultural record everything with a religous conotation or origin...there would not be much left.

Fabricated indeed.....


Taking offense. (none / 0) (#16)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 12:51:41 PM EST

Is anybody really offended when they see a Christmas tree?

Zogby polling shows an overwhelming majority (95%) say they are not offended by being greeted with a "Merry Christmas" while shopping, including 98% for weekly Wal-Mart shoppers. But greet them with a "Happy Holidays," and 46% say they take offense. The Zogby Interactive poll surveyed 12,806 adults between Nov. 21-29 and has a margin of error of +/- 0.9 percentage points.
Of course, not everyone will be excited to hear more "Merry Christmas" greetings this season. One in three respondents who identified themselves as Jewish (32%) said they were upset by hearing "Merry Christmas" as were 10% of those of non-Christian faiths or who did not identify themselves with a religion. Democrats are more likely to take offense at "Merry Christmas" (8%) compared with fewer than 1% of Republicans and 1% of Independents.
While "Happy Holidays" is a greeting intended to appeal to everyone, retailers' efforts to avoid offending anyone may have backfired. More than half of those polled (51%) said they are bothered by store clerks who greet customers with "Happy Holidays" in an effort to help stores be politically correct. For some shoppers, a clerk who says "Happy Holidays" might as well be saying "Don't shop here" - 36% say they have avoided shopping at a store or have cut their visit short after being greeted with a "Happy Holidays" instead of a "Merry Christmas." That figure jumps to 41% for weekly Wal-Mart shoppers and 42% for those older than 65.

Oh my (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by LarryE on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 07:19:15 PM EST

36% say they have avoided shopping at a store or have cut their visit short after being greeted with a "Happy Holidays" instead of a "Merry Christmas."

That's just idiotic.

A question for any of those people: If it's okay for you to be offended by "Happy Holidays," is it okay for someone else to be offended by "Merry Christmas?"

If so, what's your beef?

If not, why not? Why are your preferences more important than others'? (And no, just saying "there are more of us" won't fly.)


PC Police (none / 0) (#32)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 07:07:07 AM EST

The issue is the PC police forbidding the use of the "Merry Christmas" greeting.

Just as it would be if the reverse were true.

This country has slid into a pile of people who get insulted at every opportunity. Take a look at:

"The rabbi never said, `We want to take the trees down.' That was purely our reaction when we felt we'd been put in an untenable position."

Shorter. We'll sue if we don't get what we want.

The country is getting tired of this. It's time for lawyers to tell clients to consider carefully before taking actions. And it is time for everyone to celebrate their own holidays and shut up about others.


: Wrong (none / 0) (#33)
by squeaky on Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 11:13:40 AM EST

The country is getting tired of this.

No PPJ, the country has gotten tired of religious freaks sticking their nose in where it doesn't belong.
This is just blowback against the religious right who has lost its grip on America.
Did you not notice the mid-term elections or are you just relishing in a state of denial.

Anybody offended by "Happy Holidays"... (none / 0) (#17)
by Dadler on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 01:28:17 PM EST

...is as big an idiot as anyone who thinks there's a war on Christmas.

This is a fake issue created by people who are scarcely more real. At least in terms of brainpower.


War on Christmas = Global Warming? (none / 0) (#19)
by Slado on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 02:49:47 PM EST

You sound just like me when I complain about global warming Dadler :-'

It's a Christmas Miracle!


: You don't talk about Global Warming (none / 0) (#31)
by Dadler on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 10:14:07 PM EST

You rant in a reactionary and irrational fashion about about it -- as if scientists withOUT a clear financial conflict of interest are to be mistrusted and feared and ridiculed for their...lack of a conflict of interest.
It's batty. What else are you going to pooh-pooh science on? Gravity? Evolution? Carbon monoxide fumes?
And I may be pissy, but I still wish you a season of peace and joy and prosperity.

Offense = Freedom (none / 0) (#21)
by kdog on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 03:09:27 PM EST

If you aren't offended by something you see or hear quite regularly, I doubt you live in a free society.

Freedom is not free, this is part of the sacrifice...putting up with things that offend you. If it's a Christmas Tree you find offensive, or a lack of one....just suck it up and chalk it up as a cost of living free.


My Dutch family (none / 0) (#24)
by dutchfox on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 04:21:22 PM EST

gets a kick out of the "Happy Holidays" greeting, because in NL, it means "Have a happy vacation." When my cousin was 'on holiday' in the USA one December, she was greeted with Happy Holidays everywhere she shopped. "How do they know I'm on holiday?" she wrote me. :)


Christmas in America... (none / 0) (#15)
by Dadler on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 12:43:41 PM EST

...Has little to do with Jesus's birth -- whomever he actually was or wasn't. The date was picked to coincide with a pagan holiday, so as to attract more converts. Christmas here has more to do with Saint Nicholas, Bishop of Myra, a 4th century Turk who had a reputation for secret gift-giving, but is now commonly identified with Santa Claus, Father Christmas or in the Netherlands and northern Belgium as Sint-Nicolaas or Sinterklaas.

If people and organizations wish... (none / 0) (#18)
by Bill Arnett on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 01:28:36 PM EST

...to join in with the ever more strident commercialization of Christmas, I say go ahead.

I think it just imposes another artificial barrier between people who celebrate X-mas and those that don't.

I stopped participating in the sham years and years ago and found that my stress levels went down considerably, because the holiday now represents big-time sales opportunities for merchants, the marginalizing of those who do not or cannot participate for whatever reason, and it further stigmatizes the poor and alienates those of different religions.

But, hey, if you enjoy it, go for it.

How (none / 0) (#20)
by Wile ECoyote on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 03:01:47 PM EST

does is stigmatize the poor?


: My take.... (none / 0) (#22)
by kdog on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 03:20:26 PM EST

Nothing reminds you of being poor faster than Lil Johnny asking for something for Christmas that all his friends have that you can't afford. Or worse yet, not being able to afford any gifts at all.
May not seem like a big deal, but it hurts none the less. And Lil Johnny knows he is different than the other kids.
The dark side of the holiday season...

The paranoid appeal? (none / 0) (#23)
by dab on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 03:28:13 PM EST

I see this whole affair as a combination of a tactical error that led to being hung out to dry in a public relations coup.

The error: the rabbi's timing: this issue should have been raised many months ago if it was important to him, and now was a particularly bad time to threaten a lawsuit.

The public relations coup: I don't buy for a second that the trees were taken down because there simply was not enough time to accomodate members of other religious groups. Notice how fast the trees were taken down and put back up despite this busy time of year.

Taking down the trees had the desired effect of generating public outrage by invoking the "paranoid style" Big Tent Democrat likes to write about, i.e. Christians' culture and values are under attack in America. They had to know that the rabbi would back down in the face of public outcry about him being the grinch.

The justification that putting up a menorah would require them to engage a cultural anthropologist is disingenuous. Why would the airport be more at risk for putting up the symbols of two faiths, rather than just one? If some other group requested to display its symbols, they could have done that in either case. If not, no harm done either way.

I am surprised (perhaps naively) that the media has almost uniformly (and uncritically) participated in spreading the "war on Christmas" propaganda the airport so deftly set up.

In my view, no one is hurt by displaying the symbols of more than one group. As for the religious nature of symbols, the Supreme Court has held that both the Christmas tree and menorah have some component of non-religious significance. Isn't American society built on respecting and accomodating differing belief systems and cultures?

I think this situation is an example of a lawyer and client getting wacked in the public relations battle.

To get Xtians to sh*t themselves.. (none / 0) (#26)
by jondee on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 06:49:00 PM EST

Just put a Star of David at the top. Maybe add a few Ganeesh and Kuan Yin ornaments while you're at it.

How tolerant of you. (none / 0) (#29)
by Gabriel Malor on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 08:13:03 PM EST

Real font of liberal tolerance we got goin' here.


: Give it (none / 0) (#30)
by Edger on Wed Dec 13, 2006 at 08:18:03 PM EST

up, Gabe.

Well, Hawaii managed to work it out - regardless (none / 0) (#34)
by Kitt on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:58:14 AM EST

of the timing (see dab's comment above).

Despite a dustup in Seattle over whether Christmas trees and menorahs have a place in that city's airport, both were put up this season at airports throughout the Hawaiian islands without controversy.