Dark Knight said:Speaking as a Catholic, my religious viewpoint has always been that a Christmas tree is religious in nature, not secular. The evergreen represents the everlasting life Jesus gives us, and the tree itself is a harbinger of the tree that Jesus was crucified on for our sins. So even though legally it is secular, for some Christians it isn't.
And Kwanzaa isn't even a religious holiday! It's a modern-day rip-off of Judaism/Hannukah with their own version of a menorah, etc. I always found the mimicking of Hannukah and the timing of it to be offensive. The founder could have chosen any number of ways to celebrate black history.
It's also offensive that the court called menorah's not sufficiently religious, and I have heard many Jewish people say the same thing. It represents a miracle of God, how could it not be religious????? :doh:
DK, I don't understand the ruling re the menorah either. My guess is the Court couldn't find an equivalent, secular symbol for Hannukah. (How many people know what Chanukah Charlie looks like?) So the Court decided to stretch its definition of secular.
Kwanzaa offensive because it borrowed from Judaism? Then I assume you find Christmas equally offensive since the date, tree and lots of other symbolism now associated with the holiday were borrowed from other, older religious traditions. Easter's another "ripped off" holiday. (Not to mention how much of Christian theology was borrowed from Zoroastrianism.) Glad to know you're consistent.