Another angle on the "War on Christmas" -- The employees.

[Skinner]

In this whole ridiculous "War on Christmas," my impression is that most (if not all) of the arguments on both sides seem to focus on the either the companies or their customers. For example, the most common argument I hear from our side is, "What if the customer is not Christian?" The obvious argument here is that we live in a multicultural society in which you cannot know the customer's religion, so the customer might get offended, and the company does not want to offend.

As both a company-owner and a consumer (not to mention a secular liberal), I find it very easy to understand this argument. Speaking of my personal feelings, I find it a more compelling argument as a company owner than as a consumer. As a company owner, I do not want to offend my "customers." But as a consumer, I honestly don't give a rat's ass whether a someone wishes me "Happy Holidays," "Season's Greetings," "Merry Christmas," "Happy Hanukkah," "Happy Kwanzaa," or some combination of all those things. There are way more important things for me to worry about than whether someone wishes me the "wrong" holiday greeting. It all just seems like so much BS.

But there seems to be a serious issue here with regard to employees who are expected to say the greeting their employer requires. In my opinion, it is not a big deal to be the recipient of someone else's "incorrect" greeting. But being coerced by your employer to utter a greeting that goes against your own personal or religious beliefs does seem to raise a serious (and possibly constitutional) question.

Some people take their faith very seriously and would likely consider it a violation of that faith to utter a religious greeting that they disagree with. While, IMHO, the various December holiday greetings are so ubiquitous as to be virtually meaningless and devoid of religious content, there are plenty people who do not feel that way. Imagine how a Jewish or Muslim or Non-believing employee might feel if they were required to utter an overtly Christian holiday greeting like, "Jesus is the reason for the season" or "Celebrate the birth of our Lord"? Or imagine if a devout Christian employee were required to wish customers a hearty "Allah Akbar" with each purchase? Does uttering the words "Merry Christmas" rise to the level of being overtly religious? I think that some employees might think so.

I believe that in a diverse and free society like our own, we are not guaranteed the right to completely avoid hearing things that we do not want to hear. Listening to holiday greetings that we don't agree with is part of living in a free and diverse society. But I believe, very strongly, that we do have the right to not be forced to adhere to any religious ritual that we do not agree with. If a Jew or Muslim or Non-believer does not wish to participate in the "ritual" of wishing holiday greetings for a holiday they do not observe, I believe that employers should not require them to do so.

"Happy Holidays" and "Season's Greetings" are a good compromise, IMO. These secularized, catch-all greetings work for the companies, their customers, and the employees.

[G_j]

1. One would think "Holiday" would be enough

www.dictionary.com

Holiday:

Middle English holidai, holy day, from Old English hlig dæg : hlig, holy; see holy + dæg, day; see day.

:shrug:

[indigo32]

2. I think this is a valid point

I really don't care what greeting somebody offers my in the way of holidays.... but to have to say it over and over again.....

[MadisonProgressive]

4. Personally

I don't want them to greet me at all. It is disingenuous because it is a requirement of their job.

[indigo32]

10. Not necessarily

though it could be.
But it isn't worth the effort to get bothered by really, IMO.

[qanda]

3. How about no greeting at all except

Have a nice day. And if the customer says Merry Christmas or whatever then the employee can say, "Same to you."

[kevinbgoode]

8. That won't work. . .because the AFA and Falwell

want them to say "Have a blessed day." I've been greeted with that a few times already. My response has been a quick "thank you" but my blessings are secured from the Flying Spaghetti Monster...though once I said "Thank you, but I'm not shopping here because of interest in your religious beliefs. I consider them deeply personal."

[kevinbgoode]

5. Like most Americans, I have never been bothered by any holy-day greeting

However, what has poisoned this national celebration of peace and goodwill this year is the demand that ONLY one religious belief be recognized in every cultural ritual we engage in anywhere in the country.

For a retailer who has buckled under to the demands of people like Jerry Falwell and the American "Family" Association, this just isn't a good idea. I've emailed several retailers informing them that adhering to religious guidelines issued by these groups violates MY religious beliefs and I feel as if I have to be a card-carrying member of the Liberty Counsel or the AFA in order to take advantage of "Christmas" sales.

As a customer, I strongly resent the implication that retailers not only have to be religiously correct, but follow the demands of fringe groups who believe they alone have been selected to define MY celebrations. This isn't about christianity, because I don't view Falwell and the AFA as representative of christianity - they are more bastardized cults, caricatures of selective interpretation designed to secure money and power rather than protect real values. So when a retailer bows to their demands, I can't help but feel as if walking into their store means I am no longer shopping at Target or Kohls, but an extension of the AFA.

So this is much more than about religious beliefs - it is about the display of coercion inherent in the operations of these groups, and our failure to stand up to them and their constant threats.

By the way - as a sign that these companies don't respect MY beliefs, I've yet to receive even a form letter response to my emails. Obviously you must be a member of the religiously correct crowd to be treated with respect.

[NMDemDist2]

6. Constitutional rights and common sense in one post??

Skinner, how could you!?! :spank:

[Walt Starr]

7. It is most definitely NOT a constitutional issue to require employees

to say "Happy Holidays" or "Merry Christmas". These are private companies and private companies can make requirements which, on their face, might seem to be unconstitutional but in reality are not.

Remember, the constitution protects you from the government. Private corporations are en entirely different thing from a government and as such, are not prohibited by the constitution from controlling the speech of their employees.

An employee who works with the public is a representative of the corporation and as such, may have thier speech regulated. This is established law.

[Skinner]

18. This is true, but there are limits to what private empolyers can do.

I used the term "possibly" because I do not wish to get into an agument over whether this is actually constituational. I seriously doubt that the Supreme Court would ever decide that a private company cannot tell it's employees which holiday greeting to use.

But constitutional or not, there is an ethical issue here. Asking a devoutly religious employee to do something that goes against their faith is, IMHO, coercive and unethical.

(With regard to the constitutional issues, I am no expert on Constitutional law. However I do believe that the Supreme Court has decided that a private employer is not totally free to treat their employees however they wish. For example, it is not legal for (large) companies to discriminate based on religion, provided that religion is not part of the job. In other words, the Catholic Church can discriminate based on religion when selecting priests, but Wal-Mart cannot discriminate based on religion when selecting cashiers. If an employer sets up a requirement for employees which is completely unrelated to their job, and if that requirement has the effect of discriminating against a particular religious group, then the government can disallow that. For example, Wal-Mart cannot have an arbitrary rule that all cashiers must be Christian. Similarly, it cannot have an arbitrary requirement that all employees attend a Christian Church on Sunday, because that would have the same effect as simply discriminating against non-Christians. I would consider this to be a freedom of religion issue rather than a freedom of speech issue. It is true that telling employees that they have to say "Merry Christmas" does not rise to the level of requiring them to attend church on Sunday, and the Supreme Court would likely note that distinction. But ethically they do raise the same issues.)

[Walt Starr]

20. The ethics f the situation is an entirely different matter

and making a requirement like this is certainly unethical.

Of course, by the same token, you would not want your employees wishing your customers a "Happy Savior on a Stick Day" during the Easter season.

[Skinner]

22. LOL

Indeed, I think I would not want my employees to do that. I would agree that employers do have the right to expect that their employees do not piss off the customers.

[drm604]

28. I disagree.

It may not be unconstitutional but I think it would be a violation of civil rights laws. If an employer fires or otherwise discriminates against an employee for refusing to say a greeting that that employee find religiously offensive, then that employer is guilty of religious discrimination in employment. Saying "Merry Christmas" rather than "Happy Holidays" (or even "have a good day!") is not essential to that employee carrying out his or her duties and goes against that employees religious beliefs.

[northzax]

37. I could make the opposite arguement

that an employer can overt prohibit public expression of any religion in the workplace, especially in jobs that have the sole purpose of interacting with the public. A company can tell it's receptionist, for instance, not to say "god bless you" to everyone who calls, if they wish.

[drm604]

42. I would argue

that an employer cannot suppress religious expression that doesn't interfere with the job. If an employee is being obnoxious toward customers then that is interfering with the job in which case an employer can suppress that.

What constitutes being obnoxious in this context is open to debate and I guess has to be decided on a case by case basis. However the opposite case, IMHO, is much more clearcut. I don't see how any reasonable person can honestly argue that refraining from religious expression is being obnoxious toward customers. Of course the world is full of unreasonable and dishonest people.

[spooky3]

48. I agree with you. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) is relevant

and "religious harassment" and "reasonable accommodation of reliegious preferences" seem to be in play.

Here's a place to start for those interested:

http://www.eeoc.gov/types/religion.html

* Employers may not treat employees or applicants less - or more - favorably because of their religious beliefs or practices. For example, an employer may not refuse to hire individuals of a certain religion, may not impose stricter promotion requirements for persons of a certain religion, and may not impose more or different work requirements on an employee because of that employee's religious beliefs or practices.
* Employees cannot be forced to participate -- or not participate -- in a religious activity as a condition of employment.
* Employers must reasonably accommodate employees' sincerely held religious beliefs or practices unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the employer. A reasonable religious accommodation is any adjustment to the work environment that will allow the employee to practice his religion. Flexible scheduling, voluntary substitutions or swaps, job reassignments and lateral transfers and modifying workplace practices, policies and/or procedures are examples of how an employer might accommodate an employee's religious beliefs.
* An employer is not required to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs and practices if doing so would impose an undue hardship on the employers' legitimate business interests. An employer can show undue hardship if accommodating an employee's religious practices requires more than ordinary administrative costs, diminishes efficiency in other jobs, infringes on other employees' job rights or benefits, impairs workplace safety, causes co-workers to carry the accommodated employee's share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work, or if the proposed accommodation conflicts with another law or regulation.
* Employers must permit employees to engage in religious expression if employees are permitted to engage in other personal expression at work, unless the religious expression would impose an undue hardship on the employer. Therefore, an employer may not place more restrictions on religious expression than on other forms of expression that have a comparable effect on workplace efficiency.
* Employers must take steps to prevent religious harassment of their employees. An employer can reduce the chance that employees will engage unlawful religious harassment by implementing an anti-harassment policy and having an effective procedure for reporting, investigating and correcting harassing conduct.

[Neil Lisst]

31. If Congress wanted to assert jurisdiction through the commerce clause

it could easily do so, and prohibit any owner engaged in interstate commerce from requiring any employee to say "Merry Christmas."

Just as the interstate commerce rationale was used against racial and religious discrimination, so it can be used here.

I just want to clear up the statement regarding what is or is not well-established law. While it's well-established law that an employer can control an employee's speech while on the clock, it's also well-established law that if you fire someone for their religious beliefs, your ass is sued under a variety of state and federal causes of action.

And it IS a constitutional issue, because the 14th amendment makes it so.

[Longhorn]

9. As an atheist, "Merry Christmas" didn't mean anything to me.

I said it as I would say, "Happy Holidays." Now after all this "War Against Christmas" BS, I'll make more of a point NOT to say "Merry Christmas."

That's what those folks wanted, right? For us to be sure and be literal about what we say?

[kevinbgoode]

11. Exactly. . .

This was all about shoving their faux religion in our faces, and reminding us that we are going to be FORCED to celebrate their holy day according to their doctrine. . .whether we wish to or not. And since wingnuts regularly try to claim that atheism is a "religion" persecuting christianity, this violates our rights to worship according to our own conscience.

I celebrate how and when I wish - not at the direction of Jerry Falwell or the dictation of the American Family Association. And I don't trade at merchants who, by their acquiescence to these groups' neverending demands, endorse those narrow religious beliefs as preferred by their corporation.

[TahitiNut]

12. As a gentile, I have no problem wishing my Jewish friends ...

... and acquaintances a 'Happy Hanukkah!' For me, expressing a wish for another is best expressed in terms of their faith and their values - NOT MINE. Where the 'audience' is diverse (like for greeting cards), I choose something cross-cultural and then SIGN the card with something specific to the recipient's cultural values. This, for me, applies all year around ... when I wish my Muslim acquaintances a 'Peaceful Ramadan' and my Hindu acquaintances 'Namaste.' It's about giving from a generous spirit ... not proselytizing, imho.

The only people I've ever heard that zealously adhere to their own faith in perfunctory expressions of 'good will' are those who're terminally evangelical ... and that seems to be solely contained within the Christian faith and no other. There's something penurious - stingy - about such a stance. It seems to betray a paucity of generosity.

[Skinner]

21. I also have no problem wishing Jewish people Happy Hanukkah

or wishing anyone whatever greeting is appropriate for their faith or lack thereof.

I also agree that the only people who zealously adhere to their own faith in perfunctory expressions of goodwill are the terminnally evangelical.

However, in both cases -- me the secular liberal, and they the terminally evangelical -- the issue is the same. Letting the individual decide their own actions, free from coersion.

To put it another way: Freedom includes the freedom to be an asshole.

[TahitiNut]

29. When one is in a SERVICE (even for hire) position ...

... I believe it's quite appropriate to 'coerce' an employee to be customer-centric instead of self-centered. (As you may have deduced, I'm a pretty zealous liberal, too!) People whose 'consciences' preclude respecting the cultural preferences of others when being paid to fill a SERVICE role need to reexamine their choice of employment. Absent a knowledge of the faith of the customer, it's entirely appropriate to keep to the secular greeting, imho. It's just a matter of a SERVICE attitude.

Note that I said "absent a knowledge of the faith of the customer." If I were a Wal*Mart 'greeter' (Goddess forbid) and a nun walked in in traditional habit, I'd say "Merry Christmas" even if my employer suggested "Happy Holidays." If a rabbi walked in wearing a yarmulke, I'd happily say "Happy Hanukkah!" If a Muslim woman walked in wearing the head scarf or burka and the time of hear was correct, I'd say "Peaceful Ramadan." (or whatever.) I regard that as obvious and a SERVICE attitude,

This is not unlike the pharmacists who refuse to SERVE their customers' legitimate requests. Nobody is stuffing abortifactants down their throats. They're completely free to guide their own choices for themselves. But when they choose a SERVICE profession, they are obliged to respect the legitimate service requirements of their customers.

What sense would there be in a zealous Christian Scientist choosing to be a surgeon and refusing to operate?

How many of these evangelicals refuse double-time on Sunday? How many of these evangelicals find it so convenient to be dogmatic when its about their own comforts? It seems clear to me that this isn't about faith as much as it's about animosity to "God's children" - the 'sin' that relegated Lucifer to Hell.

In other words, their posturing is secular and political, not religious.

[Skinner]

32. To be clear

I was not arguing that the freedom to be an asshole extends to employment. I was just making a joke. As I said to Walt Starr above, an employer does have the right to expect that their employees won't offend their customers. In that regard, it is perfectly appropriate for employers to ask their employees to use secular holiday greetings, and to not use overtly religious greetings.

[TahitiNut]

33. Agreed.

:thumbsup:

[Mark E. Smith]

13. I must live in another country

... because I can't believe anyone even cares about this supposed controversy.

Do yourself a favor and avoid the Christmas trap. All it does is cause otherwise perfectly sane people to buy useless crap at outrageously marked up prices.

If the people who claim to be so concerned with keeping Christ in Christmas were truly sincere they wouldn't be spending so much of their time looking for Him in shopping malls.

[kevinbgoode]

16. They would be rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast

instead of worrying about which X-Box baby Jesus wants wrapped under their Xmas tree.

[Rainbow gatherer]

14. Let employees say what they wish.

If they want to say thank you, happy holidays or merry Christmas that's okay by me.

Also, I thought the whole idea of globalization was to make us all into McWorkers anyway, maybe this is just one of those things we'll have to get rid of in the future (individuality).

[rateyes]

15. What's wrong with employee's simply saying...

Thank you, and have a nice day. How would that offend anyone?

[Nobody]

17. Yours is the first argument that makes sense

I haven't posted before on this waste of energy before, but it's gotten so far out of hand that now I feel I have to put in my two cents even if it's only to say it's huge effing waste of time.

In a culture where there is (one would hope) religious freedom, a store employee should be able to say whatever appropriate greeting or leave-taking they feel most comfortable with. Since I endure Xmas rather than celebrate it, the idea of forcing me to use a greeting is abhorrent. I won't do it. (To me, this is the Season of Greed, which is something to be mourned, not celebrated)

However, if I hear a Blessed Be, Joyous Solstice, Allah Akbar, Happy Hannukah, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year (which I DO celebrate), my response is NOT to go running to the nearest Dobson clone and whine about my rights being trampled, it is to say "Same to you".

Thanks for remembering the people who have to say a canned phrase. They should be able to say what they want.

[Vinnie From Indy]

19. The ability of the BushCo media to drive debate is astounding

The reality that so many in America are so easily manipulated by the modern scapegoaters and con men is tragic.

It is amusing to see so many Christian Talibanistas frothing over the wording used by commercial interests to sell products. The war on Christmas is just "intelligent design" in a different costume.

[tx_dem41]

23. I'm not sure that its a constitutional question.....

I agree with your assessment of the issue re: business-owner.

As for the employee issue, I'm not sure how it goes against my belief (which are Atheistic) for me to wish someone a "Merry Christmas" or a "Happy Kwanzaa". If I were a Christian, would it be "sinful" to wish someone a "Happy Chanukah"? I don't believe so. I also don't believe that the First Amendment really has much of a role in a employer/employee relationship.

[Skinner]

26. See my answers above, to Walt Starr and Tahiti Nut

With regard to the constitusional issue: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5570194&mesg_id=5570391

With regard to giving people their appropriate greeting: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5570194&mesg_id=5570423

In short, I am also doubtful that this is a constitutional question. And I also have no problem giving people the appropriate greeting, and have difficulty identifying with those who might. The question is whether it is ethical to require a devout believer to give a greeting that they do not believe in.

[suziedemocrat]

24. I think most Christians are just gunning for a fight.

I remember hearing Mitch Miller sing "Happy Holidays" in the 1960's.

Christmas cards have said "Season's Greetings" for decades - at least.

It seems lately these people just want to be pissed off. Almost seems like a sign of desperation. When people start to think they may be wrong, their first reaction seems to be to go to war with everyone who might disagree with them. I think these born-again Christians are really full of guilt for helping elect such an evil president. I mean - you'd REALLY have to have your head in the sand not to think he is evil at this point. They try to rationalize and diffuse their guilt by focusing on ridiculous things - like "Intelligent Design" and "War on Christmas."

[Skinner]

27. I believe it is true that they are gunning for a fight.

But I don't think it's because of guilt. I think it's because they've been manipulated by people who stand to gain from division (and who don't really give a shit about them or about these issues).

[suziedemocrat]

30. I'm so flattered! A reply by Skinner. Of course you are right.

They are being manipulated.

[Skinner]

34. LOL.

Thanks. But I wouldn't get too flattered if I were you. My opinions on this stuff shouldn't be worth more than anyone else's.

[TahitiNut]

35. They aren't.

:evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin:

[Neil Lisst]

25. That was extremely well-written. You need to publish it.

First, you should run it on the main page as an editorial.

Second, submit it for publication to a print publication. It's really dead-on.

From the business owner's perspective, it's about NOT offending customers. From the employee's standpoint, it's about NOT being made to use a greeting they don't personally endorse, one that might have religious overtones.

What the alleged WAR ON CHRISTMAS is really about is politics on the right, trying to appeal to centrists who just want to say MERRY CHRISTMAS. For Fox News, it's about marketing. If you didn't see my BET TV response to Fox News and their War on Christmas coverage, here it is:

[newyawker99]

36. ...

I believe that in a diverse and free society like our own, we are not guaranteed the right to completely avoid hearing things that we do not want to hear. Listening to holiday greetings that we don't agree with is part of living in a free and diverse society. But I believe, very strongly, that we do have the right to not be forced to adhere to any religious ritual that we do not agree with. If a Jew or Muslim or Non-believer does not wish to participate in the "ritual" of wishing holiday greetings for a holiday they do not observe, I believe that employers should not require them to do so.


:thumbsup:

[Toots]

38. What if your employee was saying vote only for Republicans because

Democrats are traitors? Is that acceptable from an employee? IMO an employee must never alienate customers at any time for any reason unless the owner tells them to do so.

[Skinner]

49. I'm fairly certain that freedom of religion does not cover

employees telling customers to only vote for Republicans because Democrats are traitors. Just a hunch, tho.

[Midlodemocrat]

The company I work for has clients of all religious faiths,

as well as secular. We are expected to be respectful of the client's wishes regarding days off, comments about the season, etc., I am very cognizant of this issue because when addressing a Jewish client, I certainly can't say Merry Christmas. I can, however, wish them a Happy Holiday season, as they would to me. I can also wish them Happy Hanukkah, because I am extending to them my wishes that their particular holiday is a joyous one. As a Catholic, this doesn't offend me in the slightest. I don't expect everyone to share my religious beliefs. I don't expect everyone to conform to what I think or believe. I do, however, expect people to treat me and others with courtesy.

[Generic Other]

39. As a teacher I am expected to be inclusive

Happy holidays includes everyone. If Christians can't find it in their hearts to acknowledge they do not have exclusive rights to winter holidays, let them sue for copyright/trademark infringement. I don't think the courts would rule that they OWN any day of the year. I refuse to play their game.

[KoKo]

40. Agree...and thanks for getting to the heart of the issue.

Since I don't watch Faux I didn't get involved in this whole issue about O'Lielly and the rest and this stupid "War on Christmas." I figured it was just hype and I passed by all those threads here on DU about it figuring it was just Faux crap being spread on all the liberal blogs.

Thanks for pointing this out and for addressing it here for those of us who've ignored it. What you say is important. More Repug efforts to keep employees "in line," and to feed their RW Fundie Zealot base.

Kick and recommend!

[Quixote1818]

41. Fantastic Post Skinner. I agree 100% nt

[Blue_Tires]

43. i'm offended by the wreath in skinner's avatar!!

just kidding--good post

[Strong Atheist]

44. There is the same problem with the pledge,

and those of us (like me) who are teachers. I simply always leave out the "under god" part, but say the rest to keep my job. Two people have noticed my omission in the last five years (one a student, the other my team teacher; both very religious). The student question me and I ducked the issue ...

[realFedUp]

45. "Many happy returns"....for the days after....

and in the meantime Congress is pushing through
horrible legislation that will have far more
consequences on all.

[msongs]

46. allah akbar is VERY appropriate for christians to say ..

it is merely arabic language for god is great. what christian disagrees that god is great?
of course if you think there is no god or it is NOT great, having to say this would be
offensive.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[proud2BlibKansan]

47. Like many other American activities, I believe this is all about

the almighty $$$$$. Let's work folks up into a frenzy and while we are at it, we can make some easy money.

I started a thread on this idea last night.http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5569484

[prolesunited]

50. The whole nonsense is VERY divisive

Yesterday, another staff member, who is very conservative and religious, wished someone a Merry Christmas. Normally, I think people tend to not make a big issue out of it and just say, "Thanks, same to you." But, this person felt the need to point out they don't celebrate Christmas, but was quick to add, "I don't want to get into that whole war on Christmas crap" and walked away.

So, all they've managed to do is turn a very pleasant exchange into a very awkward moment. Personally, I'm just not saying anything to anybody. How's that for the holiday spirit?!?!?

[RoyGBiv]

51. A coercion question ...

Until yesterday when some idiot I encountered went off on an ill-conceived rant about how he couldn't find any greeting cards at Hallmark that said "Merry Christmas" on them -- which was a lie -- I have blissfully ignored this whole thing. My view is that this is an issue invented by right-wing nutjobs and that the more sane among us have for some reason been led like sheep to slaughter to start arguing about it, thus legitimizing it. So I suppose, in part because we didn't treat it as the ridiculous non-issue it is, it's here, and it's real *now*.

So, with Skinner's thoughts in mind, can anyone tell me what companies are coercing their employees to utter "Merry Christmas," or any overtly religious phrase, to their customers. I am not doubting some of these companies exist; I just have never encountered one. I don't want examples of an employee uttering the phrase. I want examples of company policy *requiring* that employee to utter the phrase.

Every job I have ever had has been a customer-contact job. Some in days past were with large corporations with a policy for everything. Others were with privately owned businesses that had policies for weird things. I now work for an enormous corporation that, again, has a policy for everything. I have never even seen a hint of such a policy. Until last year, the guidelines for what to say to customers during the holidays at my current job was the same as what we were supposed to say in the middle of August. "Always thank the customer for their business."

Now, last year, after someone in another state issued a complaint that somehow made its way to the corporate offices of being offended by the phrase "Merry Christmas" being uttered by an employee, we were issued a memo regarding a new policy on what to say to customers during the holidays. We were not outright forbidden from saying "Merry Christmas" but were encouraged to find alternate, secular phrases unless we were certain the customer would not be offended by our remarks, such as responding to a "Merry Christmas" issued from the customer first. But, the bottom line remains. We are not required to say anything about the holidays at all. Again, why is this an issue?

On a related note and referring to Skinner's initial comments, if we truly lived in an inclusive society, we would not be offended by what others offer to us as greetings during the holidays because we would recognize that person was offering us what they considered a friendly expression tantamount to a blessing for good times and a good life. It doesn't matter at all if we believe in the utility of such blessings; it's a gesture of that person's culture intended to convey good tidings. I have little in the way of a recognized religious affiliation; what's there merely lingers from my childhood brainwashing in a "fire and brimstone" church. I celebrate holidays of all varieties in my own way and always have grew my own consciousness. But, during this time of year, I regularly encounter people who tell me "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Hanukkah" or "Happy Kwanzaa and Merry Christmas." One of my neighbors always tells me "Merry Winter Solstice" on that day. I am neither Christian, nor Jewish, nor African-American, nor Pagan. Regardless, I am not offended by any of this, nor should I be. These people are just being friendly. What's offensive about that?

[BR_Parkway]

52. Good point and druggists can refuse to prescribe things based on

their religious views and those idiotic companies claim that it's in defense of their freedom of religion rights. Like most things involving KKKristians in this country - it only means what they want it to mean, when the need it to mean something.

[bloom]

53. Consider this

I was an employee at a greeting card company. The company started out being pretty secular and then started becoming more mainstream which meant that they started having more and more cards that were specific to various religions - esp. Christianity - since Christians are the majority of buyers. For Christmas, we had cards that provided people with just about any kind of greeting they might want - from your standard "Merry Christmas" /"Happy Holidays" - to various humorous sentiments or just blank cards.

If someone had a problem working on cards that were secular or a particular religion - I never heard about it. Some people were thrilled to work on Kwanzaa cards - because they wanted to explore something different. It was convenient having a person work there who considered herself a witch when it came to making Halloween cards - she had a different take on it than your average person. We all had training in Jewish religious traditions - because it was apparent that most of us didn't know enough about it.

Having said that - I would avoid working for a company that was overtly religious - with Bible verses on all the cards. And card companies who are specifically Jewish hire people who have more knowledge about the Jewish religion than what I have.


I have become more secular over the years. I consider religions to be interesting - but there are many things about religion - like divisiveness - that I find disturbing. Having been raised in the tradition of sending cards to friends and relatives, however - sometimes as the only means of staying in touch with people that I rarely see - I hate it when Christmas/Holiday/? becomes an issue. Since I design my own cards - it's really annoying to think that I can't have a greeting that will just be a friendly greeting - that some people would want to make a federal case out of it.

To me - that is the damaging thing - the strain on people who are just trying to keep up connections. The "War on Christmas"* is working against those connections and working toward divisiveness. I don't see anything positive about it for anybody. (And to me - it just makes religion seem even less appealing).


The "War on Christmas"* would have to be against a company like the one I worked for - which tried to make cards with a broad appeal (our target market was college-educated women). I guess people who support the "war" want companies to be clearly "Christian" or clearly "Jewish" or "Muslim" or "Pagan" or clearly "None of the Above" - and who are exclusive of others. To be multicultural - to think multiculturally is bad.

Lakoff laid that out - back in '95 - in his:

http://www.wwcd.org/issues/Lakoff.html

Metaphor, Morality, and Politics,
Or,
Why Conservatives Have Left Liberals In the Dust

"From the perspective of these metaphors, multiculturalism is immoral, since it permits alternative views of what counts as moral behavior. Multiculturalism thus violates the binary good-evil distinction made by Moral Strength. It violates the well-defined moral paths and boundaries of Moral Bounds. Its multiple authorities violate any unitary Moral Authority. And the multiplicity of standards violates Moral Wholeness."



* When I refer to the "War on Christmas" - I am referring to the "War" that O'Reilly promotes. I consider him and his ilk to be completely responsible for the "war". Those of us who use various greetings are not at "war" with anyone as far as I'm concerned.

[The Straight Story]

54. Hell they can fire a person for smoking at home

They will win I am sure to be able to fire people who don't say the things they want them to say.

I liked what you wrote though, and agree with it myself. Employers, it seems to me, have more rights over a person than they should. It should be simple - show up, do the job, go home.