The Christmas season is a lonely time of year for those who believe in nothing. Most, however, manage to get by without having to lash out at believers. But not the Freedom from Religion Foundation. In 2008, this group took its campaign to Olympia, Washington, and this past year, the religion haters took their show on the road to Springfield, Illinois. Here is what their sign said:
There are no gods / No devils / no angels / No heaven or hell. / There is only our natural world. / Religion is but / Myth and superstition / That hardens hearts / And enslaves minds.
By contrast the American Humanist Association’s campaign was not anti-religion; it was simply pro-atheism. Nonetheless, its timing was clearly designed to compete with Christmas. It said, “No God…No Problem!”
It is not clear how many believers, if any, would be persuaded to change their minds and start to believe in nothing. It seems more likely that these anti-Christmas campaigns were directed at fellow atheists: they functioned as a collective psychological massage.
We suggested that they stop at the nearest saloon for a few pints—it’s cheaper and promises to be the best feel-good exercise imaginable. But here’s the hitch: it wouldn’t offend anyone.
http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst.php?year=2010&month=January-February&read=2720
This poster was found at atheism.about.com. It leaves no doubt as to the motivation of many atheists, and how they want to remove religion from Christmas.
http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst.php?year=2006&month=December&read=2170
A Cincinnati attorney is suing the United States government because Christmas is recognized as a legal holiday. Richard Ganulin filed suit yesterday in U.S. District Court arguing that it is unconstitutional for Congress to proclaim Christmas as a national holiday. In his lawsuit, Ganulin said that because he does not celebrate Christmas or the birth of "Jesus Christ" (his quotes), he is "consequently damaged" by enforcement of the law.
Catholic League president William Donohue aired his views in today’s edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer and now offers the following additional remarks:
"Ganulin doesn’t have a leg to stand on. In 1984, in Lynch v. Donnelly, the U.S. Supreme Court said that the ‘Christmas holiday in our national culture contains both secular and sectarian elements.’ Five years later, in Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU, the high court declared that both Christmas and Hanukkah ‘are part of the same winter holiday season, which has attained a secular status in our society.’
"In short, while the Supreme Court knows that the origin of Christmas is religious, it also acknowledges that it has acquired a secular meaning. And that settles the issue: by having a secular as well as a religious purpose, the celebration of Christmas is in accordance with the strictures laid down by the Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971).
"But beyond the legalisms lies the real issue—the determination of secular zealots to scrub our society clean of all religious influence. This represents not only a war against our heritage, it represents an authoritarian impulse to restructure our culture according to the dictates of devout atheists. In the end, what bothers these people is that those who believe in Christ have Christmas to celebrate while those like themselves have, by definition, nothing to celebrate. That they are ‘consequently damaged’ as a result of their own doing is a mystery only to them."
http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=116