Rich Ganulin’s Case Against the Christmas Holiday

— -- [Richard Ganulin, an assistant solicitor for the city of Cincinnati, has been privately pursuing a lawsuit through the federal courts to eliminate Christmas as a federal holiday. The following is his argument against using public resources to pay for a religious celebration. The views he expresses should not be construed as those of ABCNEWS.com.]

The lawsuit I filed to challenge the constitutionality of the statute establishing Christmas Day-December 25 as a national legal public holiday questions the authority of Congress to provide ideological and financial subsidy for Christian beliefs and celebrations.

I seek the dignity of equality under the law for my belief system, 365 days per year. The lawsuit advocates that the celebrations of the birth of Jesus Christ and the arrival of Santa Claus should be personal celebrations, not governmental.

I use the following reasoning:

1. The ideal for a fair and just society is absolute equality of belief under the law. In my view, this ideal increases the likelihood that all individuals within a nation will better learn mutual respect. The United States is strong and mature enough to achieve the ideal. Other nations have a long way to go.

2. The Constitution seeks to achieve the ideal of absolute equality of belief under the law. The constitutional principles advanced in the lawsuit include separation of church and state, equal protection, and freedom of association. 3. I believe that Christmas Day is a holy and cultural Christian celebration. The words of the celebration are “Silent night, holy night,” “Christ the Lord,” and “When heaven and earth are one.” Because Christmas Day is a holy and cultural Christian celebration, Congress cannot by statute prefer it as a national legal public holiday.

Some people do not agree that equality of belief is the ideal for a fair and just society. Some do not agree that the Constitution provides for equality of belief. Others argue that Christmas Day is not really a Christian celebration. I disagree with all those views.

Millions of non-Christians in this nation do not and can not honor the Christian celebrations of the birth of Jesus Christ and the arrival of Santa Claus. The indignity of inequality is painful to an individual and dangerous for a society.

‘To Form a More Perfect Union’;

The act of Congress establishing Christmas Day as a national legal public holiday has the effect of expressly preferring Christian beliefs. Non-Christians have the need and the right to be free from government competition and contradiction in matters of belief essential to their identity.

The aspiration reflected in the United States Constitution is “to form a more perfect union.” A more perfect union is formed when all individuals are provided equality of belief under the law.

Belief systems are an essential and natural characteristic of any individual. Burdening a person’s belief system, directly or indirectly, harms that person. Requiring a non-Christian to fund and then to ignore government endorsement of Christian beliefs is a violation of the separation of church and state, equal protection, and freedom of association.

National legal public holidays are created for the communicative purpose of honoring the ideas symbolized by the days: workers on Labor Day, servicemen on Veterans Day, the nation’s birth on Independence Day, civil rights on Martin Luther King Day, and Jesus Christ and Santa Claus on Christmas Day. Sectarian preference by the government, however, impeaches the aspiration of a more perfect union.

Christians and non-Christians both benefit by eliminating the government preference for Christianity. Non-Christians benefit from the equal legal status for their beliefs. Christians benefit by removing the influence of government from their holy and cultural celebrations and by having the opportunity to live in a more equal and just nation. Jesus and Santa would approve. Imagine if all nations in the world provided for equality of belief.