Gay college club’s condom-decorated ‘Christmas’ tree
posted at 12:26 pm on December 12, 2011 by Howard Portnoy
[ Culture ]
‘Tis the season to be … aware. If you thought that well-rehearsed line from a popular Christmas carol was leading toward its more familiar conclusion, then you probably missed the kerfuffle last week involving the lyrics (video report here):
A Michigan music teacher’s decision to censor the word “gay” from a traditional Christmas carol is being met with a frosty response.
The teacher, who has not yet been named in any of the published reports, allegedly removed “gay” from “Deck the Halls” after 1st and 2nd grade students kept giggling during preparations for a Christmas concert at Cherry Knoll Elementary School in Traverse City. Instead of the traditional lyric, the students were taught to sing “don we now our bright apparel”….
One of the many infuriated Cherry Knoll parents and fellow educators who expressed umbrage on the school’s Facebook page wrote:
Essentially, this teacher has now taught the elementary school children, including children as young as five, that gay means homosexual sex.
One way of avoiding this problem in the future would be removing the sex from homosexual—in other words, dealing discreetly with what takes place in the bedroom, which is precisely what heterosexual couples do. It is certainly the tack taken by the authors of two celebrated children’s books that preach tolerance, Heather Has Two Mommies and One Dad, Two Dads, Brown Dad, Blue Dads.
But removing references to overt gay sexuality from the public square is not everyone’s cup of tea. Members of the Gay Straight Alliance at Washington & Jefferson College in Washington, Pennsylvania, believe that one historically gay issue—HIV/AIDS awareness—should be front and center in this holiday season. Accordingly, they have adorned a Christmas tree on campus with condoms.
Not everyone is happy with the display, which includes a sign reading, “AIDS Awareness! Free condoms! Take one!” Joshua Habursky, a junior and president of college’s Young Republicans Club, told TheBlaze.com:
I submitted to [the club's leaders] that I understand the tree was for thr [sic] AIDS Awareness Day … but why is it continuing to stay up into the Christmas season?
I pleaded to the college president to take it down. I met with the dean of student life who said that he approved the tree and that he would approve the tree again.
The Gay Straight Alliance is claiming their First Amendment right to co-opt a holiday symbol for their cause, once again missing the critical distinction between rights and what is right.
One additional concern of Joshua Habursky is the tree’s location—in a spot that elementary school children visiting the campus are likely to pass through. Imagine the fallout if the tykes snicker at this spectacle the Alliance is so hell-bent on displaying.
Related Articles
- Lesbian teen crowned as homecoming ‘king’
- CT high school play that includes gay kiss creates furor
- Gay advocates want NJ teacher fired for anti-gay Facebook postings
- Georgia middle schoolers learn ‘positives’ of Sharia law
- Teacher suspended for Facebook comments on NY gay marriage law
- Anti-gay marriage group swears revenge on NY pols
- Breaking: Gay marriage bill passes New York State Senate
Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Well, Christians co-opted the decorated coniferous tree tradition from the Germanic pagans for their cause, so what’s the big deal?
It’s not like they’re making a manger scene with two Josephs or two Marys. No religous symbols are ‘attacked’ here, why can’t people just let them be?
Grindstone on December 12, 2011 at 12:56 PM
Why didn’t the teacher simply choose a different song to perform?
blink on December 12, 2011 at 1:21 PM
So, the kids were *first* giggling at the word, gay, so the teacher then decided to remove that word and replace it…which means, the kids *already* had some kind of idea that the word gay meant something other than happy and festive…so, why would the parent suggest that the teacher was teaching the kids that gay=homosexual sex? I think a case could be made that the teacher could have just ignored the giggles, that by replacing the word, she brought more attention to it…but I think it’s unfair so say that she taught them about homosexual sex.
ellifint on December 12, 2011 at 1:36 PM
Exactly. “Christmas” trees have NOTHING to do with Jesus.
Daikokuco on December 12, 2011 at 1:43 PM
I hear this often, but don’t think it’s definitive. Christian use of a decorated tree seems to have started centuries after Christianity took root in Germany. In fact, the use of the tree doesn’t seem to have started until Protestantism took root in Germany.
Just because pagans had also decorated trees centuries prior doesn’t mean that the custom was co-opted.
blink on December 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM
Condoms on a christmas tree ….
It’s like the entire world of the Gay Activist revolves around copulation.
It will be a great day when we can become a mature enough society to have mature, informed discussions of sexuality in appropriate circumstances while universally condemning this kind of brash, obnoxious flaunting of sexual activity publically.
Mycnh on December 12, 2011 at 1:48 PM
Come Ramadan, will they hang condoms on a statue of Mohamed?
Opposite Day on December 12, 2011 at 2:16 PM
Oh My!!…how “edgy”..how daringly creative and original…They must be smart.
Mimzey on December 12, 2011 at 2:17 PM
Just because December 25th was the date celebrated for the birth of Sol Invictus in the Roman cult doesn’t mean the date was co-opted as Jesus’ birthday.
Grindstone on December 12, 2011 at 2:28 PM
Are straight students permitted to take condoms off the “condom tree” for their own recreational use?
Granted, I find such a display to be exceedingly tacky, but considering the college students are prone to moronic behavior – regardless of sexual prefence – I dont really see this as a “ZOMG THE GAYS ARE DEFILING CHRISTMAS” crisis. There’s probably a christmas tree on a campus somewhere adorned with cans of Natty Ice…
Jeddite on December 12, 2011 at 3:12 PM
Um, co-eds have been putting condoms on Christmas trees in dorms hallways since at least 1978.
Fallon on December 12, 2011 at 3:19 PM
Now that is a defilement. At least pick something with flavor…
Grindstone on December 12, 2011 at 3:42 PM
What does this have to do with the use of a tree at Christmas?
As far as I know, there was no tree used in the Sol Invictus.
blink on December 12, 2011 at 4:36 PM
I wonder if there would be such acceptance of a Christmas tree prominantly displayed on school grounds without condoms?
DrAllecon on December 12, 2011 at 4:39 PM
But I bet they are against BIG OIL…
SouthernGent on December 12, 2011 at 4:40 PM
…How…precious!
tom daschle concerned on December 12, 2011 at 4:40 PM
Saw your comment at the last second! LOL!
tom daschle concerned on December 12, 2011 at 4:41 PM
Excellent point.
Howard Portnoy on December 12, 2011 at 4:52 PM
It’s always good to get up to date on what colleges are calling “academic freedom” these days.
J.E. Dyer on December 12, 2011 at 5:32 PM
TexasDan on December 12, 2011 at 5:51 PM
The accuracy of this comment has been challenged without an adequate defense of the challenge. Are you capable of stepping up?
blink on December 12, 2011 at 6:13 PM
Meant to write, “without an adequate defense to the challenge.”
blink on December 12, 2011 at 6:14 PM
I had the same thoughts. I also think people should remember that there really are straights in almost all gay straight alliances. Hence, the name. I have discovered that straight kids these days often are more devoted to the cause of gay marriage than a bitter, old gay man like myself.
thuja on December 12, 2011 at 10:01 PM
Don we now our GLAAD/LGBTQIA-approved apparel
mintycrys on December 12, 2011 at 10:15 PM
I’m sorry if ou couldn’t figure out that many of the Christmas time traditions are, in fact, based in paganism. Many of the pagan rituals and customs were simply converted to Christianity to facilitate the conversion of the heathens.
For example, the Christmas Tree (or Tannenbaum) tradition has it’s roots in Germanic pagan worship of the Thunder God Donar (or Donner). Just look up the Donar Oak and Saint Boniface, as an example.
I’m sorry that I can’t be around 24 hours a day to satisfy your lack of historical context.
Grindstone on December 13, 2011 at 8:47 AM
What does this have to do with you making the claim that “Christians co-opted the decorated coniferous tree tradition from the Germanic pagans for their cause” and not being able to support your claim.
Feel free to name any pagan traditions that were co-opted, and we can discuss them. But unfortunately for you, the historical record doesn’t support your claim about the Christmas tree notwithstanding unsubstantiated claims that are often made to the contrary.
You can’t support this claim.
Your claiming that the use of a coniferous tree circa 1400s is somehow based on the fact that someone cut down an oak tree in a town 700 years prior?? Is that your basis for making this claim?
You don’t need to apologize for taking time to respond. You should apologize for being unable to substantiate your claim.
blink on December 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM
Because many Christmas traditions are based on pagan rituals and traditions. Regarding the date, I was adding an example of this co-opt. It’s a fairly simple case of easing the transition from paganism to Christianity. The Romans practiced as much for centuries, absorbing the conquered regligion into their own to ease assimilation.
Aside from the tree and the date, there’s also mistletoe (primarily Norse), the yule log, holly, gift-giving (Saturnalia), and many other rituals and traditions with roots in celebrations of the winter soltice and Yule-time. All predated Christianity.
If you do some simple research into pre-Christian pagan rituals and the conversion of the European pagans, you’ll see it for yourself.
As a quick example of one of the roots, yes. Many forms of paganism involved the worship of trees including decorating them with colorful items and images of gods. As another example, followers of the Asheira cult were recruited by the Church by advocating “Christmas Trees”. Again, facilitating the conversion.
On the other hand, there has often been backlash against the use of Christmas Trees due to their panganistic nature. The ‘tradition’ has only really come in vogue in the last two centuries, as brought over by Germans.
Also, a minor correction/addition to my earlier comment, Germanic tree worship was not limited Donar, but Woden (similar to Odin) as well.
More so, you should probably look more into anthropology, specifically pre-Christian Europe.
I posit you this question: If not pre-Christian paganism, where did these Christmas traditions develope from?
Grindstone on December 13, 2011 at 2:45 PM
Agreed – it’s more tacky than disrespectful. I can see an argument that neither belong anywhere in public on campus, but I don’t think this is something worth fighting over regardless.
Esthier on December 13, 2011 at 3:14 PM
That’s fine. Well discuss any Christmas traditions are based on pagan rituals and traditions that you want.
But the Christmas Tree doesn’t seem to be one of these. You haven’t provided sufficient evidence that it was.
The fact that a christian cut down a pagan oak tree 700 years prior to christians starting to decorate a coniferous tree is insufficient evidence to support your claim.
What do you mean, “Aside from the tree”? You’ve yet to show that the tree was taken from pagans.
Will I find insufficient evidence of the other traditions if I look, too?
No, if you do some simple research into pre-Christian pagan rituals and the conversion of the European pagans, you’ll see it for yourself that your claims about the Christmas Tree are unsupported.
I think you’re merely repeating claims you’ve heard without ever having done any research.
You’re more than welcome to research the history of the Christmas Tree yourself. It’s strange that you make claims about pagan origins simply because you don’t understand the actual history.
blink on December 13, 2011 at 3:36 PM
It’s silly to claim that seemingly unrelated Germanic tree (different types of trees) worship gave rise to the decoration of coniferous trees centuries later.
blink on December 13, 2011 at 3:39 PM
It is simple enough that coniferous trees are the only ones still green (representing life and rebirth) in the winter, for the Solstice celebrations. Fresh-cut trees were brought indoors during the German winter celebration of Yule.
See below.
The idea was to demonstrate the importance pagans placed upon trees.
So then we agree, at the very least, all those other holiday traditions are based in paganism?
Pleaes look for yourself. I highly encourage research as you learn many interesting things along the way.
I think you’re limiting yourself to the exact version of the Christmas Tree used today. Decorating a tree for the winter solstice has been a tradition for thousands of years.
Considering the freely available information that is only a google search away, I doubt that any information I link to would be deemed creditable by you and your persistance that it is “unsupported”.
But, here is a well written essay on a Lutheren website, with citations:
http://www.orlutheran.com/html/chrtree.html
As I have an interest in ancient history, including religious symbols and rituals, I have done my research into the basis for many of our customs we see everyday.
My question stands, what is the “actual” history of the Christmas Tree?
Grindstone on December 13, 2011 at 4:22 PM
OK, you’re getting pathetic now.
The pagan trees weren’t coniferous. Try again.
Again, it’s obvious that you’re unable to substantiate your claims about the Christmas Tree which is why you’re trying to switch arguments. You have no basis for claiming that the Christmas Tree was based on Yule customs.
The idea of decorating a tree at Christmas doesn’t seem to have anything to do with the importance that pagans placed on trees. The pagan importance on trees would not have supported the concept of killing a tree merely for decoration.
All? Not at all. Let’s study them one at a time.
Your claims about the Christmas tree has failed. Which other ones will fail??
I did research and I learned that your claim about the Christmas tree is baseless.
I highly encourage you to research claims before you make them, but I’m happy to research with you concurrently.
But drop the condescending attitude. It’s silly, since you’re unable to back up the first claim you made in this thread, and I was the one that was able to school you on that.
Grindstone, it’s becoming obvious to me, that you love to simply repeat things you’ve heard without checking for credibility.
blink on December 13, 2011 at 4:37 PM
This is hilarious. Even YOUR link admits that there’s no evidence to support the notion that the Christmas Tree tradition was based on any centuries earlier traditions of the pagans.
Are you next going to claim that Christmas Dinner is based on the pagan tradition of eating a feast on Winter Solstice? The pagans ate food and the christians later ate food so the christians must have co-opted that tradition from the pagans.
No, you’ve heard stories and you simply like to repeat them. Maybe some of your stories are true and maybe some aren’t.
blink on December 13, 2011 at 4:42 PM