.jpg)
WEST CHESTER, PA – For the last three years, a local group of atheists, skeptics, rationalists, humanists, freethinkers, etc. have joined in the winter festivities by putting up a display representing their values along side other displays in front of the Chester County Courthouse in West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The display, designed by the Margaret Downey, president of the Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia (FSGP) is an evergreen tree decorated with laminated book covers from varying subject matters. The Tree of Knowledge is a symbol of humanist values. It represents knowledge, education, science, philosophy, morality, diversity, and of course curiosity. A complete list of all the books represented by the book covers is available here (pdf).
The Bible (also represented as an ornament on the Tree of Knowledge) references a tree of the knowledge of the fruit of good and evil. According to the Genesis story, Eve ate from the fruit out of curiosity and temptation and thus damned all of humankind with the original sin punishable by eternal torture in Hell. The FSGP Tree of Knowledge of course does play into that symbolism, but it doesn’t rely solely on it. While there are multiple books with morality, ethics, and the nature of good & evil represented on the Tree, it also represents our humanist values and our break from the Abrahamic tradition. It is not an attack on religion, but rather an expression of an alternative set of values (i.e. knowledge and reason).
Ever since the Tree of Knowledge first joined the Christmas Tree, The Crèche, and the Menorah, this display has been the center of controversy. Many Christians have claimed that the inclusion of humanist values next to the Jesus Crèche is an attempt to “steal” Christmas. It seems that many Christians are of the opinion that Christians own the winter season. They do not.
Winter is a time of year in which the days get shorter and significantly colder. People are prone to depression during this time of year and as a result, the idea of bright colorful celebrations and gift giving started long before Christianity. Atheists aren’t trying to “steal” Christmas any more than Christians stole Saturnalia… oh wait, never mind.
Over the last two years, the Tree of Knowledge has been vandalized by loving Christians and demonized in the local newspapers and blogs in some of the most hateful ways. This year, the Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia had to fight new regulations designed to bully their display off of the courthouse lawn. One new restriction was on the height of the display. No display can be higher then 10 feet tall… except for the Christmas Tree. Clearly the County endorses one religion over all other religious viewpoints. So instead of the 18 foot Tree of Knowledge, FSGP had to get a smaller 10 foot tree.
Another regulation on when the displays could go up was apparently changed at the last minute so that the Crèche could get the ‘first come first serve’ space preference and push the now smaller Tree of Knowledge to a less visible spot under the branch of a larger nearby tree.
It now seems that a Christian call campaign has begun asking believers to contact the County Commissioners office to complain about the Tree of Knowledge and demand its immediate removal.
It seems that atheists, humanists, freethinkers, skeptics, etc. have to fight for every inch of ground. Non-theists now make up 15% of all Americans and yet we are being bullied out of the public square because Christians believe they have the Monopoly on the entire month of December. No serious argument can be made claiming that the Tree of Knowledge is in any way offensive or purposefully confrontational or provocative.
The Tree of Knowledge isn’t an attack on religion it is a symbol of humanist values. But at a time in which the inclusive greeting of ‘Happy Holiday’s’ is seen as offensive to some Christians (Bill O’Reilly), we shouldn’t be surprised that so many Christians will attack the inclusion of a Tree of Knowledge.
UPDATE on the Tree of Knowledge
On Faith Series:
On Faith: holidays or holy days?
On Faith: Swiss ban on minarets
Atheism 101 Articles:
Atheism 101: What is the difference between atheism and agnosticism?
Atheism 101: Is there moral grounding without God?
Atheism 101: The Purpose of Life
Atheism 101: Is the Bible the inspired word of God?
Atheism 101: The anti-intellectualism of religion
Atheism 101: Why has Christianity demonized nudity, sex and sexuality?
Atheism 101: Does it take more faith to be an atheist?
Atheism 101: What came before the Universe?
Atheism 101: How to respond to the ex-atheist
Comments
If there's one thing right-wing Christians cannot tolerate, it's knowledge.
As a European atheist, I'm somewhat bemused by the atheist approach to Christmas by some in the US. While many seem to enjoy Christmas and just get on with it, I've noticed that certain atheists see Christmas as an arena to engage in the Church / State debate and express their difference.
The best way to view Christmas as an atheist seems to be to acknowledge that Xmas is a syncretism that stems from pagan and secular Mid Winter Festivals, and was adapted by Christians.
And in the end, much of the Christmas iconography (including the tree) comes from Northern Europe and represents secular interpretations of the Mid Winter Festival.
When it's cold outside, and the winter begins to bite, what better than to take a day to have a celebration, with food, wine, singing, gift-giving and all that other jazz.
Atheists don't need to go around praising baby Jesus, but they should feel free to celebrate Xmas like the best of them. Even Dawkins sings Xmas Carols under the Xmas tree!
It's just so fustrating. In my state we can't display anything but the Christmas Tree...they call it a holiday tree of course, so as to not sound like they're favoring the religion.
Since Christmas isn't Christian but pagan the atheists and humanists are welcome to it. Christ never celebrated His birthday, His disciples and later apostles never celebrated His birthday and the Church of God as named and mentioned in the letters of the apostles never celebrated His birthday. But pagans worldwide from antiquity have religious festivals centred around the winter solstice - festivals such as Saturnalia and Sol Invictus. Saturnalia was celebrated by excessive drinking, sexual orgies and the exchange of gifts and was observed for seven days finishing on December 17. Sol Invictus, the rebirth of the unconquered sun god was celebrated on December 25. But Christ was not born on December 25 - was not born in December at all - but was born in September or early October at the very latest. But compromising Christians, therefore heretics, in order to entice pagans into their religious practices embraced days dedicated to pagan gods and renamed them and accepted paganism.
To continue on from my previous comment - Christmas trees are also pagan symbols and have nothing to do with Jesus Christ, likewise holly, mistletoe and the yule log. As to Santa Claus - the first lie most parents tell their children and they tell their children this lie in their first, impressionable, formative years, when they are supposed to be imparting Christian values such as not bearing false witness - that is tell lies. Jesus Christ said that Satan was the " father of lies ". Is it a conincidence that Satan and Santa have the same letters? I think not! As with the original pagan festival of Saturnalia which was celebrated with excessive drinking, sexual orgies and the exchange of gifts, Christmas is exactly the same for many. It is also a time of over-spending by parents, spending money to the point that they become financially strapped. Family disputes arise dramatically during this time also, often ending in violence resulting in injuries and death. Enough said!
To those people who think my rejection of Christmas is wrong, that my claims concerning that day, the Christmas tree and the pagan festivals are false, I challenge them to research it for themselves through reputable encylopedias and other sources of reliable information.
This is an interesting series of comments. The seven days may be associated with the solstice. The sun appears to stop moving for seven days. In the days before Copernicus, telescopes and advanced knowledge of solar system, folks sought to coax the sun god to return and bring life back to the earth. So for seven days all they could do is follow the advice of their shamans. When the sun did begin to return to the sky, it appeared that the shamans prescriptions had worked
Christians don't have to fear atheists. We are not book burners. We are not church destroyers. We won't tear down churches and build our temples over them. If Jesus is demoted from god to man, the vast rich works of biblical literary genius will not disappear. The writings will continue to be studied by scholars. Christians themselves are already atheists with regard to gods like Zeus, Thor, Odin. It is only a short leap to let go of one more god. The great works of Greek Mythology are still valued today. Many great human lessons are contained within these works. Folks accept the reality that the gods of these stories were myth. So too with Christianity. The good samaritan, the prodigal son. These stories have validity with or without belief in a god. And lets not forget the woman who was about to be stoned. A timeless tale of compassion and the dangers of self righteousness. One of the gospel writers has Jesus saying, Seek the Truth, Do not stop seeking until you find.
At first you will be disturbed. Then you will be amazed. Darwin himself was disturbed as the truth he sought began to reveal itself. It clashed with his religious upbringing. But eventually he saw that he must remain steadfast to the truth. And he was amazed. Jesus would probably be proud of Darwin.
Oh, I understand, free speech is only for Christians. Makes sense.
It's great to see something like the Tree of Knowledge going up, even though it is the subject of so much religious persecution. Nothing like some good old religious intolerance to really get into the Christmas spirit, I suppose.
Good for them for fighting to keep it up despite the prejudices. Once people accept that atheists exist and aren't leaving, maybe we can have a little peace.
Nice article. :)
Is it any wonder that people like Richard Dawkins seems arrogant to someone like Frank Schaeffer.
Except for among the most virulent racists and bigots, what other minority do you know from whom millions will not tolerate any expression at all?
The lack of response to my assertion that Christmas isn't Christian is surprising. I expected some rejection and the major one would be that Christians " Christianized " the pagan festivals, which is nonsense of course. As to the Atheist Tree of Knowledge - well, the belief that all that exists in the universe, including the invisible laws that govern the universe in all its complexity - that belief has as much credibility as the tooth fairy. Darwin ranks as highly as, or even higher than, than the Brothers Grimm in the ranks of story tellers. Just as it is almost impossible to convince those who believe Christmas is Christian, it is even more impossible to persuade atheists in the absurdity of their own fables.
I should have added, I have no problem with atheists expressing their beliefs and I won't deny them their right to do so - nor would I want to. But somehow, I don't think the majority of those who are of the baseless atheistic faith are equally willing to extend that courtesy to those who are not in their SECTarian denomination.
Wow....I'm not atheist and I'm not Christian, but I do believe that everyone has the right to believe what they want; and if they want to put up a tree of knowledge, why not? What's the harm? If a religious person has the right to showcase their beliefs, why can't an atheist do the same?
My previous comment on the complexity of the universe and the invisible laws that govern the universe was incomplete. It should have included words that credit atheists incredibly believe all these things came out of nothing, thus rendering their convictions the status of a Brothers Grimm fairy tale, as has Darwin's evolutionary fable.
If West Chester wants to play games of limiting or creating different rules for different displays, it could be challenged in court so that no one has a display. After all the area is public property of those that are being governed.
That is a shame your tree has been vandalized. It is a shame you feel bullied. It is also a shame the atheist have invented a tree that is obviously nothing more than an excuse to mock Christmas and have an excuse to have clashes with Christians. I am from Pennsylvania and have family there. I know what kind of strife your tree is creating.
For one, your religion has no long standing tradition. So, it is obviouos atheist created it for the purpose of mockery. Cival liberties are granted to those groupes who behave under normal social expectations. Yes, there are those vandals who have defaced your billboards and your tree. However, you can not say with certainty you know the Christians are the vandals. Subversives attract hatred from other subversive groups. Maybe this is why your tree and billboards are being vandalized. It could be 'so - called Christians' But, they would not really be Christians. Would they?
The tree of knowledge in the Bible is not 'against' knowledge. That is a common misinterpretation. It was symbolic of mankind breaking away from the source of goodness (God) to find fulfillment in a new way, rather than in the authentic, original way which will ultimately satisfy us (love). Knowledge of evil is the source of all mankind's problems. If we had sought knowledge of good and evil from the source of good (God), we never would have had these problems. God always gives us a choice to seek Him, or look elswehere, because love (good) is not love if it is not a choice. The tree of knowledge is not synonymous with the tree of reason or freethought. It would make more sense to call it the tree of breaking from reality, of unreasonableness, of thoughts that enslave. Check out my most recent article "Reasons for faith 101: Do faith and science conflict?" Blind faith is not found in the Bible. But I'm all for free (even if embarrassing) expression (referring to that tree).
Question, though. Do you think all the holiday displays ought be removed from in front of the courthouse, including the "tree of knowledge"? Is this not an excellent example of how even a denial of certain religious views (like absolute truth--making the Bible one of many sources of relative knowledge on that tree) is 'itself' a religious view, at least implicitly?
Richmond Evangelical: While I can't say with absolute certainty that Christians were behind the vandalism, I can say that there is good reason to believe that Christians probably were behind the vandalism. I can also say Christians are definitely behind the bullying of our tree. Further more, I can say the reason for their bullying of our tree is rooted in their Christian belief.
Richmond Evangelical: This is the third year that The Tree of Knowledge has been up. While this new Humanist tradition isn't thousands of years old, it is still a start. How can we create a "long standing tradition" if we aren't allowed to make our first steps. As I stated in the article, the Tree isn't about you. It is an expression of Humanist values. So get over yourselves and tell your fellow believers to stop bullying atheists and vandalizing our stuff. The "True Scotsman" argument is lame.
Maryann: No, I think the Constitution of the Unite States is pretty clear on this. Government can endorse any religion or religious viewpoint nor can they prohibit the free exercise of religion based on content. But Christians need to learn how to share. Second, there is no absolute truth in the Bible. Please see my article on morality in the atheism 101 series (link is at the bottom of the article).
Actually, the Constitution does not prohibit government from endorsing or impeding any religion. The only restriction placed by the Constitution is Congress making or passing any law establishing any religion as an official state religion such as Catholic/Anglican England. Congress is not "establishing" any religion by allowing religious icons to appear on government property.
Staks, I'll check out your article, and probably offer some dialogue for you. I have many on-topic that you can check out as well. I wonder what FFRF (Freedom from Religion Foundation) would say about all the holiday stuff being put in front of the courthouse (I e-mailed 'em about it)? There is a fine line between free expression and establishment by government.
Maryann: While I understand respect FFRF's position on this, I don't necessarily agree with them. Personally, I don't think any religious group should want to promote their beliefs in front of courthouses. But the fact is that they have that right and so do humanistic groups like FSGP and FFRF. But I will be honest, if religious groups didn't try to push their religions on people in such a way, atheistic groups would not be there either. We are only there because we need to make it clear that these religious displays are NOT endorsements by the town, county, or state. So if Christians want to get atheists off of the courthouse lawn, all they have to do is remove their crap.
Staks, I apologize if I came off sounding confrontational. You have a good point that if religious groups didn't put stuff in front of the courthouse, neither would these 'tree of knowledge' folks. I think that is exactly why none of it belongs in front of the courthouse. It is divisive; one of the very reasons for that 'wall of separation'. Government should be a neutral zone, where we do not have to put aside our beliefs, but where we do not shove them in the faces of others. That is why I agree there should not be public prayer before city council (or other government) meetings. I agree w/ you that as long as other religions have their stuff there--atheists and humanists (etc.) should be right there alongside. Your fellow American--Maryann.
Maryann raises a relevant point. What is at issue here is the lack of regard by legislative authority and the refusal of law enforcement to proscribe conduct set forth in the U.S. Constitution and the writ of common law.
Barring established authority's flagrant disregard for fulfilling their own obligations, groups like GS and FFRF quite appropriately seek to offer their own display's of secular humanism. In the same circumstance, neo-pagans ought to be allowed their solstice displays, Hindus ought to be allowed their DiWali displays, and so forth, "ad infinitum". Government with its public property does not serve the interest of majorities, special segments of the population, but all the citizenry with equal standing.
Arguments in the comments for this blog betray the profound ignorance by their authors of some of our most rudimentary civic realities. The intent behind the displays is completely irrelevant to the issue. It is the rights of the body politic which are at focus here.
If the civil authorities tolerate vandalism and destruction of property in the public square that are provided by a distinct interest of the community, not only are the tools of authority in violation of the "establishment clause" of Amendment 1, they also willfully violate the "equal protections" clause of Amendment 14.
Those, who like some of the commentors on this blog, are satisfied with the denial of civil rights of others because it suits their own tastes and opinions, contribute to the diminished ability of society to maintain a peaceful and just order for itself.
I was raised Christian, and when I was kid, it was made very clear to me that so called "Christians" with Christmas trees were not really Christians at all, but rather idolaters that so loved the evil pagan traditions that they had high jacked them for their own and lie to everyone about their purpose. The whole idea of celebrating the birth of Jesus, on a pagan holiday and sit around worshiping a Christmas tree was just utterly UN-Christian! As an atheist I find their defense of the holiday even more humorous.
Torrie: Agreed. Christians have such a persecution complex, yet they are the ones who persecute others. But this shouldn't surprise anyone, as hypocrisy seems to run rampant in all Abrahamic religions.
CHRISTIANS have a persecution complex?!? Now, I've heard it ALL.......
I was raised Christian, and when I was kid, it was made very clear to me that so called "Christians" with Christmas trees were not really Christians at all, but rather idolaters that so loved the evil pagan traditions that they had high jacked them for their own and lie to everyone about their purpose. The whole idea of celebrating the birth of Jesus, on a pagan holiday and sit around worshiping a Christmas tree was just utterly UN-Christian! As an atheist I find their defense of the holiday even more humorous.
Jesus was not born on the 25, but in the spring. The Norse first used the "x-mas" tree and later is was adopted, I think in the fourth century, by Christians. Sarturnalia, the festival for the god Saturn was a winter solstice event in December, and later Christians stole it to promote their religion and succeeded by the middle ages. Haters, leave our tree of knowledge alone.
The History Channel has some good video's on the pagan origins of x-mas and on how Church officials used existing festivities to promote Christianity.
Kriss
I love this! I've also seen a tree decorated with homemade dinosaur ornaments and other items an atheist would love!
Along similar lines, there is apparently an issue brewing in New Jersey where Rutger's Pastafarians are trying to get Montville, NJ, to use taxpayer money to make and put up a display of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM = god), since the town already uses taxpayer money to buy and build the Christian nativity scene. It's tough to argue against the fairness of that, unless someone is willing to admit that they don't care about fairness and just want their own faith to crush the others, which is no longer politically correct to admit.
The basic point is that the US Constitution requires that government should give no 'preferential' treatment for one religion over another. Thus, if Christians want their nativity scenes to be on government property, they should be willing to give similar homage to the one true God, which is The Great Noodley One (FSM).
RAmen.
CORRECTION to Pastafarian: the Constitution states "Congress shall pass no law". By extension of writ of common law, no U.S. legislative body cannot enable by statute or authorize funds to inhibit religion or, establish religious conduct and content in the public forum. If civil authorities sought to abide by the law, there would be NO displays that could be construed religious (or oppositional) on the "commons" of public property be it in Montville or West Chester. The remainder of the 1st Amendment guarantees that all "private" parties can engage in any unobtrusive expression of religious display at any time. Churches can "knock themselves out" with creches in full view of the public and college campuses can careen with references to the noodly one.
to Krissthesexyatheist: There is no definitive evidence that Jesus was born in the spring or any other time. (There is scant and troublesome evidence for his ever having existed). However, the reference in gospel Matthew to a "star in the east", could well be a veiled reference to the rise of the star Sirius, important to other religions of the time. Sirius (rising in the east) in Egypt was thought to be the star of Isis and signaled the beginning of the requisite to agriculture annual flood of the Nile. Notably, the presence of its brightest incarnation in the east is in late November to late January, suggesting that the occasion of the Nativity, while not on any specific date, is referenced some time in the vicinity of the winter solstice.
This reference however is not corroborated in the Nativity account of gospel Luke.
I've written an article on this which includes FFRF's position. Feedback appreciated. www. examiner.com/examiner/x-26772-San-Francisco-Apologetics-Examiner~y2009m12d11-Atheist-Tree-of-Knowledge-courthouse-lawn-controversy
Where does FREEDOM come in on our Constitution .Aren`t we ALL free to Practice what we Believe ..???
Atheists Rule . Its the only Belief system that doesn`t profit or pay for Someone`s lifestyle to spead the Word ....???
I don`t even think they own a jet to convert the poor natives of africa ,like Benny Hihn does ????
Staks -- I'm not sure it's worth commenting on some of these comments because the writers obviously can't read. If they did, then they could actually understand the Bible and realize it's no different from any other book in the shops.
I disagree with the false facts that this Atheist writer presents. Non-theists do NOT make up 15% of the American population. Atheists falsely claim that people who choose "no preference" on the religious portions of various surveys fall under the "Atheist/Agnostic" classification. The vast majority of people who choose "no preference" on surveys are merely people like non-denominational Christians who do not choose a particular denomination. They are not "non-theists". Atheists and Agnostics actually only make up about 2% - 4% of the American population.
Since the 7th Circuit US Court of Appeals has held that Atheism is a religion, I should think that Atheists would be careful how they decry religion in government, lest they bite off their noses to spite their faces.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!