Unabashedly Unhyphenated: It will never be a "Holiday Tree"

I'm somewhere between amused and disturbed that the secular humanists of the left are audacious enough to argue that there isn't at least an ongoing, quasi-organized attempt to remove all vestiges of Christmas from our cultural iconography. It's amusing from a "King's New Clothes" sort of denial of the obvious. It's disturbing because we as a society, a culture and a nation have unwittingly, in our idiotic quest to be "tolerant," imbued the champions of all that is secular with the hutzpah to believe they could attempt to do so with impugnity.

This effort is real, just as surely as there are those who interpret the "establishment clause" as giving them carte-blanche to walk all over the Christian moral foundation upon which this nation was founded.

A nation stripped of its symbols is equal to a nation without borders or sovereignty: it is a non-entity.

VFR echoes my sentiments:

“Holiday tree” takes the cake
Lawrence Auster, View From The Right

"But “Holiday tree” makes no sense at all. These are Christmas trees we’re talking about. Such trees, displayed at this time of the year, with certain types of familiar decorations, were never anything other than Christmas trees. The reason the trees are there at this time of the year is to commemorate Christmas, not to commemorate generic “holidays.”

So, while “Happy Holidays” is bad, and has gotten much worse because it’s being practiced and imposed more and more widely and is even being enforced by businesses and other institutions on their employees, it’s not inherently Orwellian. “Holiday Tree,” by contrast, is as Orwellian as you can get. But wait, there is something even more Orwellian than “Holiday tree”: ordinary people accepting the use of “Holiday tree” as normal and unobjectionable. "