Opinion

Regarding the manger

By NICOLE MACCONNELL
In life everyone will eventually have a time when they are in the minority. We might be the non drinker at a social event, the one boarding an airplane with a toddler, the one vegetarian at a friend’s birthday barbecue, the one whose political beliefs are different from the rest of their family, the one Yankees fan watching a Red Sox game, the only one in the office that hates air conditioning, and on and on. No one person is exactly alike. None of these circumstances are regulated by any federal laws. So how we navigate them determines how well we get along with our neighbors, and really how well we get along in life.

To highlight the point using the birthday barbecue example, if you are the host and you know a guest doesn’t eat meat, you offer an entrée that the guest can enjoy. If you are the lone vegetarian, you thank the host for their consideration and refrain from condemning the other guests enjoying their burgers. The point of the event is to celebrate a birthday, not debate animal ethics. It would be unreasonable for the vegetarian to demand that no other guest be allowed to eat meat out of consideration for their individual feelings. It would also be inconsiderate for other guests to make the vegetarian feel uncomfortable for abstaining. Considerate behavior allows everyone to celebrate the birthday together. The unreasonable or inconsiderate options for behavior would lead to anger and division amongst people that presumably are friends. Rational people don’t need the government to pass laws to regulate extending common courtesy in a social setting.

However, in a broader sense, if we choose to spend our time elevating individual rights over the general preferences of a community, demand complete conformity so that we never find ourselves in a minority situation or try to eradicate other ideas in favor of our own, then we start dividing everyone into groups focused on identity. And since we are all different and therefore can be divided in many ways, eventually no one will be able to find common ground anywhere, ever. This is when neighbors stop waving, families break apart, friends stop speaking, and sports fans watch games by themselves. When we spend our time finding ways to become offended, traditions end, meaning is erased and no one benefits.

Fortunately, this miserable sounding scenario isn’t really the way most people are. Most people have more in common with their neighbors, co-workers, community members than not. When mutual respect is shown, as most people do, people remain friends and neighbors in spite of perceived differences.

This can very well be applied to the Nativity controversy in Claremont that seems to never end. Every year, on December 25, we celebrate a federal holiday called Christmas Day. This isn’t news to anyone. We mostly all get the day off from work to celebrate with friends and family. In the United States, this is a traditionally Christian holiday celebrating the birth of Christ. It is because of laws regarding religious freedom that there are rules in place on how Christmas can be observed in the public square. US Supreme Court cases have determined that Nativity scenes don’t violate the Establishment Clause. It is also because we are a country that respects the rights of minorities that there are guidelines. The Nativity must not be the sole Christmas decoration. It cannot be at entrances to government buildings or be the feature of a holiday display. This is a fair way to acknowledge those of different faiths and those who are not religious may enjoy other secular decorations. Neither the minority individual nor the majority preference triumph. All are represented in a law abiding manner.

Claremont does a nice job decorating Broad Street Park in a way that recognizes the many ways people celebrate the season, which is logical. The point is to celebrate, not abolish the types of celebration that certain groups don’t approve of. Christmas, Hanukkah and secular decorations can all coexist without eliminating each other. Christmas is supposed to be the season of giving, where people enjoy time together and share what they have with those who are less fortunate. An extra helping of tolerance and generosity towards differences can go a long way.

It’s too bad that the city council has had to spend time debating how to display a Nativity during the Christmas season in a way that no one will be offended by. All when we have the highest taxes in the state, roads in need of repair, and so many more pressing problems. It’s even more unfortunate that so much anger — albeit from a very small minority — is being directed at a Nativity display, and seemingly won’t be appeased until the tradition is erased. It would seem far more productive to unite the city around helping those in need during the Christmas season, rather than dividing it on if, where, or how a long held Nativity tradition should be displayed.

Nicole Macconnell

Clarmont, NH

Avatar photo

As your daily newspaper, we are committed to providing you with important local news coverage for Sullivan County and the surrounding areas.