Liberal political correctness has gone wild at the University of Minnesota and officials at one of the biggest universities in the United States are essentially banning Christmas. Not only that, any colors or themes or “icons” that may possible be associated with Christmas are banned as well. Even jolly ole Santa Claus gets the boot.
University of Minnesota officials recently distributed a document titled, “Religious Diversity and the Holidays,” to employees and student workers advising them to keep “inappropriate religious celebrations” out of public spaces. The document was distributed at the University as part of a “Dean’s Dialogues: Respecting Religious Diversity in CFANS and at the University” event within the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences.
The handout, which originated from the school’s Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action office, encouraged recipients “to recognize the holidays in ways that are respectful of the diversity of the University community.” It listed several specific examples of “religious iconography” that were inappropriate for gatherings and displays at this time of year such as: “Santa Claus, Angels, Christmas trees, Star of Bethlehem, Dreidels, Nativity scene, Bows/wrapped gifts, Menorah, Bells, Doves, Red and Green or Blue and White/Silver decoration themes (red and green are representative of the Christian tradition as blue and white/silver are for Jewish Hanukkah that is also celebrated at this time of year).”
“Consider neutral-themed parties such as a ‘winter celebration,'” the document read. “Decorations, music, and food should be general and not specific to any one religion.”
Employees and student workers were also encouraged to report a bias incident of “inappropriate religious celebrations in their work or learning environment” to the Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action.
Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.
“The University of Minnesota has gone off the deep end with a bizarre policy censoring Christmas and Hanukkah on campus,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “In the name of inclusion and diversity, the University is doing just the opposite. Celebrating or acknowledging Christmas is legal in universities and in public venues,” said Staver.
UPDATE: A University of Minnesota official denies that the document titled, “Religious Diversity and the Holidays,” represents a policy of the school, stating instead that it was an “ill-advised” memo from “one individual that was not distributed broadly.” The University has clarified and distanced itself from this Christmas memo.
The University representative stated: “There is no ‘Religious Diversity and the Holidays’ memo. The actions of a single employee, whose attempt at a diversity training session was, to be blunt, ill-advised, does not constitute a policy on the part of the University. The document in question was created by one individual as part of a session for a segment of employees within one area of the University. It was not provided by, reviewed by, or approved by the University of Minnesota; the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences; or the University’s Office of Equity and Diversity. The document was not distributed broadly to CFANS employees (or anyone else at the University of Minnesota, for that matter).”
This is one case of political correctness gone amuck but there are others.
This year, Liberty Counsel launched its fifteenth annual Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign. The campaign educates, and if necessary litigates, to make sure that Christmas and Christian themes are not censored. Liberty Counsel has been actively monitoring cases across the country where there is intimidation by officials and groups to remove the celebration of Christmas in public and private sectors and has successfully educated and reversed these anti-Christmas actions in all of these situations.
Liberty Counsel provides a memorandum to offer guidance to public officials and schools regarding the public celebration of religious holidays. For example, publicly sponsored Nativity scenes on public property are constitutional if there is a secular symbol of the holiday in the general context. Privately sponsored Nativity scenes or religious symbols are also permissible on public property that has been opened to the general public for expressive activity. No secular symbol is necessary in the context of private speech on public property.
