Decorations during Xmas & Hanukkah


When I was growing up, we had both Christmas and Hanukkah everywhere. Due to the religious demographics of our area, most people said “Merry Christmas” and didn’t offend anyone one way or another. I’m sure many of you feel the same way.


You’ve surely noticed there’s been a huge trend over the past 5-10 years making most advertisements on TV applicable to all groups, hence the heavily PC “Happy Holidays”.

That being said, of course it should be ok to display any kind of celebratory religious message or decorations you want during holiday season. Especially Hanukkah, since there is a strong concentration of Jewish people living in the NYC metro area. The more the merrier! (heh).

However, one Hoboken411 reader noticed something odd last week over at the Chrysler Building in NYC.

He writes:

“Not a Hoboken item but considering your readership that works in NYC thought this might interest you.

I noticed in the Chrysler building, one of the most iconic buildings of NY, where there is a beautiful Christmas tree that was set up promptly after Thanksgiving for all to enjoy, surprisingly had no signs of Hanukkah. Now I have no problem with there being a 20′ + tree along side of a small menorah but the Chrysler building has chosen not to put out any decorations for Hanukkah.

Made a call to the management company to ask and it was no mistake. They apparently received complaints about having Hanukkah decorations (seems odd) and will only have a menorah up during the eight days of Hanukkah. This just seems like a poor choice to me considering that it is much more customary to put out “holiday decorations” after Thanksgiving and leave them out for the month.

I did notice a Christmas tree AND Menorah at the deli that I got my coffee one morning. How many locations can you think of that have chosen to display Christmas for a full month and Hanukkah for eight days?”

You may also like...

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tuesday, December 11, 2007 10:43 am

Not you MF. Danzig and his digs at peoples sexuality. I’m sorry if that was not clear.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007 10:42 am

homophobic? be careful when you are going to lump people together…read the transcript again Geraldo

Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:36 am
Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:34 am

And a final comment, the powers that be in Great Falls were using religion to keep Darla out of the political process. She originally came to the council meetings because she felt the cops were not doing enough about drug dealings in her neighborhood. Darla does not hide her religion, the members of the council new she was the local witch (Wicca) and didn’t want her there. They forced her to participate in their prayers in order to be heard. She then asked if it can be rotating between many faiths and the council flipped. So she sued. In short Great Falls was promoting Christianity above other faiths and making people participate in my opinion is form of proselytizing.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:28 am

I’m no legal Scholar. Ms. Eilers’s is lawyer I don’t have access to the entire case mentioned. If you have a Westlaw account cool for you. I’m sorry I can’t go into minute details.

[quote comment=”57587″][/quote]

I’ll meet your weblink and raise you one from the same site.

The difference between Great Falls and Capital Hill was simple. Great Falls refused to let any other religion be heard.

Yes, the states had their States rights, much to the Federalist among the founding fathers displeasure. And over time a lot of those state rights have been worn away by federal laws. The documents forming our legal system are living documents. The change, evolve, grow. The are not frozen in time, they are not locked into the 1700’s, 1800’s, or any other time period.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x