Are Atheists being malicious and unfair with their War on Christmas? Pro=True, Con=False.

"America is a place of freedom, creatively, religiously, and overall, it is a boiling pot of different walks of life. However, it is detrimental to this mix's balance to transgress upon the religious expressions of another if it does not advocate violence, profanity, or other unacceptable conduct."Atheists are doing nothing to censor anybody's religious expressions. The only thing they ask is we maintain the Constitution's order of separation of Church & State. When this has not been fulfilled, that's when the lawsuits occur to resolve any imbalances. Also, if you want to get specific, Christians have been doing more to advocate unacceptable conduct against Islamic practice within the U.S since 9/11. The notion that Atheists are trying to do anything to remove Christmas is a baseless argument that has been constantly pushed by Fox News to attack secularists. "An example being the removal of the Nativity scene from Santa Monica California, the birth of a man, regardless if people believed him to be the son of God, cannot cause a group of people, Atheists specifically, harm as by their own tongue's admission, they do not believe in an omnipotent power, a deity, a God, or intelligent design, and they do not believe in religion. I view this as a confession of discredit on their part."I'm not sure what my opponent is trying to advocate. Since atheists do not believe in either God or Intelligent Design, the atheists are admittingly discrediting themselves? This is a non-sequitur fallacy, as nowhere within the definition of atheism or atheist does it mention any sort of discredit amongst ourselves. In the Santa Monica case, atheists never removed the nativity scene or did anything to obstruct its view. They just used the land, that they received from the city, to place signs and scenes that advocate a religious-free viewing of the holidays'"An argument that has been brought up to me by Atheists I have held discourse with, is that under Separation of Church and State, the government cannot in any way do anything so as to prefer one religion over another. Logically, this is an oxymoron/paradox, as Atheism is not a religion and it makes it very clear by self-admission it is not a religion. And even if Atheism was a religion, the government is not promoting a religion, but a winter holiday that has multiple associations, and benefits the nation in many ways, from a government standpoint, primarily economically"I think my opponent has misunderstood Separation of Church/State. That is there to limit the government from advocating Christianity within their practices and advocating it as the country's religion. "There is no religious promotion with erecting a Christmas tree, or allowing the Salvation Army to seek charity, in letting children see the Nutcracker, or in stringing colorful lights, or letting children believe in a man who wants to give them presents if they be good to their fellow man. If anything, if this is the argument the Atheists will use, they are making themselves a religion, and they are infringing upon our rights, and promoting their religion."In all due respect to my opponent, that argument makes no sense. Even if that was the argument of atheists, which it isn't, that in no way advocates Atheism as a religion. I'd like my opponent to explain deeper on how promoting Separation of Church/State makes Atheism a religion. "This is malicious for the end result would be the denial of the Christmas holiday to the people, when, as it stands, no one is making anyone do anything to either involve themselves in Christmas, or disassociate themselves from it""No one is making anyone do anything to either involve themselves in Christmas, or disassociate themselves from it". I'm confused, so you just admitted that atheists, under 'no one', are doing nothing to disassociate anybody from practicing Christianity within the U.S.? Like previously mentioned, atheists are doing nothing to advocate the remove or destroy the holiday season, particularly Christmas. ArgumentI have one simple argument to affirm my case. The "War on Christmas" doesn't exist. The War on Christmas is a plot by the Christian-Conservative media to attack secular activists for advocating the Separation of Church/State. As it stands, atheists are doing nothing to limit anybody's right to celebrate Christmas. Instead, there are more plausible reasons why Christmas is becoming more "irrelevant" in America. According to Timothy Stanley of Oxford University, these reasons can be attributable to a decline in Christmas in America[1]-An attack on secularists by conservative and evangelical leaders-Rising unbelief and growing religious diversity -A reason for politicians to attack each other over-A way to avoid confrontation or offensive to multiple minority religious groups. Also, as Jeff Sorensen, author for the Huffington Post reviews, you can't go minutes without seeing or hearing a Christmas song, commercial, TV show, movie, magazine, or carol within your town, let alone the entire U.S.[2] When's the last time anybody saw an Islamic, Jewish, Buddhist, Hinduism, or any religious minority being represented in the U.S. mass media system? Hell, even NORAD has a feature on their website that 'tracks Santa'. Like Jeff Soresen reiterates within the article, and what I have been advocating in my entire argument, there is no War on Christmas, and it is much more likely there is a growing war on secularism. I'd also like to point out my opponent has neither given any examples of how atheists/secularists have attacked Christmas within the public sector, and has never constructed an argument proving this War on Christmas. To affirm the resolution, my opponent must prove that not only this war exists, but the atheists are being over-ambitious in trying to remove Christmas. Sources1. http://www.cnn.com...2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com....