Atlaw, you have missed the point of the proposal. It is not to insist that people celebrate a certain way, it is to protet the institutions that just want to continue to celebrate in the traditional ways. Nobody is trying to force anyone to do anything. We are interested only in protecting existing traditions from challenge.
Oh. I see. Someone is preventing you, personally, from continuing to celebrate Christmas in the traditional ways.
And someone is suing private businesses to prevent them from extending Christmas greetings and posting "Merry Christmas" signs (ironically, the proposal on the table seems to be to sue private businesses to force them to post "Merry Christmas" signs).
And someone is preventing Churches from celebrating Christmas and from displaying creches on their front lawns and from even opening their doors on Christmas day (again, ironically, a number of the "big-box" megachurches decided on their own to close on Christmas day, which doesn't seem to be getting much attention in the midst of this year's bashing of retail stores for failing to honor the "true meaning of Christmas").
And someone is preventing private citizens from going to Church and from having Christmas parties and from displaying their own creches on their own property and from buying Christmas trees and decorating their homes and buying Christmas gifts and saying Merry Christmas to others anyplace they please.
But I have to ask, who is this someone, and perhaps you can provide a few concrete examples (which, I suspect, will consist of the usual litany of oppression -- the Denver parade of lights, Mayor Bloomberg's Holiday Tree gaff, anecdotal stories about the sheer persecutorial terror inflicted by elementary schools that are having "Holiday" parties or "Winter" festivals, etc.)