Hindus are left out, Stu. But to me that's a bit beside the point.

Sophiee said in part:
if not paid for by tax dollars

There's the rub. Would that the Christmas trees weren't paid for with tax dollars. The current state of incoherent Supreme Court law on the question makes publicly-funded creches out of the question, but to me the Xmas tree is no whit less offensive.

I think you're partly right, Stu. Most of those who currently are making the biggest fuss about the phrase, would wish this country to "establish" their own Christian sect in exactly that way the founding fathers despised.

On the other hand, to me, "Happy Holidays" is virtually a stealth effort to accomplish the same thing. Christmas belongs in the home, in the church, in the heart. It doesn't belong in the mall. If people want to take their faith public, then "let [their] light so shine before others that they may see [their] good works and glorify [the] Father in heaven."

A point on which Stu's wrong: universalists don't require anyone to believe in anything. The universalist premise is that everybody's saved -- or can be -- for free.