Fourth Circuit Rules Against Prayer Before Legislative Meetings.....

Because it's always been done?

 

I'd rather pray to Him on your time because you're such a girl about it.

 

They've prayed to God since this country was founded. You can literally do it in seconds. How fast can you pray to the other ones?

 

the court says banning of goyim ONLY prayers

 

LOL ... is there anything more USELESS than praying.

I'll bet a bunch of the people on board that Germanwings Airbus prayed to their various alleged sky daddies for a safe trip before taking off from Barcelona a couple years ago. The plane proceeded to crash into the French Alps, killing all 150 on board.

Praying ... comfort for the mentally ill...

 

Post 75.....that's whats said. Just sayin.

 

Yep....but lets not talk about the leftness Right now.

 

Using Catholics as an example, they see the Pope as the highest person TO God. But not necessarily God himself, and when the controversy surrounding the same-sex marriage thing/female priests appeared, there were many who stuck to their own interpretations of literature, rather than the Pope's decision(or non decision as it were.)

So no, the Clergy does not(and should not anyway) have power over an individual person believing in whatever deity it wishes to believe in. That I think we agree is called a cult. Religion, spirituality, etc is meant to hone in your character. Who you are as a person is fortified by your beliefs and your beliefs backing up your action.(This sometimes doesn't go well of course, when a religious person commits a crime. But the very act of that crime was a betrayal of principles.)

What can I say? Some are weak-willed and others are strong-willed. The Separation Clause was meant to protect the weak-willed of society from being overpowered by some religious sermon to do "this or that". What it was not meant to do was to prevent any public religious activity or to have those of religious faith essentially shunned in.

Let's be even more clear: They own the LEASE to the land. And public works(taxpayer dollars) go into funding the schools. This is the only extent of political involvement, and even then not in the traditional terms as we know them(right or left leaning) but rather of a financial arrangement. If the schools were funded by, say banks instead would that allow for a more expressive freedom for these public venues?

To me, a political function is a political function and not merely a claim thereof.

 

Rise of Satanism?

 

This is damage done by Obama appointees.

About 3 years ago there was a required public hearing under federal law for a local environmental issues proposed regulations. There was serious public interest.

When the meeting was called to order by federal officials, one of the locals commented that all local meeting begin with a pledge of allegiance (there was an American flag up front in the hall). The leading federal official replied they do not do so. When state officials/officers stood, the federal official told them to sit down - and they did. So a couple hundred citizens said the pledge of allegiance, while all Obama's federal people and the state people remained seated, silence.

As the hearing proceeded, everyone was promptly informed by the lead federal official that while technically they have to hold a public hearing and allow everyone 1 minute each to speak to have technically held the hearing, the officials were not required to say anything, present anything nor respond to anyone - and essentially stated they had already made their decision.

Pledge of Allegiance not allowed. Total disregard for the intent of required public hearings, and total contempt at the entire occasion and everyone there.

 

If the Supreme Court upheld the ruling, then clearly a similar lawsuit would prevent all prayer before any Congressional gathering or any other political gathering. By extension, the same reasoning would be basis to ban all elected officials including the president from saying the words "in God we trust."

 

Yeshua said that people should do their praying in private. I hope you don't do your praying in public. Yeshua hates that and he will toss you into the lake of fire for violating his commandments (Matthew 7:24-27).

 

it is govt property period.

 

Perhaps the question should be, "What does freedom of religion mean?" Many fundamentalists, evangelicals, and conservatives interpret "freedom of religion" to mean freedom for them to impose their religious views over the entire nation through legal means. That means using their elected conservative representatives to pass laws based on the fundamentalist or evangelical religious point of view. This effectively imposes a small religious group's views upon the public masses without other points of view being considered. Liberals interpret "freedom of religion" as having the right as an individual citizen to hold and practice any beliefs comfortable to oneself (as long as it doesn't infringe on the legal rights of others), and avoid any laws that try to impose ethical or moral standards based on any interpretation of religious beliefs. Liberals believe that the only way to guarantee "freedom of religion" is to avoid any and all laws based on religious beliefs altogether. Keep religion and government TOTALLY separate! When religion and government are totally separate, then and only then can you be guaranteed that government will never interfere with your personal religious rights.

 

Kennedy answered that.


Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote.

The First Amendment is not a majority rule, and government may not seek to define permissible categories of religious speech," Kennedy said. "Once it invites prayer into the public sphere, government must permit a prayer-giver to address his or her own God or gods as conscience dictates."

The case hinged on these words from the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." That has come to be known as the Establishment Clause.

The Obama administration came down forcefully on the town's side – most notably because both houses of Congress have opened with prayers since 1789. But the prayers delivered there these days are far less sectarian than those heard in churches, temples and synagogues.

Most state legislatures open their sessions with a prayer, nearly half of them with guidelines. Many county legislatures open meetings with a prayer, according to an informal survey by the National Association of Counties. National data on prayer practices at the city, town and village levels do not exist.

Then came Marsh, in which the court gave a green light to legislative prayer that does not advance or disparage any faith.

Kennedy said Monday's decision follows in that spirit.

"The inclusion of a brief, ceremonial prayer as part of a larger exercise in civic recognition suggests that its purpose and effect are to acknowledge religious leaders and the institutions they represent, rather than to exclude or coerce non-believers," he said.....snip~

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...eme-court-government-prayer-new-york/4481969/

Just think if the left got what it wanted. Hindering the first would be one thing. But then stopping religious speech, they could stick a feather in their cap and call it macaroni. Then actually call themselves a Yankee Doodle.

 

Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

NOTHING in that prohibits prayer at a government meeting. Did Congress make a law ordering the prayer? No. Therefore Federal court rulings such this are made up entirely out nothing.

All the rules about school prayer, prayer at government functions, and religious symbols on government property are entirely made up out of nothing. Not a word of the Bill of Rights prohibits or even addresses the topic. The ONLY prohibition would be for CONGRESS to require or ban prayer or other religious matters.

The Federal courts - as often - ruled in exact opposite of what the Bill of Rights says by prohibiting the free exercise of religion, nor does the Constitution give the federal government any authority whatsoever over what state and local government does in regards to religion.

 

Everything Kennedy wrote is entirely made up out of thin air. The 1st Amendment doesn't say a word of any of that. It ONLY addresses what CONGRESS may or may not do. "All other rights are reserved to the states."

 

What "separation clause?"

 

Making definitive statements aren't arguments, especially when they're incorrect. It is not government property. And to show my consistency on this issue, I'm peeved with the city parking fines, etc. How can you possibly claim to own a street? You can't! Government properties are things the government is in possession of. The existence of Congress does not for example prohibit people of faith from being a congressman or congresswoman. No, they simply must not make laws that elevate the Clergy. That is all.

 

I have no problems with short little prayers and if people who believe in supernatural beings want to pray to them have at it. But NOT as a government official in their government capacity on government property. And no I am acting like a conservative and a constitutionalist. And if it is so inconsequential as you are trying to assert then why insist on it be done at all. Are the Christians really going to suffer if they are not allowed to partake in their religious ceremony or something?

 

The government can't favor any of them without violating the Constitution, the government is to give no respect to any religious establishment.

 

Bravo, sir. Bravo. This, so much this.

 

100% this.

 

Federal courts have endlessly given themselves power not given by the US Constitution and created laws out of thin air.

"Congress shall make no laws..." do not in the slightest equate to "State government shall not pray." It is a power specifically prohibited from the federal government, which includes federal courts.

 

The US Constitution does NOT say "government." It only says "Congress."