Prayer Cases Turned Away by U.S. Supreme Court Justices

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Think for myself, Jan 19, 2012.

  1. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A victory for the freedom from religion crowd.

    The USSC has refused to hear a case seeking to overturn the ruling of lower courts that banned prayer from two public forums, a county board and a school board.

    It is now pushing 30 years since the court last ruled on a prayer case. That makes me question how much longer will it be until this clearly unconstitutional practice is driven from the government altogether. I long for the day when people are free to practice their rituals in their temples and homes while others are free from their myths spilling over into the government.

    Certainly the refusal of the court to even entertain a topic that was decided almost three decades ago indicates to me that it has become a moot point.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-17/prayer-cases-turned-away-by-u-s-supreme-court-justices.html

    The U.S. Supreme Court refused to give government bodies more freedom to open sessions with prayers, rejecting a pair of appeals that sought to loosen the restrictions some lower courts have imposed.

    The justices today left intact a federal appeals ruling that said a North Carolina county board was violating the constitutional separation of church and state by opening most of its sessions with a Christian prayer. The high court also refused to review a separate decision that barred prayers at meetings of a Delaware school board.

    The Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on the constitutionality of prayer at government meetings since 1983, when the justices said lawmakers could begin sessions with nonsectarian prayers offered by a state-employed chaplain.

    The court under Chief Justice John Roberts has given governmental bodies more freedom to support religion. The court last year put new limits on the power of citizens to challenge government programs as violating the constitutional ban on the establishment of religion. The justices last week ruled for the first time that religious organizations can’t be sued for job discrimination by their ministers.

    In the North Carolina case, the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners used private religious leaders to deliver its prayers, each year inviting members of various faiths to sign up on a first-come, first-served basis to deliver an invocation.
    Referring to Jesus

    The result tended to be prayers that were predominantly Christian. From May 29, 2007, to Dec. 15, 2008, almost 80 percent of the prayers referred to Jesus, according to the decision by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia.

    “Invocations must consist of the type of nonsectarian prayers that solemnize the legislative task and seek to unite rather than divide,” Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote for the majority in the 2-1 appeals court decision. “Sectarian prayers must not serve as the gateway to citizen participation in the affairs of local government.”

    The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives open their daily sessions with a non-denominational prayer by a chaplain or a guest member of the clergy.

    Forsyth County, which has 350,000 residents and includes the city of Winston-Salem, contends the lower court ruling will force local governments to parse the content of legislative prayers to eliminate any sectarian references.
    Law ‘Settled’

    “The invocation policy of Forsyth County informed the audience of the purpose of the invocations, permitted the invocations to be presented by private citizens rather than a paid government employee and opened the opportunity to members of all faith traditions,” the county argued.

    Two women who attended a 2007 board meeting, Janet Joyner and Constance Lynne Blackmon, challenged the prayer policy. Their lawyers include attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union.

    “The law is now settled, and we are very happy that nobody in Forsyth County or anywhere else will feel like a second-class citizen because of what they believe,” said Katy Parker, legal director for the ACLU’s North Carolina chapter.

    The case is Forsyth County v. Joyner, 11-546.

    In the other case, the justices left intact a federal appeals court decision that barred prayers at meetings of the Indian River School Board in Delaware.

    The Philadelphia-based 3rd Circuit said the involvement of students made the board meetings different from legislative sessions. The three-judge panel likened the meetings to a school graduation ceremony, which the Supreme Court said in 1992 couldn’t be a forum for organized prayer.

    The case is Indian River School District v. Doe, 11-569.
     
  2. HB Surfer

    HB Surfer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    34,707
    Likes Received:
    21,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no "freedom from religion".

    The length to which you liberals will go to bastardize the U.S. Constitution is amazing.
     
    GrayMan, Marine1, ButterBalls and 2 others like this.
  3. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I disagree.

    The USSC has ruled the incorporation of religion into certain public forums does violate the separation of church and state.
     
    cd8ed and Noone like this.
  4. waltky

    waltky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    30,071
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Obama violatin' nuns right to freedom of religion...
    :omg:
    SCOTUS Takes Up Little Sisters of Poor Case Against Obama Administration
    November 6, 2015 - The U.S. Supreme Court agreed today to take up the case that the Little Sisters of the Poor--an order of Catholic nuns--has brought against the Obama administration for violating the sisters' right to the free exercise of religion.
     
    19Crib likes this.
  5. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The USSC which ruled 5-4 for separation of church and state was a mistake. The First Amendment doesn't say separation and doesn't mean that. This latest ruling is correct. There should be no forced prayer in public forums. The First Amendment gives people the right to practice their faith anyway they choose. But it also protects atheist from being forced to take part in anything religious. Or having their atheism used against them in holding office or having to donate to any religion. The schools are also wrong in forbidding players to pray before a game if they so choose to.
     
  6. Conservative Democrat

    Conservative Democrat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    2,080
    Likes Received:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The phrase "separation of church and state" appears neither in the United States Constitution nor in the amendments to the Constitution. The First Amendment does nothing more than to prohibit the establishment of an established church in the United States.

    Therefore a prayer at the beginning of a public meeting or the school day does not establish a church. The Supreme Court decision against prayer in public schools was a usurpation of legislative authority.
     
    flyboy56 likes this.
  7. Noone

    Noone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2021
    Messages:
    13,524
    Likes Received:
    7,976
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That depends on how the prayer is worded.

    I don't think the Supreme's usurped anything. Public schools are for ALL children any prayer favoring one god over another or even recognizing that there is a god is contrary to the First Amendment.

    "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."
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2024
  8. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,825
    Likes Received:
    32,492
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    For there to be freedom of religion there must be freedom from religion. It’s impossible to practice religion or no religion if it is imposed upon you by others.

    It this was a case of Muslims forcing their prayer into legislative sessions instead of your chosen religion I bet you would suddenly understand.
     
    bigfella, WillReadmore and Noone like this.
  9. 19Crib

    19Crib Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2021
    Messages:
    5,644
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Only a hard core socialist democrat would bully an obscure holy order to make the point that they are reign supreme over all things and all people. The order started in 1839 and there are ~ 2400 of them. **
    Start demanding Muslim bakeries do it "your" way.
    That is up there with tampons in the boys restrooms in school.
    ** Wikipedia excerpt:
    In the United States, however, they are LSP. Today the Little Sisters of the Poor serve over 13,000 of the elderly poor in 31 countries around the world.
    I frequently throw a few bucks in the plate for them.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2024
  10. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This isn't about atheism.

    It's about ANY religion or religious belief.

    "Prayers before a game" involve government employees picking a religion and forcing students to take part in that religion.

    THAT is unconstitutional.

    The test is, pick a religion you most oppose. Consider a coach of that religion teaching your kid the appropriate "football prayer" of that religion.

    Also, there is no overriding reason for such prayers to take place. You don't have to pray to play some sport.
     
    bigfella and Noone like this.
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The government selecting and requiring a religious service IS the establishment of a religion.

    Let's be serious.

    "Separation of church and state" is merely an easier way of referring to this issue.
     
    Noone likes this.
  12. Conservative Democrat

    Conservative Democrat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    2,080
    Likes Received:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is not the establishment of religion by definition.
     
  13. Noone

    Noone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2021
    Messages:
    13,524
    Likes Received:
    7,976
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Constitution prohibits the government from taking sides, in any way, with respect to religion.
     
  14. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you wanted to establish a religion by using our schools, what would you do?
     
  15. Conservative Democrat

    Conservative Democrat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    2,080
    Likes Received:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That is not my interpretation of,"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

    According to my interpretation "prohibiting the free exercise therof" is prohibiting public prayers, as long as no one is required to say the prayers. I would say a Jewish or Muslim prayer as long as it did not assert anti Christian doctrines.

    The Jewish prayer The Shema, "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is One," might seem to do this, but the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke have Jesus saying the Shema. .

    ------------

    You express your opinion of Donald Trump. I am a Democrat. Nevertheless, I wanted him to be nominated by the Republican Party in 2016. This was not because I thought he would be easy for Bernie Sanders, who I voted for in the primary, or for Hillary Clinton, who I voted for in the general election, to defeat. It was because he seemed to feel concern for those who had been left behind by the economy of the 21st century. Someone described him as "A third party candidate running as a Republican."

    Trump changed my attitude about him when he cut taxes for the rich as president. At that point Trump's character and personality deficiencies became intolerable. Now my hatred for Trump is visceral.
     
  16. Conservative Democrat

    Conservative Democrat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    2,080
    Likes Received:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Before doing anything with the schools, I would add an amendment to the Constitution specifically stating that a religious denomination was the Established Religion of the United States.
     
  17. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No one is forced to pray. It is all done in silence, so no one knows your praying or not. To you it could be a moment of silence.
     
  18. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    That is just what the First Amendment forbids
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2024
  19. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, there are strong similarities between the Abrahamic faiths. That's not an excuse.

    Individuals may practice their religion, within our law, of course. Those representing our government are not allowed to promote their religion.


    If Republicans were worried about those left behind, they could spend a few moments on that, rather than waving Hunter dick picks around. Or, they could work on not kicking the can down the road on our debt more than a month or two. Or, they could vote for the Republican border bill that Trump ordered them to ignore. (Why do they work for Trump?)
     
  20. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    There is no separation of church and state. There was none when we first became a nation and there is none now. It was a mistake for a previous USSC to rule there was. Our Bill of Rights doesn't even say that. We have always had a mix of government and religion. What our forefathers wanted was no interference between religion and government as it was in England where the church had almost as much power as the King. They didn't want America to establish a national religion like the Church if England
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2024
    AmericanNationalist likes this.
  21. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    America does sort of promote a certain religion in recognizing Christmas, and Easter. We also recognize God withThanksgiving and In God We Trust on our bills and coins. But that can be any religion. God. as the name is really genetic
     
  22. AmericanNationalist

    AmericanNationalist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2013
    Messages:
    41,155
    Likes Received:
    20,937
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There's even public statements by the framers on this topic. The idea that they wanted to have 'religious beliefs in silence' is absolutely crazy and a gross misinterpretation on the first.
     
  23. Eclectic

    Eclectic Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2024
    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    119
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    The Founding Father's were very cognizant of the need to keep government and religion separate. Religious wars had raged from the beginning of the Reformation about 1520 though the Thirty Years War ending in 1648. Many of the groups settling in the colonies were religious dissidents fleeing religious persecution by other Christian groups. Separation of church and state has a long history, but it was Thomas Jefferson who wrote "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state#History_of_the_concept_and_term

    The formulation was later entered into Supreme Court jurisprudence by Chief Justice Morrison Waite in the case Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_v._United_States#Wall_of_separation_between_church_and_state
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2024
    AmericanNationalist likes this.
  24. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I never said they wanted it in silence. I said if you didn't want to pray you could just be silent for one minute. No one is forcing you or those athletes to pray.
     
  25. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    People seem to forget the Bill of Rights is not to give the Government power to control you. It's to give the people power to control the government
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2024
    Noone likes this.

Share This Page