Appeals Court Approves City Council Ban on Prayer 'In Jesus' Name'
We read:
" The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that the city council of Fredericksburg, Virginia had proper authority to require "non-sectarian" prayer content and exclude council-member Rev. Hashmel Turner from the prayer rotation because he prayed "in Jesus' name." Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing the decision, said: "The restriction that prayers be nonsectarian in nature is designed to make the prayers accessible to people who come from a variety of backgrounds, not to exclude or disparage a particular faith."
Ironically, she admitted Turner was excluded from participating solely because of the Christian content of his prayer.
Gordon James Klingenschmitt, the former Navy chaplain who faced court-martial for praying "in Jesus name" in uniform (but won the victory in Congress for other chaplains), defended Rev. Hashmel Turner: "The Fredericksburg government violated everybody's rights by establishing a non-sectarian religion, and requiring all prayers conform, or face punishment of exclusion."
Source
11 comments:
In their efforts to have non-sectarian religion acceptable to everyone they (the state) have created a new religion. What ever happened to separation of church and state?
up is down and left is right....
Yes keep religion confined to churches, temples, mosques and other designated venues for the credulous and superstitious.
anonymous 3,
So you think there should be laws restricting where religion can be practiced? Do you know what the First Amendment says? Here is the first clause:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
Wow, we need to get right on the job of restricting those religious people, 'cause even though the First Amendment says we're not allowed to restrict religion in so many words, it doesn't really mean it.
</sarcasm>
Did I say there should be "laws" restricting where religion should be practised? Read again!
Well how else would you confine religion? In fact, it would be a lot easier to confine the godless.
"Did I say there should be "laws" restricting where religion should be practised? Read again!"
Someone did...
"Yes keep religion confined to churches, temples, mosques and other designated venues for the credulous and superstitious."
Which means you (or someone else) wants to ban the open execution of religious ceremonies...
I do feel a constitutional battle coming up here, the statement that the decision means the creation of a "non-sectarian religion" is a clear declaration of war, a statement that the state here has established a state religion in direct violation of the 1st ammendment (however, does the 1st fall under the 14th, else it's not applicable to individual states?).
"should be confined" is an opinion or strong recommendation which doesn't necessarily require a law to enforce it, but could be a wise move by the parties concerned - ie. render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's - in other words keep religion in its proper place and secular matters in their own arena, and don't confuse the two!
Obviously, someone here does not understand what it means to be a Christian. To really be a Christian is to be one in all ways, at all times, and in all places, not just in the church pew on Sunday morning. (Unfortunately, most Christians forget this). Confining religion to it's PROPER PLACE would be to not confine it all. The founding fathers understood this when they wrote there should be no restriction of religion.
BTT
I'm not saying that it is the only religion. I'm saying that, as a Christian, I am - and should be - free to take my religion with me where ever and whenever I go. It cannot be confined. It is a worldview that influences my entire life. And other religions, as long as they don't promote violence to others, should be free to practice as they preach also. As long as it doesn't do physical harm to anyone, then live & let live. If it offends someone - too bad, so sad, there's a lot of unhappiness in the world - suck up & deal.
BTT
So if all these religions are competing for space in the "secular" arena too, it could become very chaotic - not to mention allowing "equal time" to atheists, humanists, etc. Easier not to have religious matters mentioned at all when the main focus is supposed to be about secular and material concerns.
Post a Comment