Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A federal judge in Wisconsin ruled the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional Thursday, saying the day amounts to a call for religious action.
Clip:
Crabb wrote that her ruling was not a judgment on the value of prayer. She noted government involvement in prayer may be constitutional if the conduct serves a "significant secular purpose" and doesn't amount to a call for religious action. But the National Day of Prayer crosses that line, she wrote.
"It goes beyond mere 'acknowledgment' of religion because its sole purpose is to encourage all citizens to engage in prayer, an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function in this context," she wrote. "In this instance, the government has taken sides on a matter that must be left to individual conscience."
Well the Atheist has won again!
Wonder how much joy they feel when some child takes a gun into the classroom and blows everyone away?
Joy like a fountain because we got our way!
Took the hope away, so what is left for a poor sick kid that has nothing or nobody?
The satisfaction of some sick Atheist.
the Atheist didnt win. Atheist lost with the rest of us.
This was a win for folks who hate the idea of a founding document that governs what we do today.
It is a win for those who believe in mob rule.
Americans lost. sadly too many Americans dont even know they lost.
Well the Atheist has won again!
Wonder how much joy they feel when some child takes a gun into the classroom and blows everyone away?
Joy like a fountain because we got our way!
Took the hope away, so what is left for a poor sick kid that has nothing or nobody?
The satisfaction of some sick Atheist.
mmmmkay......lets do a poll of inmates in this country and see what belief they identify with. Please. Back away from the computer.
She makes a pretty good legal and Constitutional case for her ruling, but the administration has said they will appeal it, so we'll have to see how it turns out. The ruling will not be enforced until the defendents exhaust their appeals, which may take years.
The original NDP was not limited to Christian's, but included a call for people of all faiths to pray on a specific day. Had that remained as it's intent, I doubt the law would have ever been challenged or overturned by the courts. As evidence of that, the group which brought the suit has been in existence for nearly 40 years, but never addressed the NDP until Bush began holding yearly, exclusively Christian services in the White House as a part of the NDP.
However, the NDP law was deliberately subverted to a Christian only practice during the Reagan Adminstration by the bureaucratic sleight of hand of creating the National Day of Prayer Task Force, headed by Shirley Dobson, and turning the management of the NDP over to them. That effectively made the NDP an exclusively Christian day of prayer, in spite of the law's intent and contrary to the will of Congress because Dobson's group would not invite other faiths to participate, or allow them to do so if they weren't "Christian" enough to suit them. For instance, Mormon's were prevented from participating on more than one occassion.
That transference of the the law from one calling all faiths to one of only allowing Christian's to participate opens the NDP to rulings just like the one made in Wisconsin because it DOES stamp Christianity with the official approval of government, a direct slap in the face to the 1st Amendment. I suspect those who did that within the Reagan adminstration and Focus on the Family knew that very well at the time. Perhaps they wanted it to be challenged in an effort to make Christianity the legal religion of America, which has always been one of the goals of the Evagelical political movement.
Given the case law that Judge ruled on, I'll be surprised if her ruling is overturned on appeal and I hope it isn't. However, the NDP can easily be saved by Congress by simply revoking the charter of the NDP Task Force and returning the law to it's original intent. Let's see if they have the guts to do it.
Read #4 that you so conveniently seemed to forget to bold - something prayed for - now go run along and look up the definition of pray - it doesn't have to be religious.
Once again, proving the closed mind of a liberal.
The purpose of prayer is to invoke a higher power (God) to listen to you and/or intercede for you. If you want to do that in private, fine. But there is absolutely no reason the government should concern itself with when, whether or if the citizenry is praying. Government should simply ignore the issue and not seek to promote or hamper religion in any way. That way we can be sure that our County maintains freedom of whatever religion we choose (or none).
Only religious people want government to set aside time for prayer (or meditation, they will allow, in order to achieve this government sanction of their religious beliefs). By setting aside a certain time to pray or meditate or simply be silent, government is basically telling everyone that the majority believes in God, and praying to this God is the right thing to do. It is an insidious form of peer pressure that implies that if you don't believe in an intercessionary, omnipotent God who can be swayed by silent thoughts, then you are unusual and not "normal."
And before you Judeo-Christians start arguing that America is a Christian nation, keep in mind that our longstanding and continuing open immigration policies may someday mean America will have a majority of Hindus. Do you want your kids or grandkids to have to venerate a cow in the classroom because we didn't hold the line on separation of Church and State in our generation?
it should be noted that the very first congress paid a preacher to come to washington and pray before the first congress began.
there was never an intent for a "wall of seperation" that blocks religious activity by the government.
the only seperation the framers intended was that Governemnt would not pick one group over another and favor them.
Mark Levin, is that you!? I've read your posts and they are almost the same words used by him as I listened to him earlier today.
You are right. The Americans lost today and it is sad to see that some don't even realize it.
And a note to the one/those that kept asking, what is it?
It is/was a day set aside to stop and give thanks for our freedoms so as we may continue on in life, liberty and our pursuit of happiness.
I guess there are those that don't respect that any more and it is their voice we will continue to hear more of in the future.
Well I guess it is time too for the churches to hand over their money as well to the state and federal government. They are broke and are going to need all the help they can get. What? I believe the non-believers voice is being heard loud and clear, for a reason. The establishment clause is about money, tax money.
The reason it is unconstitutional is because the law required the president to ask the country to pray. He is still allowed to do that if he WANTS to do so, he just can no longer be FORCED to do it if he does not. It's the forcing part that was unconstitutional.
It was a good ruling. I hope it sticks. Little by little we will root religious bias out of our laws and level the playing field for people of all beliefs as well as non-believers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Enough with this religious nonsense already.
What? I believe the non-believers voice is being heard loud and clear, for a reason. The establishment clause is about money, tax money.
