Skip to comments.New Jersey Mayor tells feds no ceremony without prayer.
Posted on 05/12/2014 7:13:45 AM PDT by armydawg505
A New Jersey town canceled its ceremony celebrating new U.S. citizens after federal immigration officials would not allow the event to begin with a prayer.
According to the Star-Ledger, Carteret Mayor Daniel Reiman had assured U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials that the prayer leading Saturdays ceremony would be nondenominational.
They refused to budge on that, Reiman said, the paper reported.
The battle came just days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local government meetings can include sectarian prayers.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
City and personal audits have been ordered.
Remember when Russia was officially an atheist nation and the United States was a bastion of Christianity?
I’ll bet the Feds wouldn’t have a problem with two “openly gay” illegal alien homosexuals swapping spit on national TV before the ceremony though.
Bravo Mayor Reiman.
You you are on solid footing on moral, religious, and Constitutional grounds. I hope that others will follow your example.
Personally, I think the Mayor should have had these “officials” taken into custody, escorted off the premises, and then proceeded with the prayer.
It’s way past time to push back.
More proof that Osama Obama isn’t a moslem,as many believe,but an atheist.
“Remember when Russia was officially an atheist nation and the United States was a bastion of Christianity?”
And when the U.S. Presidents were manly men and Russian leaders were fat old shoe-pounding whack jobs?
Pravda is still a propaganda machine. This is from Pravda:
In the East there is someone that causes the western liberal's maniacal laughter to stop. Vladimir Putin. He has real world power, which causes the liberal media to fearfully ignore or warp his image. Like a good Christian King he leads a nation to Christ. Deep down in their evil souls they shriek like devils because they know Christ is true God and true power that they cannot defeat. They thought the Bolshevik revolution destroyed Holy Mother Russia. Christ cannot be defeated and his servant Putin has welcomed Christ and His church.
-- from the thread US threatened by Russia's Christianity
Many of us might be thinking along the same lines here. After decades of holding the line regarding prayer in schools, or public meetings, the Supreme Court seems to be washing its hands of the issue. But why now? Why has the USSC decided to stick to the plain meaning of the First Amendment regarding Congress and religion?
In recent times, we have learned that local governments and schools have been making special accommodations to Muslims. Where before, any number of groups would have virulently fought any special accommodations to Christian groups, there is a strange silence regarding Muslims. By its ruling, the courts have now wiped away potentially thousands of lawsuits by religious groups or their opponents regarding prayer or religious services in public meetings or school facilities.
I think the fights now are not whether prayer or religious matters can be considered in Government buildings, but whether one religious group can be excluded while a different religious group can be championed.
Ironic, isn't it that the USSC follwed the prayer decision by this decision:
Supreme Court Allows Nebraska City's Illegal Aliens Housing Ban to Stand The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review a lawsuit challenging a Nebraska citys ordinance that bans renting homes to illegal aliens -- a decision which could open the door to similar laws in many other cities.
Attorney Kris Kobach, who defended the Fremont, NE ordinance, said the Court's decision gives a bright green light for other cities within the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that want to adopt such laws. The circuit includes Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and the Dakotas. "Today we achieved final victory on behalf of the citizens of Fremont, Nebraska," said Kobach.
"The ordinance...to stop employing and renting to illegal aliens was approved last year. Our victory in Court is complete. The ACLU has been defeated." (Excerpt) Read more at toprightnews.com ...
As FReeper yefragetuwrabrumuy helpfully posted......the real zinger in the USSc residence decision is that it nails illegals for identity theft, if they use a fake ID, and claim they are citizens. And do so for gain, the crime cant just be brushed off. Can most assuredly impact: getting in-college tuition, getting a raft of govt checks under multiple id's, EITC refunds, voting w/ fake id, etc etc etc.
Heres the angle of how the law works: The rental provision requires prospective tenants to obtain an occupancy license. They must declare their immigration status. City police then check with the federal government.
If a tenant is found to be an illegal immigrant, the license is revoked. This avoids the problem of landlords having to somehow check the legal status of their tenants, and having to figure out what are valid forms of ID.
But the real zinger is that it nails illegals for identity theft, if they use a fake ID, and claim they are citizens. And do so for gain, so the crime cant just be brushed off.
I understand (and agree with) the intent of the law, in terms of keepig out illegal aliens, but the idea of an "occupancy license" rubs me the wrong way....