Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal judge: Ind. legislative prayers can't favor 1 religion
First Amendment Center ^ | 12/2/05 | Staff

Posted on 12/02/2005 5:59:53 AM PST by EBH

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 12/02/2005 5:59:53 AM PST by EBH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: EBH

For the love of (CENSORED).


2 posted on 12/02/2005 6:08:32 AM PST by NavVet (“Benedict Arnold was wounded in battle fighting for America, but no one remembers him for that.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH
Congress must limit the jurisdiction of federal judges so they don't have the jurisdiction to limit free speech and the exercise of religion. (IMHO)
3 posted on 12/02/2005 6:13:46 AM PST by Edgerunner (Proud to be an infidel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH
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.

Exactly where does it say sectarian prayer is unconstitutional in public places? If the Indiana House required only Christian prayer, then that would violate the establishment clause.

4 posted on 12/02/2005 6:17:00 AM PST by Tai_Chung
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

The Indiana House of Representatives should tell Emperor Hamilton to take a flying leap at the moon. Maybe he could do something with his life. Get a job or sumptin.


5 posted on 12/02/2005 6:21:18 AM PST by Enterprise (The modern Democrat Party - a toxic stew of mental illness, cultism, and organized crime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tai_Chung

Whomever is praying should be allowed to pray what is heart felt, in my opinion. No limits on free speech.


6 posted on 12/02/2005 6:24:46 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EBH

It's inherently absurd to say that a prayer is offered without reference to whom the prayer is directed. Not that such a simple fact would stop a federal judge from asserting that it be done.


7 posted on 12/02/2005 6:25:34 AM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH
"The state is not to give the impression of endorsing one particular religious tradition but rather to celebrate the rich plurality of faiths that make up the state of Indiana,"

Essentially, this judge has stated that Christian religions are not permitted to exist. Instead, he has said that the state has created rules for prayers that override the real religions that actually do exist in America. This state prayer is OK, but the prayers of real religions are not as good as the state prayer.

The judge has just created an establishment of religion...and has created a prayer for that previously non-existent religion.

The rabbi in the above quote is guilty of the same thing. Rather than deal with real religions, this rabbi wants the state to create a "neutral" religion that doesn't exist anyplace at this point in time.

This ruling is a GROSS VIOLATION of the 1st amendment.

If each speaker is permitted simply to be himself, and if rabbis and imams are included on a numerically representative basis, then has the ideal situation of not endorsing any one religion. All are permitted both to be themselves and to have their turn.

8 posted on 12/02/2005 6:26:26 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH
If this ruling by some federal judge doesn't wake up American ideals and sensibilities about religion, nothing will. There is a constant assault on religion going on, in particularly the Christian religions. We need to stand up and say "no more of this b.s. from unelected judges who do not hold our religious views sacrosanct." Enough is enough.
9 posted on 12/02/2005 6:26:59 AM PST by geezerwheezer (get up boys, we're burnin' daylight!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH
There is nothing in the Constitution that gives a federal judge the right to tell a state legislature what they can or cannot do in their legal setting of passing laws for the state.

This should be appealed and if not successful the congress should pass a law that stops any federal court from interference in the affairs of individual state legislatures.
10 posted on 12/02/2005 6:28:23 AM PST by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tai_Chung
Apparently, the judiciary of this country takes the view that

freedom of religion, means freedom from religion.

They need to be smacked down, but the wonderful pro arab legal lobby (I think its CARE) is pushing this agenda right behind the ACLU.

We have had suits threatened in Florida over, now get this, the lack of the Muslim Holiday Ramadan.

Here, one school district (are you listening?) canceled ALL Christian holidays!

Fortunately, the parents smacked that down posthaste, but imagine if it was done in the blue NE or the left coast.

It's coming.

11 posted on 12/02/2005 6:32:44 AM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT

IGNORE THE RULING, PRAY ANYWAY!


12 posted on 12/02/2005 6:33:16 AM PST by Samurai_Jack (ride out and confront the evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EBH
So now we have leftist judges setting "acceptable" uniform prayers for the country. The judge has banned certain words from the prayers of Americans. If this is not in violation of the establishment clause, what is?

No one should obey him. He is not the government's prayer dictator. Let him send in his army to round of all the folks saying incorrect prayers in public. What an idiot.
13 posted on 12/02/2005 6:35:30 AM PST by Galveston Grl (Getting angry and abandoning power to the Democrats is not a choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Samurai_Jack

IGNORE THE RULING, PRAY ANYWAY!
14 posted on 12/02/2005 6:40:33 AM PST by Samurai_Jack (ride out and confront the evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT

Agreed!


15 posted on 12/02/2005 7:04:15 AM PST by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EBH

...we need a PUKE alert...


16 posted on 12/02/2005 7:05:54 AM PST by auto power
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

This is a tough blow for hoosiers. I guess we'll have to make ourselves feel better by moving the clock an hour earlier, giving the colts a few hundred million more dollars, and increasing taxes on alcohol and cigarettes.


17 posted on 12/02/2005 7:06:56 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: geezerwheezer

HON. DAVID F. HAMILTON, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
46 E. Ohio Street, Room 105
Indianapolis, IN 46204

Sir:

“All of us who have inherited the liberties of the religion clauses of the First
Amendment continue to elaborate on their meaning and application one case at
a time. In this case, for the reasons set forth above, plaintiffs are entitled to a
permanent injunction against the Speaker in his official capacity barring him from
permitting sectarian prayer as part of the official proceedings of the Indiana House
of Representatives. If the Speaker chooses to continue any form of legislative
prayer, he shall advise persons offering such a prayer (a) that it must be nonsectarian and must not be used to proselytize or advance any one faith or belief
or to disparage any other faith or belief, and (b) that they should refrain from
using Christ’s name or title or any other denominational appeal.”

So ordered.
Date: November 30, 2005
/s/ David F. Hamilton
DAVID F. HAMILTON, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana



"Mere mention of the word religion has caused eruptions of animalistic rage among National Socialists."


EWALD VON KLEIST-SCHMENZIN
National Socialism: A Menace
Der Nationalsozialismus (Berlin: Verlag Neue Gesellschaft, 1932).


18 posted on 12/02/2005 7:20:39 AM PST by maxsand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Edgerunner
Congress must limit the jurisdiction of federal judges so they don't have the jurisdiction to limit free speech and the exercise of religion. (IMHO)

      Strategy difference of opinion.  Congress needs to exercise its power of impeachment and removal from office.  (IMHO)

19 posted on 12/02/2005 7:24:48 AM PST by Celtman (It's never right to do wrong to do right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EBH

A prayer doesn't make law.


20 posted on 12/02/2005 7:31:28 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Exalt the Lord our God, and worship at His footstool; He is holy. Ps 99:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson