[BenLurkin]

Islamic prayers—as were also offered in the Indiana House and noted with approval in Judge David Hamilton's ruling—begin "In the name of Allah, the merciful." Is it legal to invoke Allah's name, and not that of Jesus Christ?

[Galveston Grl]

This article is spot on. That is exactly what this atheist judge did - he established the State prayer and if you choose to pray otherwise, you are in violation of his established religion and in danger of punishment. This has to be overturned and/or Americans must disobey it and let the petty dictator come arrest them. If I were an elected leader there I would be walking around saying "Hi (Jesus) how (Jesus) are (Jesus) you (Jesus)."

[microgood]

The Indiana House of Representatives should tell the Federal Court to go to Hell and do what they want.

[untrained skeptic]

The proper response to this is to ignore the judge and do it anyway. What's the federal judge going to do about it?

Let an elected official lead the prayer and let him tell the judge that he is exercising his first ammendment rights.

Have him tell the judge that he is answerable for what he says to the people who elected him, and if they are unhappy with him expressing his personal faith while in office they can choose to not reelect him.

[PeterPrinciple]

any kind of prayer that mentions "Christ's name or title."

Very specific language.

[RonF]

The Indiana State Constitution, in Article 4, Section 8 says of its legislators:

"They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

Seems to me that the courts of Indiana can't do a damn thing if one of the legislators themselves offered a prayer on the floor of the legislature. Even if they find it a violation of their constitution, the Indiana Executive branch is powerless to prevent it.

[PaxMacian]

"A federal court has ruled that the Indiana House of Representatives may not open with any kind of prayer that mentions "Christ's name or title." "

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,"

Courts cannot make law by fiat which is wholly unconstitutional.
Who will arrest someone in this country for speaking the name of Christ?
That pig will be roasting on a pit before nightfall!

[Sopater]

"And blessed is he who does not take offense at Me."

- Matthew 11:6, Luke 7:23

But Peter said to Him, "Even though all may fall away, yet I will not."

- Mark 14:29

[red irish]

Where is the oucry that there should be of the christians in this country. Over the years we have been asleep. How can a christian nation have 40 million deaths from abortion and not rise up in great numbers. There are too many of those who say they are christian and go along with gay marriage, abortion. Conversion should be first with the christians. John the Baptists lost his head preaching to repent of sin. And Jesus said there was no one greater than John the Baptist. We need more preaching on sin and repentance.The battle has been won by christ but the war against him is still very much on.

[Logophile]

If I ask someone to pray for me, I can only expect that person to pray to the deity he believes in, using the forms of his religion. A Muslim will give an Islamic prayer. A Hindu will give a Hindu prayer. And a Christian will give a Christian prayer. Each person will pray according to his particular beliefs and the practices of his religion.

Very reasonable.

Some will argue that a Christian prayer should not be offered in public because a non-Chrisitan might be offended. The argument is unpersuasive: If anything, I would be flattered if a Muslim or a Hindu were to think enough of me to offer a prayer in my behalf. The form of that prayer might be unfamiliar, but the sentiment is a positive one.

[AmericaUnited]

I'm skeptical that this article is 100% accurate.

[montag813]

A federal court has ruled that the Indiana House of Representatives may not open with any kind of prayer that mentions "Christ's name or title."

No Federal judge has any authority whatsoever to make such a ruling or even consider such a case. The 1st Amendment refers only to Congressional action via-a-vis an offical religion. And the 10th Amendment prohibits the Federal government from interfering in State authority in such matters. Once again, as with the Ten Commandments issue, we have a simple matter of nullification. The Indiana House has no obligation whatsoever to obey the judge's ruling. The Speaker and the Governor should also issue a full rebuke of the judge and his illegal ruling to give Hoosiers and indeed all Americans a valuable civics lesson.

[RightOnline]

If one more totally idiotic "judge" or group thereof try to redefine the 'establishment clause' in such an asinine way, I swear.........they're getting us out here in flyover country very, very riled up. Something's gonna give.

[the invisib1e hand]

we are no longer "slouching toward Armageddon." We are, it seems, hurtling that way.

[ViLaLuz]

Rampant Christophobia.