Skip to comments.Breaking — Supreme Court upholds legislative prayer in Town of Greece v. Galloway
Posted on 05/05/2014 7:31:47 AM PDT by Pyro7480
This morning the Supreme Court held in Town of Greece v. Galloway, that the town's practice of beginning legislative sessions with prayers does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. It was a 5-4 decision, split along traditional right-left lines.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Glad to hear. This will drive them nuts on planet MSNBC.
I hope that this helps clarify that the “establishment” clause, which the liberals constantly talk about, does not mean you have to ban every mention of religion. It doesn’t mean that you have to have “zero tolerance”, and cleanse the public sphere of any religious symbol.
A blow to the Prayer Nazis.
But on the scary side, we are one Obama Supreme Court appointment away from a total ban on public prayer....
Because the practice of banning religious symbols.. is actually a religion in itself.
Pray for the continued service and good health of Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and even Anthony Kennedy. If any of them retire before Obama’s term is over, the replacement will be a hard leftist, in the mold of Ginsburg, Kagen, and Sotomayor.
“But on the scary side, we are one Obama Supreme Court appointment away from a total ban on public prayer....”
Darned right scary. It is nuts that 9 people have this say over every facet of our lives. Or should I say 5 people.
5-4 - do you recognize what a thin line this country is hanging on?
Here come prayers at city councils of religions you don’t like.
Bad news for Tim Tebow, as now the leftists at NBC, in retribution, will run 15 stories between now and NFL Week 1 showing he’s still not ready for the NFL.
Well, you figure the reason it gets to the point of 5 justices having this power, is because lower courts consistently make liberal decisions, which work their way up the line.
If the lower courts nipped lawsuits over these issues in the bud, we wouldn’t get to the point where a bare majority of the Supreme Court is defining these issues for us.
But then that touches on the issues of federal judges in general. Obama continues to appoint hard leftists to the lower federal courts.
And this points up why elections matter. How many voters consider that the president is the one who will be appointing federal judges for the next four years, when they go vote?
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Pray for the health of those 5 Justices. They are all that stands in the way of the precipice.
I finally figured it out after all these years that there’s only one person who liberals hate more than conservatives, the Tea Party, and FOX News combined- GOD!
Probably a good idea to pray for RB Ginsberg’s health as well.
Friend, we are one liberal justice away from total destruction of the Constitution. We need an Article V Convention ... badly.
And the ACLU
Indeed, which is why we must pray for the health of the Fab Five (even Kennedy) for the next 3 years (absent, of course, Congree doing the right thing and impeaching the son of a bitch).
I grew up in Greece, NY. Good to hear my hometown worked out to be worth a damn.
“These ceremonial prayers strive for the idea that people of many faiths may be united in a community of tolerance and devotion,” Justice Kennedy wrote. “Our tradition assumes that adult citizens, firm in their own beliefs, can tolerate and perhaps appreciate a ceremonial prayer delivered by a person of a different faith.”
Our tradition assumes that adult citizens, firm in their own beliefs, can tolerate and perhaps appreciate a ceremonial prayer delivered by a person of a different faith.
Exactly. I’m old enough to recall prayers at football games (Texas). Whoever arranged them was very ecumenical in that there was a rotation of Protestant ministers, Catholic priests and Jewish rabbis. It didn’t harm anyone to hear the prayers of another faith; in fact, it probably promoted community unity and understanding.
Too bad there are 4 left wing wastes of our time on that Court.
In a sane world, a story like this wouldn’t need to be breaking news (heck, there wouldn’t BE a story like this)....
It’s so profoundly depressing that something this clearcut was a 5-4 decision. It’s not really even a close call from a historical viewpoint. If the Clintons win in 2016, we’ll lose a significant chunk of our “rights”.
We’ve already fallen over that line with some very depraved decisions, such as Roe and Lawrence, etc.
Now waiting on Obama to declare that he “has a pen and a phone” and wants to go nuclear by adding 2 more justices.
“Indeed, which is why we must pray for the health of the Fab Five (even Kennedy) for the next 3 years (absent, of course, Congree doing the right thing and impeaching the son of a bitch).”
We should pray for all of them to remain healthy and happy until the next administration. Replacing an old leftist with a young one wouldn’t do us any favors either. And, personally, I’d change the “(even Kennedy)” to “(even Roberts)”. As much damage as Kennedy has done with his manipulation of the constitution to support the gay rights movement, at least he was coming at things from a personal liberty perspective, as ludicrous as some of his decisions may be. Justice Roberts, OTOH, put a knife in the back of the American public and the entire conservative legal movement with his travesty of a decision on Obamacare. He took the constitutional shackles off of the power of the state, for a few months of good press.
That is why Barry needs to be removed from office and slow joe marginalized until 2016.
There is absolutely no doubt that the prayers are establishing a Federal and/or state religion. What's their problem??
By doing so, they rely on the ignorance of many citizens of America's founding history and of the ideas of liberty which were strongly held and advocated by the man (Jefferson) who authored the Declaration of Independence, with its recognition of a "Creator," of "the laws of nature and of nature's God," of "Divine Providence," and of "Supreme judge of the world," as well as the actual meaning and context of his letter to the Baptists--whose phrase about the "wall of separation" they love to twist and cite as the basis of their prejudice and tyranny against religious expression in the public square!
Perhaps these "progressives" might wish to read and be honest enough to cite this portion of Thomas Jefferson's letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper:
"In our village of Charlottesville, there is a good degree of religion, with a small spice only of fanaticism. We have four sects, but without either church or meeting-house. . . .As for Jefferson's views on a university setting as a place appropriate for open exchange of ideas and of unthreatened expression of religious thought, and to correct a then-false impression that the institution was against religion, he stated:
. . . The court-house is the common temple, one Sunday in the month to each. Here, Episcopalian and Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist, meet together, join in hymning their Maker, listen with attention and devotion to each others' preachers, and all mix in society with perfect harmony.
". . . .In our university you know there is no Professorship of Divinity. A handle has been made of this, to disseminate an idea that this is an institution, not merely of no religion, but against all religion. Occasion was taken at the last meeting of the Visitors, to bring forward an idea that might silence this calumny, which weighed on the minds of some honest friends to the institution. In our annual report to the legislature, after stating the constitutional reasons against a public establishment of any religious instruction, we suggest the expediency of encouraging the different religious sects to establish, each for itself, a professorship of their own tenets, on the confines of the university, so near as that their students may attend the lectures there, and have the free use of our library, and every other accommodation we can give them; preserving, however, their independence of us and of each other. This fills the chasm objected to ours, as a defect in an institution professing to give instruction in all useful sciences. I think the invitation will be accepted, by some sects from candid intentions, and by others from jealousy and rivalship. And by bringing the sects together, and mixing them with the mass of other students, we shall soften their asperities, liberalize and neutralize their prejudices, and make the general religion a religion of peace, reason, and morality." - Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper
Praise be to God!
Very true. I overlooked the age factor.Of course, I especially pray the Kenyan doesn't get another chance to corrupt the USSC.
As with Atheists. Since they “believe” there is no God that makes atheism a religion by definition. And it just breaks their phony little hearts when you define that for them. I’m still waiting for someone to publish the Atheists Prayer? -—starts off with “hello nobody——”?
“A blow to the Prayer Nazis.”
“Here come prayers at city councils of religions you dont like.”
Why should that make a difference? A prayer at a public meeting is nothing but a desire of one person (the prayer-giver) to invoke the blessings of their recognized higher power on whatever the meeting is intended to accomplish. It may be a request for wisdom or peaceful debate or something else but the point is the public organization is not the instigator of the prayer but the intended beneficiary.
If I, as a Christian, have a Muslim friend who says to me, “It looks like you are having a tough day; may I pray for you?”, should I be offended? My response would be to be touched by my friend’s concern and appreciative that he is trying to help me in the best way he knows how. I don’t have to share a belief in the same diety to accept and make my own similar wishes to others.
So in a public meeting, I don’t care whether the prayer is addressed to Jesus Christ, Allah, Buddha, Ra, Satan or anyone or anything else. I take the good wishes and hopes of the prayer-giver as something good for all of us to consider and pass along. It doesn’t mean you agree with everything that has been said, only that you appreciate the sentiment and intent.
Me, too, bro :)
Cardinal Mooney H.S. Class of '81
5-4 for free speech is sad. There is always next time for SCOTUS to overturn the first amendment
Woot! I wonder how the 3 chosen voted.
I believe that they have been so confused by previous rulings that they can't see beyond their over-educated law minutia. The founding document is expressively clear.
The "general welfare" and "commerce" clauses were never meant to be so infinite. The writings of our Founding Fathers were very clear in the Federalist and even anti-Federalist papers, not to mention their specific writings in other correspondence and personal diaries.
To remind us all, the entire purpose of the Constitution was to LIMIT federal government. They even had to spell it out further in the 9th and 10th Amendments. STATES RIGHTS!
As someone once said, "What is a 100 lawyers at the bottom of the sea?". A good start. Lawyers spin, parse, distort, manipulate, and on. I hate lawyers, until I need one...haha.
The above said, Supreme Court justices should not have life tenure.
When you think about it, just one black robe can determine the fate of this country. As has already been shown.
We need to start constructing lots and lots of new insane asylums.
Is time set aside during church for the local city officials to discuss city business?
Not in my church. Ask the black churches though. I believe there is quite a history of mixing politics and church. Prayer, however, is not mixing religion and government for the reason I stated in my original post.
Again, I have no problem with sectarian prayers in public meetings so long as the opportunity to say such prayers is offered to anyone or group who requests it in an even-handed manner. And if atheists wish to invoke whatever higher power they recognize to bless a public gathering, I have no problem with it.
I’m glad of the result. The fools of the Freedom From Religion bunch were planning on suing the city of Rapid City, South Dakota because they were holding prayer before their council meetings. Last night they held their council meeting and opened it with an invocation. The first time in over a year.
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.