Posted on 05/05/2014 7:38:59 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Well, this is good news, but the ruling should have indeed been 9-0 as one FReeper noted. Prayers at government functions and meetings do not create an established religion, and it would be impossible to define a standard that said if such prayers took place, they would have to represent all religions equally. Would satanists have to have equal time even if there wasn’t a single satanist within 100 miles of the prayer location?
The simplest standard and one that could be easily and fairly applied to all is to permit the town to hold whatever prayers it wants—consistent with the generally held religious beliefs of its citizens—so long as participation is not mandatory.
As a Christian, I think other religions are wrong, but I certainly respect the right of other Americans to practice those religions or no religion at all. I wouldn’t be offended if a city council composed mostly of nonbelievers simply had no prayer at all, and I’d be respectful if the majority had a different religion (and prayer) from my own.
There is, of course, another enforceable standard, and that would be to prohibit all religious expression in any government or publicly funded forum and enforce the ban with force. That would involve policing everything said or done to ensure a name like Jesus was never uttered. It would literally require a 1984 Orwellian state, and I hope most Americans still prefer liberty.
Bookmark
Truly.
Speaking of prayer, we should pray to and petition Our Lord Jesus to watch over Justices Roberts, Thomas, Kennedy, Scalia and Alito that they may have good health and continue on the bench; and that Roberts and Kennedy do not stray from the true meaning of our Republic’s Constitution, and to always interpret it so to allow the most rights to the citizens and keep the government’s powers in check.
If anything happens to these five, and Obama gets to name a successor, then decisions like this will go 4-5 rather than 5-4!
to 4 out of 9 justices liberalism is the only permissable religion, that and Islam.
The Supreme Court used to devise standards for how to apply the constitution. For example, we’ve all heard the “shouting fire in a crowded theater” First Amendment standard (that no longer exists BTW). A major problem with recent rulings is they lack any consistent, easily understood standard. Each case now seems to be arbitrarily decided based on who can convince a majority of justices. A ruling today can (and often does) completely contradict a ruling yesterday or tomorrow.
I really only see two possible standards in regards to religious expression. We seem to be moving toward the first which is a complete ban on all religion in government. That’s difficult to justify as it directly contradicts the plain text of the US Constitution as well as the historical record of free exercise of religion by government. The second standard is one where anyone—even a government official—is free to express themselves (religious speech notwithstanding) so long as religious speech or participation isn’t mandated.
Some people will no doubt be offended by the latter standard, but I think it’s consistent with American ideals of liberty, equal treatment under the law, and respect for others.
Prayer is permitted. 5-4, with the typical 5 most conservative vs the 4 most liberal.
Indeed. The Constitution does not guarantee the right to not be offended.
To the liberal justices, I'm sure there's a random penumbra or hidden emanation that would guarantee it.
As a Christian, I’m regularly offended by non-religious speech. I hear people cursing all the time, and they disrespect my Lord’s name. Nevertheless, I would never, ever use government to try and eliminate such offensive speech!
It’s very foolish, in my opinion, to ask government to regulate offensive speech, because who gets to determine what’s offensive? It’s entirely subjective. Anyone who uses government like that against their fellow citizens may very well see that power turned against themselves at some point! It’s like playing with fire.
Kinda like privacy.
Exactly. In the fairness of “Congress shall make no law”, having this filter down to local venues is remarkable.
The Founders NEVER intended for prayer removed from all government proceedings, they intended for Congress NEVER to make it mandatory.
BTW, this should also take care of prayers at HS football games and everything else.
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.