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

Skip to comments.

Court's Prayer Ruling Has Nationwide Implications
CBN ^ | May 06, 2014 | John Jessup

Posted on 05/06/2014 5:08:04 AM PDT by xzins

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that cities and towns across America can continue praying at public meetings.

Monday's 5-4 decision centers on an action that dates back to the nation's founding in 1774, when the first Continental Congress opened with Christian prayers.

Two-hundred and forty years later, however, America is much more religiously diverse. That is part of the reason an atheist and Jew challenged prayers at public meetings in the town of Greece, New York.

They claimed the prayers were mostly Christian, made them uncomfortable, and amounted to coercion.

But in the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy warned against courts becoming censors of religious speech.

"Government is prohibited from prescribing prayers ... In order to promote a preferred system of belief or code of moral behavior," Kennedy wrote.

"It would be a few steps removed from that prohibition for legislatures to require chaplains to redact the religious content from their message in order to make it acceptable for the public sphere," he continued.

Meanwhile, the implications of Monday's ruling extend across the country.

For instance, picturesque Carroll County, Maryland, with its farmhouses and rolling hills, seems like a peaceful place. But there's a storm brewing at the intersection of faith and politics and it's drawing national attention.

A group of residents sued the county because the commissioners' opening prayers were only Christian. A federal judge agreed, temporarily barring the board from praying in Jesus' name.

The injunction didn't sit well with one of the commissioners.

"I think that is an infringement on my freedom of speech and freedom of religion," Carroll County Commissioner Robin Frazier told The Baltimore Sun. "I think it's a wrong ruling. But out of respect for my colleagues, I'm not sure how strongly they feel about it, I'm willing to go to jail over it."

Commissioner Frazier also defended her stance on Fox News.

"I said that I pray in Jesus because that's how the Bible instructs us to pray," Frazier said. "John 16:24 says, 'Hitherto have you asked nothing in my name, ask and you shall receive that your joy may be full.' That's Jesus speaking."

After the residents' lawyers filed a motion for contempt, the county, the commissioners, and their legal team went silent.

Commissioner Frazier, Carroll County, and their legal team all declined CBN News's requests for interviews. Although they remain tight-lipped about the issue, people in and around the county had strong opinions about the matter.

"Congress does it so it's okay," one man said.

"I agree 100 percent - yeah, I do," Westminster, Maryland, resident Susan Miller said.

But Woodlawn, Maryland, resident Rachael Yost viewed the matter differently.

"I think that's the part that makes it feel very specific to Christianity. If it was just a generic everyone pray to some higher power, that'd be alright," Yost said. "But (that) automatically excludes me from what's going on."

"This isn't about atheism being pushed down someone's throat," she continued. "This is about being inclusive to everyone, including Christians."

Monica Miller, a lawyer with American Humanist Association, represents the residents, which include a practicing Catholic. She said the Supreme Court ruling won't make much of a difference in the Carroll County case.

"It looked like the town (Greece) was making an effort to be all inclusive, and it seemed as though, although a majority of those prayers ended up being Christian, there were others," she said.

"In this case if the county decided to completely change its practice and do something exactly like the town of Greece perhaps that would be okay," she added.

Jordan Sekulow, with the American Center for Law and Justice, disagreed.

"This idea that we're going to have prayer, but it can't be sectarian prayer is now out the door," Sekulow told CBN News. "That is a big deal for people when you talk about praying in Jesus' name."

"What the court said today is if you're going to have prayer, and there's a Christian praying, they can absolutely close their prayer in Jesus' name," he continued. "So, we're not going to make that distinction anymore. So I think that will have an impact on a number of cases."


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: establishment; freeexercise; prayer; prescribed

1 posted on 05/06/2014 5:08:04 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All; P-Marlowe; Gamecock; Scoutmaster; Girlene; Jim Robinson; Alamo-Girl; betty boop; wmfights
"I said that I pray in Jesus because that's how the Bible instructs us to pray," Frazier said. "John 16:24 says, 'Hitherto have you asked nothing in my name, ask and you shall receive that your joy may be full.' That's Jesus speaking."

This commissioner, a woman, wants to be her real religious self when she prays. If someone forces her to pray a neutral prayer, then that is both violating her free exercise AND establishing a government preferred religion.

What is awesome is that Kennedy and the court appear to agree with that. It's awesome because it is exactly true.

In Kennedy's own words:

"Government is prohibited from prescribing prayers ... In order to promote a preferred system of belief or code of moral behavior," Kennedy wrote.

"It would be a few steps removed from that prohibition for legislatures to require chaplains to redact the religious content from their message in order to make it acceptable for the public sphere," he continued.

As much as I respect Jordan Sekulow, he is in error in his comments at the end of this article, in my non-lawyer opinion.

(Monica Miller, a lawyer with American Humanist Association) "In this case if the county decided to completely change its practice and do something exactly like the town of Greece perhaps that would be okay," she added.

Jordan Sekulow, with the American Center for Law and Justice, disagreed. "This idea that we're going to have prayer, but it can't be sectarian prayer is now out the door," Sekulow told CBN News...."What the court said today is if you're going to have prayer, and there's a Christian praying, they can absolutely close their prayer in Jesus' name," ...

Anthony Kennedy, in his opinion, specifically cited the fact that the town Greece, NY, used all the congregations in their phone book as a list for randomly/systematically selecting the person to pray.

In other words, the court approved of prayer at council meetings so long as the practice was open to and tolerant of everyone on the basis of their representation in the area as determined by their presence in the phone book.

Most important to me, though, is that Scotus said they don't want to be 'religion police'. They voted in favor of free exercise yesterday so long as everyone gets tolerated and the opportunity is presented based on their representation in the population.

Will that mean that at some point in time I'll have to sit through an Imam's prayer BASED ON his representation in my local population? Yes. But, these things are important to me:

1. I don't have to AMEN to his prayer to his foreign god.

2. I'll get some cross cultural training.

3. In our Christian area, I'll get a lot of prayers from a lot of different denominations...some of which will also be cross cultural training, and a few of which, I'll not be able to AMEN.

2 posted on 05/06/2014 5:09:34 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

That the Supreme Court even has the power to tell people where they can pray and cannot pray is scary. How far we have fallen as a nation.


3 posted on 05/06/2014 5:13:52 AM PDT by goodn'mad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

It’s sad that Americans have to ask permission to pray from a group of mere mortals.


4 posted on 05/06/2014 5:17:55 AM PDT by lakecumberlandvet (Appeasement never works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I used to go to Al-anon meetings. (stopped going for other reasons but still thought it was good for me) but there was a meeting two blocks from my home that I quit going to because they decided (on a vote when I wasn’t there) not to say the Lord’s prayer at the end but instead the serenity prayer again. Part of the ending is that anyone who wants to can join in the prayer. I stepped out. I got a shocked look from the woman who thought that excluding the Our Father was being all inclusive. Some of these people are just ignorant.


5 posted on 05/06/2014 5:18:53 AM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lakecumberlandvet

America is changing. I don’t think we will ever be what we were. I don’t recognize my country anymore.


6 posted on 05/06/2014 5:19:24 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: goodn'mad
My problem is with the "religion" tag.

Wiccan is a Religion? Islam is a religion? Budda is a Religion?

7 posted on 05/06/2014 5:19:58 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: goodn'mad

I agree with that because the first branch of government mentioned in the Constitution is:

“We the people of the united States...”

The first branch is ‘the people’.

The second branch mentioned in the Constitution, also in that line is: “The States.


8 posted on 05/06/2014 5:20:32 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xzins

For some reason people think this is limited to prayer in board meetings?

The same 1st amendment covers school prayer!


9 posted on 05/06/2014 5:21:47 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Unions are an Affirmative Action program for Slackers! .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

The Apostle Paul wasn’t bothered by viewing other religions. He even went among them once and commented on how many religions were assembled there in Athens.


10 posted on 05/06/2014 5:24:09 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: xzins

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2014/05/pols_give_blessing_to_top_court_s_ruling_on_prayer

>>A divided Supreme Court blessed prayer in government meetings yesterday in a landmark ruling that had some Bay State politicians praising the vote — and one overjoyed councilor declaring he’ll recite his Hail Marys louder now.
Somerville Alderman Dennis Sullivan said the ruling will inspire him to be more open in prayer, “but probably not loud-loud” so not to be overbearing.

“We have aldermen who are Jewish and I wouldn’t want to impress my views,” Sullivan added. “But personally I think it’s good. We can use all the help we can get.”

Boston City Councilor Stephen J. Murphy said the high court’s decision is all-American to the core.

“It’s an important part of who we are as a country,” he told the Herald last night. “It’s something that should not be attacked and too often is in modern USA. It preserves the principles we were founded on. It’s our identity. It’s who we are. I think it’s important that it was reaffirmed in the highest court of the land.”

In a 5-4 vote the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a town board in Greece, N.Y., did not violate the First Amendment when it recited a Christian prayer prior to meetings. The content of the prayers is not significant as long as they do not denigrate non-Christians or try to win converts, the court said.

Justice Anthony Kennedy said forcing clergy to scrub the prayers of references to Jesus Christ and other sectarian religious figures would turn officials into censors. Instead, Kennedy said, the prayers should be seen as ceremonial and in keeping with the nation’s traditions.

“The inclusion of a brief, ceremonial prayer as part of a larger exercise in civic recognition suggests that its purpose and effect are to acknowledge religious leaders and the institutions they represent, rather than to exclude or coerce nonbelievers,” Kennedy said.

But not everybody was counting their blessings.

Cambridge City Councilor Timothy J. Toomey Jr. said they have no prayer prior to their meetings, just a moment of silence. He said he hopes that remains the case.

“We salute the flag and have a moment of silence. If people want to pray, pray privately. That’s what I do,” he said. “I would keep it private. ... That way if people want to they can pray to whatever deity or non-deity they choose.”

Somerville Clerk John Long said he’s never received any feedback, positive or negative, about opening meetings with a nondenominational prayer by the city clerk since the 1980s.

Long said he has the prayer memorized — and now the nation’s highest court ruled he can keep reciting it for years to come.


11 posted on 05/06/2014 5:24:18 AM PDT by raccoonradio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“Our cause is just; our union is perfect. Our internal resources are great and if necessary foreign assistance is undoubtedly attainable. We gratefully acknowledge as a signal instance of the Divine Favor towards us that His Providence would not permit us to be called into this severe controversy until we were grown up to our present strength had been previously exercised in warlike operations and possessed the means of defending ourselves”

“With hearts fortified by these animating reflections we most solemnly before God and the world declare that exerting the utmost energy of those powers which our beneficent Creator hath graciously bestowed the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume we will in defiance of every hazard with unabating firmness and perseverance employ for the preservation of our liberties being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than
to live slaves.” -Continental Congress, Phila, 1775

“History of the United States: from their first settlement as colonies, to ...” 1826
By Salma Hale, p144


12 posted on 05/06/2014 5:25:01 AM PDT by bunkerhill7 ("The Second Amendment has no limits on firepower"-NY State Senator Kathleen A. Marchione.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

Yes, I can see them opening the school day with prayer led by someone from one of the congregations randomly selected from the school district’s area phone book with a different person each day.


13 posted on 05/06/2014 5:26:17 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: raccoonradio
Somerville Clerk John Long said he’s never received any feedback, positive or negative, about opening meetings with a nondenominational prayer by the city clerk since the 1980s.

I would say that this town is WRONG according to yesterday's opinion of Kennedy. He specifically rejected prayers that were scrubbed as being an example of censorship.

14 posted on 05/06/2014 5:31:25 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Monica Miller, a lawyer with American Humanist Association
15 posted on 05/06/2014 5:33:44 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

>>Wiccan is a Religion? Islam is a religion? Budda is a Religion?<<

Intellectually, I have a problem with that question. Yes, all 3 are religions (the former being a particularly evil one), as are Judaism, Hinduism, and Taoism.

Or do you define religion as only Christianity?


16 posted on 05/06/2014 5:48:37 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: raccoonradio

‘Don’t want to impress my views.’ Does anyone realize that someone can pray without forcing someone else to believe in their god? Just like someone can have an opinion without destroying another person’s belief or HURTING feelings. What a nation of thin-skinnned ninnies we have become.


17 posted on 05/06/2014 5:49:41 AM PDT by bboop (does not suffer fools gladly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Or the same church every day. The USSC refused to put restriction on the content, or require inclusion of all faiths.

All that is required is to not exclude a faith.


18 posted on 05/06/2014 5:53:58 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Unions are an Affirmative Action program for Slackers! .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Except for the Christian Religions and Judaism, all the rest are 3 dollar bills.


19 posted on 05/06/2014 5:54:15 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lakecumberlandvet

There was a point in time, circa 1790, where you went to prison for traveling on Sunday....right here in the northeast.


20 posted on 05/06/2014 5:57:12 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

“Free Exercise” for me but not for thee???


21 posted on 05/06/2014 6:02:05 AM PDT by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Oh goodie, the SCOTUS ruled we actually DO have a first amendment! Thanks for “letting” us have our constitution.


22 posted on 05/06/2014 6:08:02 AM PDT by Phillyred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

This is all about “In Jesus’Name”. A local nursing college had been using our sanctuary for their graduation, but two years ago they asked us to remove the cross and not to mention Jesus in the closing prayer. I told them that - for me - without the name and power of Jesus it was not a prayer, just noise. They found another “church” for their graduation.
There is power (and division) in that name!


23 posted on 05/06/2014 6:11:45 AM PDT by impactplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Maybe, but the plain words of the Constitution do not state that the right to the free exercise of Chrisitianity or Judaism are protected. The right to free exercise of RELIGION is what is protected.

You REALLY don’t want government to be the judge of what is true and false religion. Don’t forget, laws can change. The religious makeup of the population at large can change. What if atheists, for instance, become politically dominant. What if the atheist-dominated government decides that ALL religions are false and effectively repeals the First Amendment?

Admittedly, such hypotheticals may seem implausible, but do you really want government to have the power to determine religious truth? The only real solution is the one that the Founders gave us - the plain text of the First Amendment. This plainly protects ALL religions, whether or not they are true or false ones.


24 posted on 05/06/2014 6:11:51 AM PDT by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Phillyred

“The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that cities and towns across America can continue praying at public meetings.”...........

Seems this was a “no brainer” decision as the 1st Amendment had already provided the “freedom”. Now we need to address the millions of other places that this same freedom is being blocked.


25 posted on 05/06/2014 6:13:12 AM PDT by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: stremba

There are religions, cults and political systems....and you say all of them fall under that umbrella. That simply can not be.


26 posted on 05/06/2014 6:21:02 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: lakecumberlandvet

Boy, is the Left having a foot-stomping hissy fit over this today.

One of my local news stations interviewed one of the TWO plaintiffs (out of 96,000 people in Greece, NY) who huffed and scowled before barking into the camera that “obviously a lot of these Justices don’t care about MINORITY RIGHTS!”


27 posted on 05/06/2014 6:27:20 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Please don't let your quandary become a decision to keep religion out of the public arena. It's better to have all religions in the public arena than none at all. If Christianity cannot win in the arena of ideas, than it's useless. But there is no doubt that it wins every time! It has and always will. Only those who do not want religion in public places want a country run by men, not God.
28 posted on 05/06/2014 6:27:43 AM PDT by celmak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

And you are content to allow the government to have the power to distinguish between them? That’s not very smart; government may not always get it right, you know.


29 posted on 05/06/2014 6:34:41 AM PDT by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“Two-hundred and forty years later, however, America is much more religiously diverse”

Apparently the constitution is now invalid because of diversity.


30 posted on 05/06/2014 6:51:04 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon
“Two-hundred and forty years later, however, America is much more religiously diverse” Apparently the constitution is now invalid because of diversity.

LOL! Great catch, Viennacon!

Wish I'd thought of that

31 posted on 05/06/2014 6:54:19 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Buddhism is really more of a philosophy, like confucianism, although there are definitely elements and sects that are religious since they fuse Buddhist teaching with Hindu divinity tales. Wicca is just BS pretending to be centuries old when in fact its younger than Mormonism. It is unashamedly evil. You no more have to let Wiccans in than Oklahoma has to allow that satanic monument to be built.


32 posted on 05/06/2014 6:58:12 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: stremba

However, you do have to draw a line somewhere. Look at the satanist monument in Oklahoma. There is a degree to where a ‘religion’ is essentially a base evil practice with no place in civil society. Satanism falls under this catagory.


33 posted on 05/06/2014 7:00:21 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: xzins

As a matter of courtesy and respect for others, I would have no problem sitting thru a prayer offered by a Buddhist monk or a Jew. I’d have more problems with a Muslim, but again - as a matter of courtesy and respect for others - I’d sit through it without complaint. I don’t believe Mormons are Christians, but I lived in Utah for years and was never offended when Mormons prayed around me.

While an RN, my wife would sometimes ask an ill patient if it was OK for her to pray for him or her, and no one ever said no. Most people understand respect for others religious beliefs. Only a small handful attack Christians who pray...


34 posted on 05/06/2014 7:02:08 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I sooooo miss America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“Two hundred and forty years later, however, America is much more politically diverse... so its time to ban all political speech and install Obama as king. The government knows best.”


35 posted on 05/06/2014 7:02:28 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

I’d also have no problem sitting through prayers from Jews, Hindus etc. I would have a problem with Satanists and Wiccans.


36 posted on 05/06/2014 7:04:13 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

37 posted on 05/06/2014 7:27:15 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

>>Buddhism is really more of a philosophy, like confucianism, although there are definitely elements and sects that are religious since they fuse Buddhist teaching with Hindu divinity tales. Wicca is just BS pretending to be centuries old when in fact its younger than Mormonism. It is unashamedly evil. You no more have to let Wiccans in than Oklahoma has to allow that satanic monument to be built.

There needs to be some parameters established — too loose and you end up with Satan Worshipers and Scientologists. Too tight and you end up with nothing.

I should read before posting (I am of course the first to ever do that here) — islam is a political ideology parading in the cloak of religion. It is no more religion than the democrat party.


38 posted on 05/06/2014 7:44:06 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: xzins
What a thin thread our Liberties hang on. One SCOTUS member could have swung this the other way, just like the dangers our 2nd Amendment are in given the 5-4 ruling in the Columbia v. Heller case (2008) and then again in the 5-4 ruling of the McDonald v. Chicago case (2010.

As an aside, I love how the NYSlimes writes a headline saying SCOTUS was playing activist and Justices Extend Firearm Rights in 5-to-4 Ruling
39 posted on 05/06/2014 8:33:52 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

Until, of course, Muslims (for instance), become a majority, take over the government, and define any belief system other than their own as “base evil” and outlaw it. We REALLY don’t want to grant government the power to control religious expression, even if it’s religious expression we disagree with. The Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, exists to reign in government. That’s a good thing; don’t give it up so easily.

Again, think in terms of what you would want to have protected if some other religion became predominate. Would you want another religion to define the display of crosses as evil, for instance? Another religious group might consider a cross to be just as offensive as you consider a statue of Satan to be. Would you be willing to give up your expression of your Christian beliefs because the majority of civil society considers them to be “base evil”? I would think not, nor should you have to. Similarly, as offensive as we find the religious expression of satanists, it is protected by the First Amendment. In fact, that’s why we have the First Amendment; if only non-offensive religious expression, speech, print articles, etc. were protected, there would be no need for a First Amendment.

The line comes at coercion. Religious expression should be protected so long as there’s nobody forced to give up their rights to allow the expression. Obviously, human sacrifice would force some people to give up their right to life. Coerced prayer would also be a violation of religious freedom. I don’t include things like a prayer before a public meeting or a prayer in a school setting. I mean a situation in which if you fail to pray you will be arrested, beaten, killed, etc.

On the other hand, you, or any other Christian, are not FORCED to go look at that statue in Oklahoma. If it truly is that offensive to you, you are free to move to another city where there are no statues of Satan, or you can just avoid going to the location where that statue is located. Similary, with the type of prayer at question in this SCOTUS case, nobody is coerced. Anyone at these meetings can simply decline to participate in the prayer. Therefore, these prayers are protected by the First Amendment.


40 posted on 05/06/2014 8:59:51 AM PDT by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: xzins

A first step to re-establish prayer in the classroom?


41 posted on 05/06/2014 9:21:01 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stremba

There is no basis for people in New York to erect a statue in Oklahoma. And really, there’s no basis, even for it to be erected in Oklahoma by any Satanists who live there in Oklahoma.

The Oklahoma council should designate a landscaping decoration area, assign a committee to decorate it, take recommendations, and choose one.


42 posted on 05/06/2014 10:44:02 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
“obviously a lot of these Justices don’t care about MINORITY RIGHTS!”

The court emphasized equal rights. The town's process made it possible for any group in the phone book to have their turn. If they haven't chosen to be a group and to put their name in the phone book, then that's on them. And when they do, then they'll get selected randomly at the rate at which they number among all other such groups.

AND, if there's a group that wants NO PRAYER AT ALL, then they can start a group, put their name in the book, get their turn, and spend the 1 minute (short sectarian) saying NOTHING....or even ranting for all I care. I'll learn more about who they are by the way they use their turn when their number ever comes up.

43 posted on 05/06/2014 10:49:17 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

See post #13


44 posted on 05/06/2014 11:03:52 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Does this extend to prayer at high school sports events?

-PJ

45 posted on 05/06/2014 11:11:12 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

See #13

I think it can be made to fit if people are willing to find a random method of selecting those who pray from among either students, teachers, or local congregations.


46 posted on 05/06/2014 11:20:10 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Phillyred; cyn
Oh goodie, the SCOTUS ruled we actually DO have a first amendment! Thanks for “letting” us have our constitution.

Destructive little gotcha they've got going. The lord (USSC) giveth, the lord taketh away.

Next think you know they'll let us keep the real definition of marriage intact... /s

Beast.gov has put itself in the place of God, defining words and reality as it sees fit. In defense of its tower of lies, it targets lawful (truthful) citizens for destruction.

47 posted on 05/06/2014 11:25:58 AM PDT by Ezekiel (All who mourn the destruction of America merit the celebration of her rebirth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: xzins

You have informed insight to this issue, dear brother in Christ, thank you for sharing!


48 posted on 05/06/2014 7:40:28 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio; xzins
What a thin thread our Liberties hang on. One SCOTUS member could have swung this the other way

Exactly. Justice Kennedy replaced Sandra Day O'Connor as the swing vote on the SC. He can lean libertarian at times, and at others ....who knows. Glad to see him affirm that we still have our Constitutional freedom of religion. But it is a very thin thread as you noted, Cheerio, and Kennedy doesn't always get it right (same sex marriage).
49 posted on 05/06/2014 8:55:20 PM PDT by Girlene (Hey, NSA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Girlene; Cheerio
He can lean libertarian....

Exactly, right on the money. And I think this is one of those times.

His libertarian ruling has to do with the government not acting as a religion police, going over prayers, rewriting them, and establishing a preferred prayer.

A libertarian would say that individuals should be free to be themselves without government influence. That others simply need to get over their sensitivities every time they hear something they don't agree with.

That's what Kennedy said with the provision that there be a systematic method of choosing who is to pray at any meeting that puts all possible prayers in a pool from which their name could be selected.

50 posted on 05/07/2014 4:57:06 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

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