PDA

View Full Version : Seperation of Church & State??



road kill
09-08-2010, 03:25 PM
Guess not.....where is your outrage now??



http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local-beat/Council-Meetings-to-Begin-with-Muslim-Prayers-102387499.html

RK

gman0046
09-08-2010, 03:50 PM
Talk about appeasement, this takes the cake. Next maybe they could dish out 99 lashes and finish up with a stoning.

Franco
09-08-2010, 03:52 PM
Maybe with 87% of the folks that took the poll outraged, they will dump thier City Council at election time.

Where is the ACLU when you need them?;-)

Buzz
09-08-2010, 03:55 PM
Do any of you guys have a problem with the congressional chaplain doing the invocation at the beginning of the day in DC?

Separation of church and state has nothing to do with it...

Gerry Clinchy
09-08-2010, 04:03 PM
They should give equal time to all faiths (even atheists) in the city. I'm sure that all could come up with invocations sensitive to a group that might be of diverse faiths.

subroc
09-08-2010, 05:56 PM
They should give equal time to all faiths (even atheists) in the city. I'm sure that all could come up with invocations sensitive to a group that might be of diverse faiths.

why would an athiest need equal time if they lack faith?

sometimes there just isn't a need for consideration.

Gerry Clinchy
09-08-2010, 06:29 PM
why would an athiest need equal time if they lack faith?


I was thinking of the lawsuit we discussed here once, wherein atheists felt a need to put some kind of display near a Christmas display ... to give equal space to atheism.

It is not a "faith", but it is a belief system ... which you might call a kinda, sorta "religion" with a semantic stretch.

As long as an "invocation" does not disparage some other belief system, even an atheist might have some words of wisdom to offer to a group who will be making laws for a whole city, county, state, country.

YardleyLabs
09-08-2010, 09:26 PM
Presumably, everyone noticed that the Council has been opening every meeting with a prayer for some time. As noted, "On Facebook, Council Minority Leader Luis Cotto wrote: "We start every single council meeting with a prayer. 99% of the prayers are Christian based, and in three years I recall one Rabbi coming through."" All they have done is to allow another religion to participate in an established tradition. Personally, were I ma member of the council, I would object to any prayer at the beginning. Failing that,, I would be happy with an approach similar to that suggested by Gerry, with a standing invitation to representatives of all faiths, including atheists if they so chose. Not sure I understand the big deal.

subroc
09-08-2010, 09:39 PM
In a nation that promises freedom of religion the council has determined to start their meeting with an invocation. Inviting all faiths that wanted to participate would be a logical direction. Why would the faithless deserve a place in that setting? The invocation is a religious prayer, not a place to give voice to all that want it or a way to advocate

Freedom of religion

I expect if the council determined they want a forum where they open their meeting with the idea of giving voice to all positions on all issues the faithless might have a case but this is a religious prayer. They have no place in this setting

Gerry Clinchy
09-08-2010, 09:59 PM
While prayer invocations have been a "custom", I don't think that changing such a custom would interfere with our Constitution.

I think that an invocation that was secular could still be invoke people to do their best in representing their citizens.

That doesn't mean that everybody in the room has to give up their belief in God to listen to wisdom from someone who may not believe.

Like, Jeff, though, doesn't seem like a big deal as long as their is equal opportunity. If the individual representatives of faiths or beliefs don't accept the invitation, that's their option.